14 hours ago by Anthony Wrigley And Ainsley Newson, The Conversation In the future, our DNA could be different by design. Credit: http:\/\/www.shutterstock.com<\/a> <\/p>\n The ability to precisely and accurately change almost any part of any genome, even in complex species such as humans, may soon become a reality through genome editing. But with great power comes great responsibility and few subjects elicit such heated debates about moral rights and wrongs. <\/p>\n Although genetic engineering techniques have been around for some time, genome editing can achieve this with lower error rates, more simply and cheaply than ever although the technology is certainly not yet perfect. <\/p>\n Genome editing offers a greater degree of control and precision in how specific DNA sequences are changed. It could be used in basic science, for human health, or improvements to crops. There are a variety of techniques but clustered regularly inter-spaced short palindromic repeats, or CRISPR, is perhaps the foremost. <\/p>\n CRISPR has prompted recent calls for a genome editing moratorium from a group of concerned US academics. Because it is the easiest technique to set up and so could be quickly and widely adopted, the fear is that it may be put into use far too soon outstripping our understanding of its safety implications and preventing any opportunity to think about how such powerful tools should be controlled. <\/p>\n The ethics of genetics, revisited <\/p>\n Ethical concerns over genetic modification are not new, particularly when it comes to humans. While we don't think genome editing gives rise to any completely new ethical concerns, there is more to gene editing than just genetic modification. <\/p>\n First, there is no clear consensus as to whether genome editing is just an incremental step forward, or whether it represents a disruptive technology capable of overthrowing the current orthodoxy. If this is the case and it's a very real prospect then we will need to carefully consider genome editing's ethical implications, including whether current regulation is adequate. <\/p>\n Second, there are significant ethical concerns over the potential scope and scale of genome editing modifications. As more researchers use CRISPR to achieve more genome changes, the implications shift. Our consideration of a technology that is rarely used and then only in specific cases will differ from one that is widely used and put to all sorts of uses. <\/p>\n Should we reach this tipping point, we will have to revisit the conclusions of the first few decades of the genetic modification debate. Currently modifying plants, some animals, and non-inheritable cells in humans is allowed under strict controls. But modifications that alter the human germ-line are not allowed, with the exception of the recent decision in the UK to allow mitochondrial replacement. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Go here to read the rest: 14 hours ago by Anthony Wrigley And Ainsley Newson, The Conversation In the future, our DNA could be different by design. Credit: http:\/\/www.shutterstock.com<\/a> The ability to precisely and accurately change almost any part of any genome, even in complex species such as humans, may soon become a reality through genome editing. But with great power comes great responsibility and few subjects elicit such heated debates about moral rights and wrongs Continue reading
\nGenome editing poses ethical problems that we cannot ignore<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"