Gene-edited humans seen as likely by scientists and public, new studies suggest
6 reported
A Guardian editorial reports that recent discoveries and a new poll indicate scientists and the public believe gene-edited humans are likely in the near future, despite a worldwide legal prohibition on human germline editing. Two new studies using base editing, a more precise next-generation Crispr tool, were conducted on human embryos to study early development or disease, with the lead author stating the technology is not yet ready for the clinic. The editorial notes that safety concerns form the basis of most laws against gene editing, but the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and the US National Academies hold that germline editing is not ethically unacceptable in itself. New polling by Ipsos for the Progress Educational Trust found that a majority of citizens in the UK, Spain and the Netherlands supported gene editing to correct life-threatening genetic conditions like cystic fibrosis. The editorial warns that collaborations between IVF companies and labs doing base-editing research in the US show how short the leap could be from medical treatment to on-demand genetic designs.
What’s reported
No country currently allows human germline editing, and 70 countries have laws against it, including the UK.
Two new studies use base editing on human embryos, which is legal in the UK and US as long as embryos are destroyed within 14 days.
Lead author Dieter Egli said the technology was not yet ready for the clinic but advances would guide responsible research.
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics and the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hold that human germline editing is not ethically unacceptable in itself.
Ipsos polling for the Progress Educational Trust found a majority in the UK, Spain and the Netherlands support gene editing for life-threatening conditions like cystic fibrosis, and a plurality support it for manageable conditions like asthma.
In the US, collaborations exist between IVF companies and labs doing base-editing research.
Key figures
Dieter Egli, lead author of one study
R Alta Charo, bioethicist
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Progress Educational Trust
Sources: The Guardian
