[ad_1]
A few weeks ago, Lulu and Nana were born: twins genetically modified by a group of Chinese researchers, led by He Jiankui (Chinese University of Science and Technology of the South). The goal was clear: the goal was to protect the little ones against the human immunodeficiency virus. The news shocked the world because, if confirmed, it would be the first "baby designer" made from the Crispr / Cas9 technique, the famous chisel capable of modifying genes that shake the darkest fantasies. genetic determinism.
However, beyond the hullabaloo explosion confined, the international scientific community calls for caution. It turns out that He Jiankui, for the moment, walks in lazy newspapers: his work has not been published in any specialized magazine and, therefore, his experience has not yet been contrasted or submitted to the magnifying glass of other experts. In this sense, Alberto Kornblihtt, Ph.D. in Chemical Sciences from the University of Buenos Aires and Senior Researcher at Conicet, said: "It is not possible to evaluate anything because the work has not been published : we do not know how they did this experiment, what their goals were. " , or if the embryos were discarded en route. If they actually generate virus-resistant babies, only multi-million dollar families can access it, which would result in the creation of a subgroup of humans who would have a genetic advantage simply because that they have a lot of money. It's something as sophisticated as it is useless. "
Although this is forbidden in many countries, He Jiankui's group has published human embryos to enable them to resist a future infection. Crispr, a technique that revolutionized the world of molecular biology and whose creators could soon win the Nobel Prize in Medicine, works like a "molecular chisel" because it allows to produce cuts and modifications in the genome . It is therefore used to introduce, correct or eliminate DNA sequences in a totally targeted manner and with surgical precision. "Until now, we have been very cautious, because if the technology was not used properly, it could repair the damage but also introduce a new problem elsewhere," says Marcelo Rubinstein, doctor of chemical sciences and technology. senior researcher at Conicet. .
"I am against the genetic modification of human embryos that can produce new traits for babies born and passed on to offspring, and Crispr has potential unpredictable effects due to changes in other genome sites. that do not constitute the desired area.In the future, these little ones could present a defect by canceling another gene that is not expressed today.What the world needs the least, is to edit the genome of those who are about to be born, because there is much to do with those who are born, "says Alberto Kornblihtt.
"The enthusiasm for this technique is encouraged because, at least by working with mice, collateral damage can be significantly reduced, in which case the gene that codes for the protein found in white blood cells and functions as a gateway for the virus in the cell would be eliminated, "says Rubinstein.
"What in the past has been censored, in the future may not have a trial.In reality, it opens the door to the transformation of any aspect of the biology of the human being," says the specialist.
This question, from Rubinstein's point of view, can be observed from a geopolitical point of view. "There is a very important battle between China and the United States, so it is a show of force: both nations claim to show that they are not willing to give any benefits. During the Cold War, the situation was much more palpable, but the dispute is still latent, except that the USSR no longer exists, "he said. The immediate antecedent In mid-2017, a team of scientists led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov (University of Science and Health of Oregon) decided to move the first pawn on the chessboard. Abandoned a traditionally pragmatic logic in bioethics, he published his research in the prestigious journal Nature in which he demonstrated that Crispr could be used in human embryos – derived from the sperm of a patient – by eliminating congenital effects before birth and without introduction ire additional errors in your genome. In this case, unlike Chinese work, caution has triumphed: they abandoned the experience at the embryonic level. Here, it seems, although the confirmation of the case remains, the Asians took two steps forward to conquer the goal in advance and plant their flag to shout to the world their total mastery of the technique. The difference is that now the disputed territory is not the moon – as in the 60s – but the human body.
[ad_2]
Source link
