Allegations of Genetically Modified Babies Must Be Treated with Caution

EOn Monday morning, there was news 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 it presents unpleasant echoes of the horrors of eugenics and dystopian vision of Aldous Huxley. Brave New World.

However, despite the serious interviews in which Professor He Jiankui and his associates have described their work, for the moment, their demands must be met with a large handful of salt.

Scientists explain that babies' genomes from their experiments have been modified so as not to contract HIV, although it is only in one of the twins that the procedure provides complete protection by modifying the two copies of the target gene. Their seemingly noble purpose was to produce children who are not affected by this life-changing disease, which affects nearly 37 million people worldwide.

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

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

Among them, the South Korean researcher Hwang Woo-suk. 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 has widely claimed to have succeeded in cloning human beings, and Sergio Canavero, a pioneer of the infamous "head transplant", also courted the press without having substantiated their claims.

The response of the scientific community to the Chinese team's experience has been fast and fairly unified by ranking Professor He in the same category as those so-called nonconformists. Although a few have temporarily welcomed the results, with some reservations, most have called this announcement "irresponsible" and "designed to cause maximum controversy and shock," while evidence of the results The team's positives were (for the moment) nonexistent.

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

On the other hand, China has become a bit of a Wild West in terms of genetic modification. 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 genetically modified their cells. In this context, the birth of these twins seems to be an inevitable 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 Professor Hei's claims have any foundation whatsoever, but with so many unknowns about the long-term impacts of this technology, many will argue that his claims (and actions) are morally wrong. questionable. .