One of the developers of the CRISPR / Cas genome editing technology, Feng Zhang and Emmanuelle Charpentier, as well as their colleagues from seven countries, called for a global moratorium on the use of genetic editing of viable human embryos for the birth of CRISPR people, as Chinese scientist Jiankui He did. The call for a moratorium, backed by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), is published in the journal Nature.
He previously stated that twins were born in November and he tried to build up resistance to HIV infection. He spoke about his work in an interview with The Associated Press, there is still no published scientific article about his research or independent confirmation. The Chinese authorities in January announced the preliminary results of the investigation into He's work, confirming not only the existence of the twins Lulu and Nana, but also another pregnancy of the participant in the experiment, and later published draft guidelines governing experiments in genetic editing and other biomedical technologies.
Zhang, Charpentier and 16 other scientists, including, for example, Eric Lander, director of the Broad Institute, are calling for a temporary moratorium on experiments with genetic editing of human germ line cells for clinical purposes, that is, to create genetically modified children. Zhang himself has already personally called for a similar moratorium immediately after the announcement of the experiment by the Chinese scientist.
By a temporary moratorium of limited duration (they consider a five-year period to be appropriate), the authors of the manifesto mean a voluntary refusal from such experiments until a number of conditions are met with confidence. These conditions include, in particular, the mandatory information and consultation of the international community before the approval of the experiment, a transparent process for evaluating an application for its implementation, and a demonstration of consensus in society about the appropriateness of the experiment. "Countries may choose different paths, but they must agree to work openly and with respect for human opinion on an issue that ultimately concerns the entire species," the scientists write. They emphasize that the moratorium will not concern the editing of embryos for scientific purposes without implanting them in the uterus, as well as the editing of somatic cells for the treatment of diseases.
“While technology has evolved over the past few years, germline editing is not yet safe or effective enough to be used clinically … the scientific community agrees that the risk of not getting the desired changes or causing unexpected mutations is still unacceptable for such an application. Considerable research work is being carried out in this direction,”the document says.
The authors also distinguish between genetic adjustment to protect against disease and genetic enhancement of beneficial parameters in humans. If at this stage they consider the latter to be absolutely unacceptable, then the issue of protecting the unborn child from diseases, from their point of view, is more complicated. They remind that today couples with a high risk of passing on a mutation that causes a particular disease have the possibility of in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Scientists believe that improving these procedures is still a safer and more effective way to prevent the transmission of genetic diseases.
According to the authors of the manifesto, decisions on such experiments should not be made only by the scientific community without a wide public discussion. In addition, they urge all researchers or organizations that become aware of such experiments or their plans to release this information to the public (scientists emphasize that people who knew about He's experiments did not make an effort to stop them). In an editorial, Nature notes that a system similar to the disclosure of experiments with potential biosafety risks may be appropriate here.
Promotional video:
The National Academies of Sciences, Medicine and Engineering of the United States in their commentary refrained from direct support of the moratorium, but noted that they share the concerns of the authors of the manifesto in the journal and have already created an international commission on scientific and ethical issues of editing the human genome.
Olga Dobrovidova