[ad_1]
In China, two genetically modified babies would be born. It is not known if the two girls really exist. The researcher in charge has been on leave without pay for months. Experts around the world criticize the possible advance.
The man speaks softly, softly, broken English. He seems dreamy when he talks about Nana and Lulu, two girls who were born a few weeks ago. But who continues to listen to He Jiankuai in his video, soon understands that he is not announcing a normal birth. The researcher from the South Shenzhen University of Science and Technology in China hopes to have created the first genetically modified humans with Nana and Lulu. The genotype of both girls had been altered as part of an artificial insemination with the Genscher Crispr-Cas. A receptor has been turned off, which would be necessary for an HIV infection. This is also reported by the press agency AP,
Technically, such an intervention would be possible, says the expert
It would be an ethical and scientific failure of an unprecedented dam – but until now, it is unclear whether Nana and Lulu actually exist. Hes University distanced itself from a statement by He, who had not been paid for his work since February. There are no pictures of children or their parents, let alone a scientific publication. It excludes all contact with the family. AP reportedly received documents from the researcher as evidence of the birth and genetic modification of the girls. A total of 16 embryos had to be changed and eleven transferred. However, until an independent examination, babies remain speculative – even if they are not unrealistic. "Technically, I think it's possible," says biomedical scientist Dirk Heckl of the University of Hanover. "In monkeys, the method has been successful since 2013 – and this does not distinguish us from the monkey." Ethically, however, the birth of genetically modified children should be clearly condemned.
The same view was expressed by experts from Europe and the United States. "I'm shocked and disappointed," said Paul Freemont of the Center for Synthetic Biology at Imperial College London about the possible birth. "It is quite uncertain who this research should benefit from." Reproductive medicine Channa Jayasena, also Imperial College, criticized the approach. "My fear is that it happened hastily and without proper discussion of the consequences." Errors in gene editing could lead to new flaws. The chairman of the German Council of Ethics, Peter Dabrock, spoke of an "affront to the demand for responsible science". Even Dabrock's predecessor, Christiane Woopen, has condemned her attempts. "Chinese researchers have violated human rights and seriously undermined the credibility of science, which should not be tolerated by the international community."
It is also difficult to know what goal the genetic modification of children should have. Although the alleged father is HIV-positive, his viral load is very low thanks to the available treatments. Neither the mother nor the children have any risk of infection. The genetic modification of the receptor however increases other risks, such as infection with West Nile virus. "Maybe I underestimate HIV disease, but changing kids' genes so that they're not infected with HIV would not come to mind," said Dirk Heckl.
"In spite of all this outrage, we must not forget that there is no uniform legal prohibition of interventions on the germ line in humans in the world," says legal expert Jochen Taupitz from the University of Mannheim. In many countries, such as Russia, there is no explicit legal regulation. Although there have been bans in China, the United Kingdom and the United States, it is unlikely that their transgression will be sanctioned. "The most" hard limit "is that no federal funds can be used for such tests," said Taupitz. Many experts therefore call for binding international regulations.
From a legal point of view, it will be necessary to determine whether the experiments, if they took place, were carried out with the informed consent of the parents. According to AP, the signed forms indicated that it was an AIDS vaccine trial. It is also unclear whether the Chinese Academy of Sciences was aware of the experiments. The Academy formed an alliance with the British and American national academies three years ago to reach consensus on the ethical implications and lawfulness of gene editing in humans. The next conference will be held Tuesday in Hong Kong, and many experts will review its performance. On Monday again, more than 120 Chinese researchers distanced themselves from Hes' alleged attempts in an open letter.
Source link
