The DNA of early human embryos carrying a sequence leading to hypertrophic cardiomyopathya potentially deadly heart defecthas been edited to ensure they would carry a healthy DNA sequence if brought to term. The Nature paper announcing this has reenergized a terrific national and international debate over whether permanent changes in DNA that can be passed from one generation to another should be made. Bioethicists are asking, Should we genetically engineer children? while some potential parents are almost certainly asking, When will this technique be available?
The Should questions bioethicists are asking are probably not relevant. The only question whose answer ultimately matters is: Can techniques like CRISP-R be used to genetically engineer children safely? Because a variety of forces guarantee that if they can be, they will be.
The key questions reliable practitioners must answer are: Can we prove it works? Then: Can it be used safely?. If yes on these questions, then we will see: Who is marketing this technique to potential parents? Finally, we will learn: Where was it done, who did it, and who paid for its use?
We are closer than ever before to using CRISP-R to replace dangerous DNA sequences with those that wont keep a baby from being healthy. Fortunately, this Nature paper leaves many questions Unanswered because the embryos were not allowed to come to term.
Most importantly, we still dont know Could the embryos have developed into viable babies? Just as in 2015 when researchers at Sun Yat-Sen University in China didnt implant engineered embryos into a womans womb, the scientists who published in Nature recently didnt feel ready (and didnt have permission) to try this potentially enormous step. As experiments proceed, this question will, at some point, be answered.
It will be answered because there is an enormous, proven market for techniques that can be used to ensure that a baby will be born without DNA sequences that can lead to genetically-mediated conditions; many of which are devastating as we have been tragically reminded of late.
Under the best circumstances, in-vitro fertilization leads to a live birth less than half of the time. As a result, whoever tries to see if an embryo that has had targeted DNA repaired using CRISP-R will doubtless prepare a lot of embryos for implanting in quite a few women. When those women are asked to carry these embryos to term we will not know about it. We will probably not find out if none of the embryos come to term successfully.
We *will* know about this procedure if even one baby comes to term and is born with the targeted genetic sequence corrected as intended. Until now, (and maybe even with our new knowledge), any baby brought to term after CRISP-R was used to edit and replace unhealthy DNA would have almost certainly had other DNA damaged in the editing process. This near-certainty and other concerns have held people back from trying to genetically engineer an embryo that they would then bring to term. They could not, until recently, have confidence that only the sequence being targeted has been affected. With this new Nature report, this, at least, is changing.
The results of these newly reported experiments are many steps closer to usability than the Chinese experiments reported in 2015. This is the nature of scientific experimentation, particularly when there is demand for the capability or knowledge being developed.
People try something. It either works or it doesnt. Sometimes when it doesnt work, we learn enough to adjust and try again. If it does work, it often doesnt function exactly the way we expected. Either way, people keep trying until either the technique is perfected or it ultimately proves to be unusable.
This Nature paper is an example of trying something and doing a better job than the first attempt. It does not represent a provably safe and reliable technique . Yet. If market driven research works as it often does, people will work hard to publish data (hopefully from reliable experimental work) suggesting they have a safe and effective technique. Doing so will let them tell some desperate set of wealthy prospective parents: We should be able to use this technique with an acceptable chance of giving you a healthy baby.
Princetons Lee Silver predicted parents desire for gene editing in his Remaking Eden, a book published in 1997. He argued this because people fear sickness or disability and feel strong personal, economic and social pressures to have healthy, beautiful children who should become healthy attractive adults.
People already spend a great deal on molecular techniques like pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is regularly used to reduce couples risk of having babies with known (or potential), chromosomal abnormalities and/or single gene mutations that can lead to thousands of DNA-mediated conditions.
As I showed in my Genetics dissertation published from Yale in 2004, different countries respond differently to controversial science like this. Similarly, different individuals responses are equally diverse. One poll indicates nearly half of Americans would use gene editing technology to prevent possible DNA-mediated conditions in their children. Policy makers who object to the technology therefore have a problem: if they succeed in blocking it somewhere, research and real world experience indicate other governments may well permit its use. If this happens, these techniques will be available to anyone wealthy and desperate enough to find providers with the marketingand hopefully scientificskill needed to sell people on trying them.
This gene editing controversy is a reminder that we are losing the capacity to effectively ask, Should we? As our knowledge of science grows, becomes more globalized, and is increasingly easy to acquire for people with different morals, needs and wants, we must soon be ready to ask, Can we? and ultimately, Will someone? Their answers will give us the best chance to ensure any babies that may come from any technique described as genetic engineering are born healthy, happy, and able to thrive.
The Morning Email
Wake up to the day’s most important news.
- Bitcoin Price Forecast and Analysis – September 19, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Litecoin Price Forecast and Analysis – September 19, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Ripple Price Forecast and Analysis – September 19, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Ripple Price Forecast and Analysis – September 18, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Litecoin Price Forecast and Analysis – September 18, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Ethereum Price Forecast and Analysis – September 18, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- This Cryptocurrency Could Be the Next Bitcoin - September 20th, 2017
- Ripple Price Forecast and Analysis – September 15, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Ethereum Price Forecast and Analysis – September 15, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- Ethereum Price Forecast and Analysis – September 19, 2017 - September 20th, 2017
- genetic engineering | Definition, Process, & Uses ... - August 24th, 2017
- Genetic Engineering Advantages & Disadvantages - Biology ... - August 24th, 2017
- Genetic engineering - Wikipedia - August 22nd, 2017
- genetic engineering | Definition, Process, & Uses ... - August 22nd, 2017
- Genetic Engineering: What is Genetic Engineering? - August 21st, 2017
- genetic engineering | Definition, Process, & Uses ... - August 21st, 2017
- Gene therapy - Wikipedia - August 21st, 2017
- Genetic Engineering Advantages & Disadvantages - Biology ... - August 21st, 2017
- Genetic engineering - Biology-Online Dictionary - August 21st, 2017
- History of genetic engineering - Wikipedia - August 21st, 2017
- ADRIAN Kibbler wonders whether genetic engineering may be used in the future to prevent illness - Ludlow Advertiser - August 21st, 2017
- ADRIAN Kibbler wonders whether genetic engineering may be used in the future to prevent illness - Ludlow Advertiser - August 19th, 2017
- Listening for the Public Voice - Slate Magazine - August 16th, 2017
- The Impossible Burger wouldn't be possible without genetic engineering - Grist - August 12th, 2017
- Genetically Engineering Pigs to Grow Organs for People - The Atlantic - August 11th, 2017
- When genetic engineering is the environmentally friendly choice - GreenBiz - August 10th, 2017
- Gene Editing Might Mean My Brother Would've Never Existed - TIME - August 10th, 2017
- Global: Engineering the Future of Our Food - STRATFOR - August 10th, 2017
- Genetic Engineering with Strict Guidelines? Ha! - Discovery Institute - August 9th, 2017
- When genetic engineering is the environmentally friendly choice - Genetic Literacy Project - August 7th, 2017
- The Call-In: Genetic Engineering - NPR - August 6th, 2017
- Experts Call on US to Start Funding Scientists to Genetically Engineer Human Embryos - Gizmodo - August 5th, 2017
- What is genetic engineering? | Facts | yourgenome.org - August 4th, 2017
- Genetic Engineering with 'Strict Guidelines?' Ha! - National Review - August 4th, 2017
- A Blueprint for Genetically Engineering a Super Coral - Smithsonian - August 4th, 2017
- Don't fear the rise of superbabies. Worry about who will own genetic engineering technology. - Chicago Tribune - August 3rd, 2017
- We Need to Talk About Genetic Engineering | commentary - Commentary Magazine - August 1st, 2017
- Understanding the basics of Genetically-Modified Organisms - NIGERIAN TRIBUNE (press release) (blog) - August 1st, 2017
- Can genetic modification turn annual crops into perennials? - Genetic Literacy Project - August 1st, 2017
- Genetic engineering creates an unnaturally blue flower - Engadget - July 31st, 2017
- 'True blue' chrysanthemum flowers produced with genetic ... - Nature - Nature.com - July 31st, 2017
- When genetic engineering is the environmentally friendly choice - Ensia - July 29th, 2017
- Should genetic engineering be used as a tool for conservation? - chinadialogue - July 29th, 2017
- Scientists Give a Chrysanthemum the Blues - New York Times - July 29th, 2017
- Human Genetic Engineering Begins! | National Review - National Review - July 27th, 2017
- True Blue Chrysanthemum Flowers Produced with Genetic Engineering - Scientific American - July 27th, 2017
- Pancreas in a Dish Tells Story of How Metastatic Cells Turn Back Time - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (press release) - July 27th, 2017
- 'True blue' chrysanthemum flowers produced with genetic engineering - Nature.com - July 26th, 2017
- Ghana mulling genetic engineering to combat armyworm crop damage - Genetic Literacy Project - July 26th, 2017
- Genetically Engineering Nature Will Be Way More Complicated Than We Thought - Gizmodo - July 21st, 2017
- Should Genetic Engineering Be Used as a Tool for Conservation? - Yale Environment 360 - July 21st, 2017
- DARPA funds $65 million for safer genetic engineering and technology to fight bioterrorism - Next Big Future - July 21st, 2017
- A Super-algae to Save our Seas - Laboratory Equipment - July 21st, 2017
- McCaskey grad writes new book on CRISPR and genome engineering - LancasterOnline - July 20th, 2017
- Chris R. Badman - Lincoln Journal Star - July 20th, 2017
- China unveils technology to create SUPER-HUMANS via hyper-muscular test-tube dogs - Express.co.uk - July 18th, 2017
- 32 genetic engineering incidents since 2011 revealed in regulator's ... - The Canberra Times - July 17th, 2017
- Genetically Modified Rice Stacked With Antioxidants - Asian Scientist Magazine - July 17th, 2017
- This Is Why Investors Will Need to Learn a New Acronym: CRISPR - Madison.com - July 17th, 2017
- China unveils gene technology to create SUPERHUMANS with hyper-muscular test-tube dogs - Express.co.uk - July 16th, 2017
- Boston author turns real life into Hollywood-ready stories - Boston Herald - July 16th, 2017
- FDA Panel Recommends Approval for Gene-Altering Leukemia Treatment - New York Times - July 14th, 2017
- I poured out my hot sauce - The Telegraph - July 14th, 2017
- Genetically engineered salmon is coming to America - The Week Magazine - July 12th, 2017
- Are Pink Pineapples Safe to Eat? - Observer - July 12th, 2017
- Can Genetic Engineering Put an End to Diamondback Moth Plague ... - Growing Produce - July 11th, 2017
- Writing the human genome - The Biological SCENE - July 10th, 2017
- Stanford's Final Exams Pose Question About the Ethics of Genetic Engineering - Futurism - July 10th, 2017
- America's First Free-Roaming Genetically Engineered Insects Are ... - Gizmodo - July 8th, 2017
- Genetically modified food is too advanced for its out-of-date regulations - The Hill (blog) - July 8th, 2017
- New Molecular Scalpel Acts as GPS to Improve Genetic Editing - Bioscience Technology - July 7th, 2017
- Stop GM mustard release as it will harm farmers: scientists to PM - Livemint - July 6th, 2017
- IARPA seeks tech to ID bioengineered life forms - FCW.com (blog) - July 5th, 2017
- 'Woolly' Breathes New Life Into A Scientific Saga - NPR - July 5th, 2017
- The race to revive woolly mammoths using ancient DNA - CBS News - July 2nd, 2017
- Scientific finding paves way for rice genetic engineering to develop efficient water storage - InterAksyon - June 30th, 2017
- Biotechnology confusion: Differences among GMOs, gene editing and genetic engineering - Genetic Literacy Project - June 29th, 2017
- Avoiding CRISPR-Mediated Gene-DriveEvolved Resistance in Mosquitoes - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (blog) - June 29th, 2017
- Genetic engineering tool generates antioxidant-rich purple rice - Phys.Org - June 27th, 2017
- Simple, affordable tests can prevent genetic disorders - Khaleej Times - June 27th, 2017