[ad_1]
When we talked about human cloning for the first time, there were many protest voices, the idea went awry and the world reacted with some vehemence. But the subject has not been lost in the drawers of the laboratories.
The first genetically modified babies in the world will be born in China. Professor He Jiankui says that by removing a specific gene from the embryos using the CRISPR-Cas9 technique, the binoculars will have natural immunity against the AIDS virus. The girls, "Lulu and Nana", will grow up in an ethical storm between efficiency and morality of the procedure.
Can this experience change the human being of the future?
The information begins to echo in the scientific community after the revelation made by the scientist himself in Hong Kong to one of the organizers of the International Conference on Gene Manipulation, which will begin next week.
In a video posted on YouTube, He Jankui presented the process, which began with a fairly normal in vitro fertilization procedure. Once the father's sperm had fertilized the mother's egg, an embryologist injected the CRISPR-Cas9 proteins into the cell, which underwent "genetic surgery", excluding the gene called CCR5. .
This gene encodes the protein that HIV uses to enter a cell. In this way, he eliminates the virus and allows, according to the scientist, the girls to develop a natural immunity against the virus.
The scientist said that the goal was not to cure or prevent an inherited disease, but rather to try to create resilience to a possible future HIV-AIDS infection. In addition, he stated that the parents concerned did not want to be identified or interviewed.
More than just ethics it is security
This type of procedure is not simply "cut and paste". One of the major problems with this technology is that it can cause unintended mutations in other parts of the genome.
He stated that his team was aware of this and that, as a result, he had directed whole genomes and directed sequencing techniques before embryo implantation, during pregnancy and again after birth.
The team reports that only the desired genes have been modified and that there have been no untargeted mutations. The twins, nicknamed Lulu and Nana, to protect their privacy, are apparently "as healthy as any other baby" and are now at home with their parents.
The scientific community does not seem to react positively. Kiran Musunuru, an expert in gene manipulation at the University of Pennsylvania, and editor of a genetics journal, said it was "inconceivable … a human experience that would not be defensible neither morally nor ethically ".
Scripps Research Translational Institute (California) director Eric Topol also said "it's too early".
Ethics of publishing
If the announcement regarding CRISPR babies seems to be out of nowhere, it's because it happened. The experiment was more or less secretive and was only published a few weeks after the birth of genetically modified children.
This secret has raised many suspicions, scientists wondering first of all if the results are as innovative as they appear. And if they are, it can be an unpleasant first step on the slippery path of "projected babies", avoiding the many years of debate about how to proceed.
It is important to note that at this stage, the reports have not been independently verified. It is therefore difficult to say whether the allegations are real. Scientists around the world will think "show me the evidence" and some of the claims of the scientists involved suggest that the issue of genes has only partially worked out. If confirmed, this represents a considerable technological and ethical leap. This big leap is possible to edit the book of human life – some might even suggest that it is a step towards eugenics.
Notes Darren Saunders of the University of New South Wales in Australia.
Eugenia is a term created in 1883 by Francis Galton (1822-1911), which means "well born". Galton defines eugenics as "the study of socially controlled agents that can enhance or impoverish the racial qualities of future generations, whether physically or mentally."
Why the AIDS virus?
The scientists also questioned the target of the chosen disease. HIV is not a high priority in this area, and it is not worth the other risks introduced by the experimental procedure. In addition, other teams have already found safer ways to use CRISPR to "heal" the disease effectively in adult cells.
Last year, a study found that CRISPR gene modification can introduce hundreds of unintended genetic mutations, wreaking havoc on the genome in several ways. This study was later withdrawn by the review, after a review that revealed inconclusive data, but concerns remain.
By disrupting the CCR5 gene in a healthy human being, it will likely become more sensitive to a variety of much more common infections, and something quite benign, like the flu, can now be deadly. .
Greg Neely of the University of Sydney said.
The future of embryo editing
The scientific community emphasizes that risks are far more important than benefits. However, embryo editing has considerable potential for chronic disease prevention, improving the quality of life and reducing the burden on health systems.
This type of technique has already proven effective, as studies have shown that it was possible to completely suppress a genetic disease of a human embryo and, therefore, essentially eradicate this disease of the family line. But this preclinical trial aimed to ensure that the technique was safe and effective and that the embryo could not be postponed until the subject's ethics had been resolved.
The study has not yet been officially released, and it is now possible that no newspaper will want to answer it. In any case, it's a fascinating and terrifying story.
[ad_2]
Source link
