Genetically modified baby claims must be treated with caution

E On Monday morning, news came out of a major breakthrough in China. Thanks to the wonders of gene editing, binoculars were apparently born with a fantastic superpower: they were naturally resistant to HIV.

Depending on your position, this result may seem extremely exciting or downright terrifying. Gene editing (and "designer babies") is a fascinating frontier in scientific research, but with unpleasant echoes of the horrors of eugenics and the dystopian vision of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World

. the serious interviews in which Professor He Jiankui and his badociates described their work, as their claims must now be considered with a handful of fists.

Scientists say babies created by their experiments have had their genomes altered so that they can not get HIV, although it is only in one of the twins that the procedure provides complete protection by modifying both copies of the target gene. Their seemingly noble purpose was to produce children who are not affected by this life-altering disease that affects nearly 37 million people worldwide.

However, without publication in a scholarly review and thorough scientific review, we should perhaps decline to judge the veracity of their claims

Indeed, controversial areas such as gene editing and cloning have attracted charlatans and selfish people who are happy to make bold statements that are no longer supported by scientific evidence.

South Korean researcher Hwang Woo-suk is at the forefront of these concerns. Once considered a pioneer in stem cell research, he fell dramatically in 2005, discovering that he had simulated the creation of the first cloned human embryos in the world.

Severino Antinori, who claimed to have succeeded in cloning human beings, and the pioneer of the "head transplant", Sergio Canavero, are pretentious claimants who seduced the press without having substantiated their claims. To find out more

The reaction of the scientific community to the Chinese team's experience was fast and unified enough by ranking Professor He in the same category as these so-called nonconformists. Although a few have temporarily welcomed the results, with some reservations, most have called this announcement "irresponsible" and "designed to cause as much controversy as possible", while evidence of positive results from the team remained non-existent (for the moment).

does not mean that the experiments are science fiction. Gene editing can undeniably be done on humans and human embryos. Only last year, a team at the Francis Crick Institute in London modified human embryos for the first time in the UK, but these cells were essentially confined to a laboratory – they were not implanted in surrogate mothers.

In contrast, China emerged. as a kind of wild west in gene editing. Freed from the ethical restrictions that prevent researchers in Europe and the United States from moving in this scientific direction, it is the Chinese scientists who show the way (for better or for worse).

In Chinese hospitals, dozens of patients with cancer or HIV have been genetically modified with cells. In this context, the birth of these twins seems to be an inevitable next logical step. The problem is that, although gene editing tools have proven to be a fantastic scientific innovation, scientists are still not able to control them enough to ensure safety. Some have suggested that they could be used to treat untreatable genetic diseases for which no other option is available, but HIV – with a profusion of preventative measures and medication for treatment – is not available. in fact not a part.

It remains to be seen whether the Professor's claims have any basis whatsoever, but with so many unknowns about the long-term impacts and side effects of this technology, many will argue that his claims ( and his actions) are morally questionable in one way or another.