Top biologists debate ban on gene-editing
Delegates at a crucial scientific summit this week are expected to debate a ban on the use of the controversial technique of gene-editing. Hundreds of the world’s leading biologists will gather in Washington to discuss the procedure, in which genes are removed from or added to human embryos.
Some researchers say gene-editing of humans could have unpredictable effects on future generations and is ethically unacceptable. They also warn that the technology could be used to create lineages of “enhanced” humans and want all work in the area halted until its implications are fully assessed.
As a result they are expected to call for a moratorium on future research at the summit, which is to be attended mostly by researchers from the UK, US and China, where gene-editing is most widely practised. But other scientists say a moratorium would be harmful. Gene-editing has the potential to rid the planet of some fatal illnesses, they argue. Academics in favour of continuing the current research programme point to the work of Chinese scientists, who earlier this year reported they had used a gene-editing procedure called Crispr to modify an aberrant gene that causes beta thalassaemia, an inherited life-threatening blood disorder. This was done in IVF embryos obtained from fertility clinics. The embryos were not implanted into women once the modifications were made, however.
Other scientists say versions of genes that predispose humans to Alzheimer’s disease or make them susceptible to HIV and other infections could be removed from embryos and so free future generations from these conditions. The technology also offers ways to improve stem cell research, boost the effectiveness of IVF techniques and reduce human miscarriage rates. For good measure, techniques like Crispr will allow researchers to rewrite the genomes of plants and animals and transform agricultural science.
“There is a great deal to be gained through the use of gene-editing, but obviously we have be careful how we proceed,” said one conference organisers, Professor Robin Lovell-Badge, of the Francis Crick Institute, in London. “The point of this meeting is to determine just how quickly we should move.”
__________________________________________________________________________
Where does one draw the line with this between helping humanity cure diseases and outright mad scientists playing God?
Delegates at a crucial scientific summit this week are expected to debate a ban on the use of the controversial technique of gene-editing. Hundreds of the world’s leading biologists will gather in Washington to discuss the procedure, in which genes are removed from or added to human embryos.
Some researchers say gene-editing of humans could have unpredictable effects on future generations and is ethically unacceptable. They also warn that the technology could be used to create lineages of “enhanced” humans and want all work in the area halted until its implications are fully assessed.
As a result they are expected to call for a moratorium on future research at the summit, which is to be attended mostly by researchers from the UK, US and China, where gene-editing is most widely practised. But other scientists say a moratorium would be harmful. Gene-editing has the potential to rid the planet of some fatal illnesses, they argue. Academics in favour of continuing the current research programme point to the work of Chinese scientists, who earlier this year reported they had used a gene-editing procedure called Crispr to modify an aberrant gene that causes beta thalassaemia, an inherited life-threatening blood disorder. This was done in IVF embryos obtained from fertility clinics. The embryos were not implanted into women once the modifications were made, however.
Other scientists say versions of genes that predispose humans to Alzheimer’s disease or make them susceptible to HIV and other infections could be removed from embryos and so free future generations from these conditions. The technology also offers ways to improve stem cell research, boost the effectiveness of IVF techniques and reduce human miscarriage rates. For good measure, techniques like Crispr will allow researchers to rewrite the genomes of plants and animals and transform agricultural science.
“There is a great deal to be gained through the use of gene-editing, but obviously we have be careful how we proceed,” said one conference organisers, Professor Robin Lovell-Badge, of the Francis Crick Institute, in London. “The point of this meeting is to determine just how quickly we should move.”
__________________________________________________________________________
Where does one draw the line with this between helping humanity cure diseases and outright mad scientists playing God?
