The case for banning heritable genome editing

Botkin, Jeffrey R.

doi:10.1038/s41436-019-0696-6

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Certainly, some point out that the first experiments using CRISPR to edit human embryos occurred in 2015, and since then, only few teams around the world have focused on the process and its potential [ 85 ], but recent studies have highlighted an underappreciated risk of CRISPR–Cas9 editing: if embryos are deemed to have the right to at least some degree of legal safeguards, such safety concerns are likely to significantly inform the ongoing debate on the matter. In light of such major unsolved controversies, some have called for an international moratorium on all embryo editing [ 88 , 89 ], and some countries, including Canada, already have policies that ban human-embryo gene editing, irrespective of whether or not the edited embryo would be meant for implantation [ 90 ]. In the United States and Britain, on the other hand, an intermediate regulatory approach has been chosen.…”

Section: Beyond Therapeutic Safety and Efficacy Genome Editing Entails Polarizing Ethical And Legal Quandariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CRISPR-Cas and Its Wide-Ranging Applications: From Human Genome Editing to Environmental Implications, Technical Limitations, Hazards and Bioethical Issues

Piergentili

Rio

Signore

et al. 2021

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The CRISPR-Cas system is a powerful tool for in vivo editing the genome of most organisms, including man. During the years this technique has been applied in several fields, such as agriculture for crop upgrade and breeding including the creation of allergy-free foods, for eradicating pests, for the improvement of animal breeds, in the industry of bio-fuels and it can even be used as a basis for a cell-based recording apparatus. Possible applications in human health include the making of new medicines through the creation of genetically modified organisms, the treatment of viral infections, the control of pathogens, applications in clinical diagnostics and the cure of human genetic diseases, either caused by somatic (e.g., cancer) or inherited (mendelian disorders) mutations. One of the most divisive, possible uses of this system is the modification of human embryos, for the purpose of preventing or curing a human being before birth. However, the technology in this field is evolving faster than regulations and several concerns are raised by its enormous yet controversial potential. In this scenario, appropriate laws need to be issued and ethical guidelines must be developed, in order to properly assess advantages as well as risks of this approach. In this review, we summarize the potential of these genome editing techniques and their applications in human embryo treatment. We will analyze CRISPR-Cas limitations and the possible genome damage caused in the treated embryo. Finally, we will discuss how all this impacts the law, ethics and common sense.

show abstract

Section: Beyond Therapeutic Safety and Efficacy Genome Editing Entails Polarizing Ethical And Legal Quandariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CRISPR-Cas and Its Wide-Ranging Applications: From Human Genome Editing to Environmental Implications, Technical Limitations, Hazards and Bioethical Issues

Piergentili

Rio

Signore

et al. 2021

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some bioethicists have argued that GGE is only justifiable in the first place if people's preferences for genetically related children carry moral weight [28,41]. Given that people can adopt or start families in other ways, the argument is that there is little reason to invest resources in developing new assisted reproductive technologies.…”

Section: What Is the Potential Clinical Utility Of Germline Gene Editmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is also a significant ethical question about whether this means GGE could ever be justifiable. Some have argued that because knowing the full panoply of risks and benefits from GGE requires intergenerational monitoring, any use of GGE would be unethical, because it would be unethical to subject multiple generations of future persons to unknown risks without extremely strong clinical benefit [28,77]. This feeds back into questions about clinical utility and justification [74].…”

Section: How Do We Monitor Heritable Changes?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most prominently, a recent report from the UK Nuffield Council on Bioethics left the door open for permissible uses of GGE for non-therapeutic purposes [ 22 ]. There are also prominent voices opposed to translational research into GGE, as they see GGE as of limited or no potential clinical utility and beset with too many ethical problems to ever be feasible [ 27 , 28 ]. Others have taken a more moderate approach and argued for more research coupled with a moratorium over the near-term on creation of pregnancies with edited embryos [ 29 •, 30 •].…”

Section: Where Are We Are Now In the Ethics Of Gene Editing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GGE research also involves research on human embryos and stem cells, which faces a higher level of ethical scrutiny. There is significant disagreement about the potential clinical utility of GGE [ 2 , 15 •, 28 , 47 – 49 ]. Opinions run the spectrum: with some arguing there is no potential utility for GGE specifically, and others arguing that there is significant-enough promise to justify continuing research.…”

Section: What Is the Potential Clinical Utility Of Germline Gene Editmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Responsible Translational Pathways for Germline Gene Editing?

Cwik

2020

Curr Stem Cell Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review Continued development of gene editing techniques has raised the real possibility of clinical application of germline gene editing. These results, as well as reports of an unethical experiment which resulted in the birth of at least two children from edited embryos in 2018, have highlighted the urgency and importance of ethical issues about translational pathways for editing of human germline cells. Charting responsible translational pathways for germline gene editing requires tackling some significant and complex ethical issues. Recent Findings A literature on development of clinical applications of germline gene editing is emerging, and several key ethical issues are coming into focus as major challenges for responsible translational pathways. Summary Potential clinical utility, clinical justification, and human subjects research for germline gene editing raise outstanding ethical questions. Work on these questions will help provide guidance to researchers and clinicians and direct translational projects toward justifiable applications.

show abstract

You can't keep a bad idea down: Dark history, death, and potential rebirth of eugenics

Liscum

Garcia

2021

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Be careful what you wish for”: This adage guides both how this project came to life, and how the topic covered in this review continues to unfold. What began as talks between two friends on shared interests in military history led to a 4‐year discussion about how our science curriculum does little to introduce our students to societal and ethical impacts of the science they are taught. What emerged was a curricular idea centered on how “good intentions” of some were developed and twisted by others to result in disastrous consequences of state‐sanctioned eugenics. In this article, we take the reader (as we did our students) through the long and soiled history of eugenic thought, from its genesis to the present. Though our focus is on European and American eugenics, we will show how the interfaces and interactions between science and society have evolved over time but have remained ever constant. Four critical 'case studies' will also be employed here for deep, thoughtful exploration on a particular eugenic issue. The goal of the review, as it is with our course, is not to paint humanity with a single evil brush. Instead, our ambition is to introduce our students/readers to the potential for harm through the misapplication and misappropriation of science and scientific technology, and to provide them with the tools to ask the appropriate questions of their scientists, physicians, and politicians.

show abstract

The case for banning heritable genome editing

Cited by 12 publications

References 10 publications

CRISPR-Cas and Its Wide-Ranging Applications: From Human Genome Editing to Environmental Implications, Technical Limitations, Hazards and Bioethical Issues

CRISPR-Cas and Its Wide-Ranging Applications: From Human Genome Editing to Environmental Implications, Technical Limitations, Hazards and Bioethical Issues

Responsible Translational Pathways for Germline Gene Editing?

You can't keep a bad idea down: Dark history, death, and potential rebirth of eugenics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About