[ad_1]
The recent claims of the first babies in the world to be published by a gene have provoked a strong reaction, to say the least. The Southern University of Science and Technology, which employs the researcher involved, He Jiankui, said in a press release that she was not aware of her work, that those these had taken place off campus and that it was a case of scientific potential. misconduct that would not remain unanswered
This striking news marks a sharp increase in the controversy surrounding the editing of the human genome. But this is not the first time that a Chinese team uses the CRISPR technique on human embryos in a way that few researchers from other countries have attempted, and the country has claimed several innovations in the field.
The debate on China's progress in this area broke out of scientific laboratories and circles a few years ago. In an article published in 2015 in the New York Times Yi Huso, director of research at the Center for Bioethics of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, says, "I do not think China wants take a moratorium […] People say that they can not stop the train of Chinese genetics because it is going too fast. "
However, there are some important points to understand about the state of the human genome publishing in China today. . First, access to surplus embryos in China is not much easier than anywhere else. On average, 83% of Chinese couples undergoing an IVF procedure decide to keep their embryos up until three years after the birth of a child. In the United States, about 62% of American couples keep their embryos up to five years after birth. In France, out of 220 000 surplus frozen embryos, only 20 000 can be made available for research and less than 10% of these have been used effectively.
The New Technological Race
But China has entered the race of the "genome of publishing". among the great scientific nations and its progress did not come out of nowhere. China has invested heavily in the natural sciences sector over the last 20 years. The Ninth Five-Year Plan (1996-2001) mentioned the critical importance of biotechnology. The current thirteenth five-year plan is even more explicit. It contains a section devoted to "Developing Effective and Advanced Biotechnologies" and lists key areas such as "Genome Editing Technologies", intended to "place China at the forefront of biotechnological innovation and to become the leader of international competition in this sector ".
Research on Chinese embryos is governed by a legal framework, the "Technical Standards for Human Assisted Reproductive Technologies," published by the Ministries of Science and Health. The guidelines theoretically prohibit the use of sperm or egg cells whose genome has been manipulated for the purpose of procreation. However, it is difficult to know what value really attributes this rule to the rule, especially in the complex institutional and political context of China.
In theory, there are three main actors in biomedical research in China: the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Health, and the Chinese Food and Drug Administration. In reality, the other agents also play an important role. Local governments interpret and apply departmental "recommendations" and their own interpretations can lead to significant variations in what researchers can and can not do on the ground. The National Academy of Medicine of China is also a powerful institution with its own network of hospitals, universities and laboratories.
Another main actor is involved: the health section of the People's Liberation Army, which has its own biomedical faculties, hospitals and research laboratories. The PLA interprets the recommendations itself and has proven its ability to collaborate with the private sector on gene editing projects. In January 2018, the Wall Street Journal reported that 86 patients had been enrolled in a clinical trial to try to cure cancer. A Chinese start-up, Anhui Kedgene Biotechnology, participated in this partnership with PLA 105 Hospital in Hefei Province.
It is still too early to say what is really at stake here. The previous Ng-Ago should make everyone cautious about such major announcements: even published articles can be removed and peer-reviewed research needs to be changed. This announcement is not even at this stage. And the moment chosen by the media is a little too perfect, said in a tweet Antonio Regalado, editor in chief of biomedicine at MIT Technology Review:
Think why the @AP contains all these photos from Dr. He in the bank. They knew they had to go on and helped keep the secret IN THE NAME OF the researchers so that the guy could continue the experiments and tie up the world at the time / place of his choice.
– Antonio Regalado (@antonioregalado) November 26, 2018
This is clearly not the end of history, it is a step further in the era of gene editing [19659002] Guillaume Levrier, PhD student – CEVIPOF (Sciences Po Political Research Center), Sciences Po – USPC.
This article was first published in The Conversation.
[ad_2]
Source link
