The Challenge of CRISPR-Cas Toward Bioethics

Abstract

Since determining the structure of the DNA double helix, the study of genes and genomes has revolutionized contemporary science; with the decoding of the human genome, new findings have been achieved, including the ability that humans have developed to modify genetic sequences in vitro. The discovery of gene modification mechanisms, such as the CRISPR-Cas system (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) and Cas (CRISPR associated). Derived from the latest discoveries in genetics, the idea that science has no limits has exploded. However, improvements in genetic engineering allowed access to new possibilities to save lives or generate new treatment options for diseases that are not treatable by using genes and their modification in the genome. With this greater knowledge, the immediate question is who governs the limits of genetic science? The first answer would be the intervention of a legislative branch, with adequate scientific advice, from which the logical answer, bioethics, should result. This term was introduced for the first time by Van Rensselaer Potter, who in 1970 combined the Greek words bios and ethos, Bio-Ethik, which determined the study of the morality of human behavior in science. The approach to this term was introduced to avoid the natural tension that results from the scientific technical development and the ethics of limits. Therefore, associating the use of biotechnology through the CRISPR-Cas system and the regulation through bioethics, aims to monitor the use of techniques and technology, with benefits for humanity, without altering fundamental rights, acting with moral and ethical principles.

CRISPR-Cas Technology: Emerging Applications in Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

“…It also requires national and international communities to develop and keep updating clear legislation and guidance for this technology [158]. Together, bioethics and legal law as well as the scientific community should work together in order to assure some principles that aim to protect human dignity, safeguard the integrity of patients, and safeguard their genetic information and cells to avoid inappropriate use [169].…”

Genome Editing among Bioethics and Regulatory Practices

“…In 1975, the second international conference in Asilomar (California) clearly assessed that, despite the fact that the use of technology applied to DNA was allowed in several countries, the application of genetic engineering to humanity continued to be the subject of deep debate and a growing concern was expressed more generally about the use of recombinant DNA. After about 50 years, Asilomar as a historic event seems not to have lost much of its attraction and several scientists are calling now for a new Asilomar as a symbol for the present research era [ 27 ].…”

“…In the last years several scientists casted doubts about the 100% effectiveness of the currently available genome editing methods, suggesting tacitly that an absolute effectiveness is per se a sort of synonym of acceptability of them at a bioethical level. As discussed by Gonzalez-Avila and colleagues [ 27 ], the lack of confidence in the CRISPR-Cas systems and their applications prompted the suggestion of being careful with releasing them, but none of the countries are actually thinking that laws regulating the use of these techniques should be based on a bioethical evaluation rather than on effectiveness.…”

“…The discussion about the extent of the use of CRISPR in clinical medicine frequently includes scientists asking to avoid the precautionary principle when applying such technologies for saving lives, but CRISPR-Cas is not inherently a “good” technology. As stated by Gonzalez-Avila and colleagues [ 27 ], “the new genetic modification technologies can be something applauded or something deplorable, taking into account that the tool used is not the one that determines the end, it is the user who determines the fact. After the probable approval of CRISPR-Cas as a therapeutic alternative, it is questioned how feasible it is to approve it, if it will be accessible to the public, in which cell lines it could be applied, in addition to the laws that should govern its use”.…”

Legal Regulation Of Genetically Engineered Activities

“…This raises ethical issues that generate a great deal of controversy in society. To overcome them there is necessary a clear conceptual understanding of problems associated with diagnostics and editing of human genome, on the basis of which there should be developed the effective normative legal regulation, which will satisfy the interests of all participants of the indicated legal relationship (Gonzalez-Avila et al, 2021). Advances in genetic engineering have led to the creation of modern medicines, food, supplements, and other products that can be used in human economic activities (Okada & Watanabe, 2016).…”