[ad_1]
GENETIC MODIFICATION
Controversy and doubt is the reaction to the announcement that a Chinese scientist has created the first genetically modified babies in the world to resist certain diseases through the CRISPR genetic modification technique.
Jesús Centeno
The controversy began when specialized publications such as the American magazine MIT Technology Review echoed the study of scientist He Jiankui, who began broadcasting videos on Youtube yesterday in which he claimed to have modified the Two genes.
According to the Chinese researcher, the girls Lulu and Nana, "were born healthy a few weeks ago," thanks to in vitro fertilization with a genetic modification technology "that will prevent them from being infected by HIV ".
In these videos, I claimed to have used the CRISPR / Cas9 technique and justified the experiment by stating that the genetic modification "is not intended to eliminate genetic diseases "but rather" to give girls the natural ability to resist possible HIV infection. "
To achieve his goal, he claims to have" disabled "the CCR5 gene, which forms a protein that allows HIV to enter a cell and that, in practice, this implies an improvement of the DNA.
"I understand that my work is controversial, but I think families need this technology and I'm willing to accept criticism of them," he says. One of the videos.
However, the University of Science and Technology South of Shenzhen City today challenged his teacher in a statement and pointed out that it was not even at current of this project.
she is "deeply shocked by the case" and urges her, on leave since February this year, to come as soon as possible to give explanations.
"The University will convene international experts to investigate this incident, which constitutes a serious violation of ethics and academic standards," said the institution on the project, which also raised doubts as to its veracity, because to date, it has not been published in any Scientific Review
For its part, the Chinese press today acknowledged that the study had sparked controversy between academics and the public across the country.
The China Daily newspaper highlights concerns "about ethical issues and its effectiveness" and reveals that the parents of both babies are people living with HIV, according to Bai Hua, head of Baihualin, a non-governmental organization that Occupies people with this disease,
Meanwhile, more than 120 academics from the Chinese scientific community said in a statement released on Sina Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, that "any attempt" to modifying human embryos through genetic modification is "crazy", and that giving birth to these babies involves "high risk."
"Chinese authorities must take quick legislative measures to strictly supervise such research", added a Chinese scientist.
The controversy comes a day before researchers in this field begin an important meeting on genome modification, to be held from 27 to 29 November in Hong Kong.
Overall, the journal Nature also participates in the debate today. and in an article he argues that this announcement caused a "scandal" among the international scientific community and that, if true, "would represent a significant advance in the use of human genome modification".
"He is premature, dangerous and irresponsible," Joyce Harper, a researcher at the University College of London, told the publication.
"This experience exposes normal and healthy children to risks without any real benefit being needed," the magazine says.
This type of tool has not been used so far to study its benefits for the elimination of disease-causing mutations, and adds that the scientific community "has long been asking" for the establishment of principles ethical, long before a case such as this occurs.
In 2016, a group of Chinese scientists became a pioneer in the use in humans, especially in patients with lung cancer. , CRISPR genetic modification technology, reported by Nature.
However, scientists in the UK have discovered that CRISPR gene modification technology could cause more cell damage than was thought a study published this year by the same magazine. EFE
[ad_2]
Source link
