nature | They are meeting in China; they are meeting in the United Kingdom; and
they met in the United States last week. Around the world, scientists
are gathering to discuss the promise and perils of editing the genome of
a human embryo. Should it be allowed — and if so, under what
circumstances?
The meetings have been prompted by an explosion of interest in the powerful technology known as CRISPR/Cas9,
which has brought unprecedented ease and precision to genetic
engineering. This tool, and others like it, could be used to manipulate
the DNA of embryos in a dish to learn about the earliest stages of human
development. In theory, genome editing could also be used to 'fix' the
mutations responsible for heritable human diseases. If done in embryos,
this could prevent such diseases from being passed on.
The prospects have prompted widespread concern and discussion
among scientists, ethicists and patients. Fears loom that if genome
editing becomes acceptable in the clinic to stave off disease, it will
inevitably come to be used to introduce, enhance or eliminate traits for
non-medical reasons.
Ethicists are concerned that unequal access to
such technologies could lead to genetic classism. And targeted changes
to a person's genome would be passed on for generations, through the
germ line (sperm and eggs), fuelling fears that embryo editing could
have lasting, unintended consequences.
Adding to these concerns, the regulations in many countries have not kept pace with the science.
Nature
has tried to capture a snapshot of the legal landscape by querying
experts and government agencies in 12 countries with histories of
well-funded biological research. The responses reveal a wide range of
approaches. In some countries, experimenting with human embryos at all
would be a criminal offence, whereas in others, almost anything would be
permissible.
0 comments:
Post a Comment