[ad_1]
Experts from the World Health Organization are meeting Monday in Geneva to debate the future of human gene editing, while scientists and ethicists call for a worldwide ban on human health. The use of technology that could lead to genetically modified babies.
The global ban would specifically concern the modification of human DNA that is transmissible from one generation to the next, called the germ line. It would be a five-year moratorium to create an international framework to encourage scientists to do the right thing.
"The call is for a temporary freeze on the clinical applications of germ line modification," says Dimitri Perrin, a senior lecturer at Queensland University of Technology in Australia. "That's not to say that we should stop research on embryo editing; it simply means that it is too early to apply this technology clinically. "
The push to suppress germ line editing – which came from 18 scientists and was published in the journal Nature – follows the international outrage that erupted when Chinese researcher He Jianku illegally used CRISPR gene cutting scissors to edit embryos that led to the birth of binoculars.
Some scientists opposed to the moratorium
However, not everyone supports the idea of a moratorium. Helen O'Neill, Director of the Reproductive Sciences and Women's Health Program at University College London, told the Science Media Center that such a move might cast a negative light on the potential for germline genome modification that would have huge consequences for research funding.
"Currently, legal and ethical measures are in place around the world to regulate the use of gametes and embryos," said O & # 39; Neill. "Let's not forget that He Jiankui broke many rules and was aware of this by choosing to do his job outside of the auspices of the university … This is not all that. He did it because the law allowed it. "
Perrin admits that in many countries there is already a ban on germ line modification, but the idea is to try to reach an international consensus on how to move forward with this technology. .
"It is true that most European countries, for example, have signed the Convention on Human Rights in Biomedicine and, in this convention, the changes that would be inherited from one generation to the next. others are forbidden by default, "said Perrin.
"This proposed moratorium would bring together various stakeholders – researchers, clinicians, ethicists and the general population – for an open discussion on the timing and use of Crispr."
Technology advances too fast
Countless questions remain unanswered about the use of Crispr (short palindromic repeats regularly grouped together) and about the dangers it poses. Technology could cause cells to lose the ability to fight cancer or create incurable diseases. There is also the risk of ushering in a new era of human inequality.
Dr. Gaetan Burgio, a geneticist at the John Curtin School of Medical Research at the Australian National University in Canberra, warns: "We do not know exactly what Crispr is doing in the cell. We have learned a lot, but we still have a lot to learn. We need to be sure that it works and that we must ensure absolute safety for all clinical uses and we are not yet in this position. "
The moratorium will not prevent dishonest scientists like He from interfering in human embryos, Burgio adds, but he can certainly reduce their motivation to want to do it.
[ad_2]
Source link
