[ad_1]
The National Health Commission and the Ministry of Science and Technology issued a statement on Wednesday in which they said they are paying close attention to the case of two genetically modified babies – a topic that has raised worldwide concerns about research. ethics.
"We always attach great importance to protecting the rights and interests of people in the field of health, scientific research and medical activities must respect the laws, regulations and ethical rules in force.We will always punish any illegal activity", says the press release. Ministries continue to investigate.
He Jiankui, the Chinese researcher who found himself in the limelight of his genetic manipulation of human cells, unleashed a global ethical turmoil on Monday after claiming to have genetically modified two twins, Lulu and Nana, with the aim of making them HIV safe.
He recruited eight couples through an AIDS support group. One couple gave up and received about 30 eggs from the remaining seven pairs.
Participant at the Second International Summit on the Human Genome Publishing in Hong Kong on Wednesday – where he had already been scheduled as a speaker a participant questioned him on his decision to conduct tests on Human being.
He said that he was "proud" of his work and that he believed he was helping people who otherwise would have no hope of living. The twins are born healthy this month in China, he said.
Summit researchers who heard the report at the summit expressed deep concern over the ethical risks and unpredictable results of the experiment.
David Baltimore, chairman of the summit's organizing committee, said it would be irresponsible to proceed with any genome editing at the clinical level until the safety issues have been addressed and it is not necessary. There will be no consensus.
Baltimore said his research was not transparent and showed a failure of self-regulation on the part of the scientific community.
Robin Lovell-Badge, head of Stem Cell Biology and Genetics Development at the Francis Crick Institute in the UK, said he was misguided and had taken bad advice.
During the interview, he said that he had approached four other scientists in China and the United States to review the consent form that he had then given to the parents. He added that he had also received comments from scientists at meetings in recent years.
Part of the reason he went ahead, he said, was due to his observation of an earlier public inquiry and the results of studies obtained in the United States and in the UK, stating that a majority in society seemed to find the idea acceptable.
Lovell-Badge said that he had not conducted his research in a carefully controlled and cautious manner, including publishing results throughout the process and involving the authorities in decision-making.
The process of obtaining informed consent from patients has been poorly executed, said Lovell-Badge.
Wei Wensheng, a professor at Peking University, asked him why he chose to cross a red line by performing secret clinical trials.
This red line – the international consensus on the prohibition of genome editing on germ lines, which can transmit their genetic material to offspring, has been observed by the Chinese scientific community since the first summit on the Edition of the human genome in 2015.
In response, he indicated that he had consulted with several institutions to obtain their reactions.
Many technical issues have been raised about the necessity and authenticity of the experience it is.
David Liu of Harvard University asked him about the unmet medical need for the experiment. According to Liu, an HIV-positive father and an HIV-negative mother are already likely to have a baby without HIV after the "sperm wash", an effective technique that separates sperm from infected cells before fertilization for their own sake. ensure that the virus is not spread. . During the interview, he stated that he had performed the procedure as part of the experiment.
Some scientists have also expressed concerns about backtracking Mr. He's experience on gene editing technologies around the world.
"I feel more disturbed now," said Liu, also badociated with the Broad Institute of MIT and the inventor of a variation of the gene editing tool. "This is a horrendous example of what not to do with a promising technology that could be very beneficial to society.I hope this will not happen again," said Wednesday. Associated Press.
George Daley, dean of Harvard Medical School and one of the conference organizers, said that since the case could have been a misstep, it should not in any way lead us to head in the sand and not, very positive aspects that could emerge in a more responsible way. "
Still, Daley added, "Scientists who get mean … it's costing the scientific community deep and deep."
<! – enpproperty
Source link
