It’s Too Soon To Genetically Alter Embryos, Panel Says Of ‘CRISPR Babies’
An international panel of experts, assembled in the aftermath of one scientist's secret use of CRISPR to "edit" the DNA of a human embryo, offers guidelines for the gene modifying technology.
AP:
Still Too Soon To Try Altering Human Embryo DNA, Panel Says
It’s still too soon to try to make genetically edited babies because the science isn’t advanced enough to ensure safety, says an international panel of experts who also mapped a pathway for any countries that want to consider it. Thursday’s report comes nearly two years after a Chinese scientist shocked the world by revealing he’d helped make the first gene-edited babies using a tool called CRISPR, which enables DNA changes or “edits” that can pass to future generations. He Jianqui did this to three babies when they were embryos to try to make them resistant to infection with the AIDS virus and described it in exclusive interviews with The Associated Press. (Marchione, 9/3)
Stat:
Expert Panel Outlines Steps Before Future 'CRISPR Babies' Attempts
Nearly two years after the birth of the first “CRISPR babies” stunned the world, an international group of experts on Thursday warned such human experimentation — in which the DNA of embryos is edited before starting pregnancies — should not be conducted because of unresolved scientific and ethical issues. But the group’s eagerly awaited report detailed the steps that scientists should go through before attempting to create gene-edited babies should countries ever greenlight the procedure. (Joseph, 9/3)
Nature:
‘CRISPR Babies’ Are Still Too Risky, Says Influential Panel
Editing genes in human embryos could one day prevent some serious genetic disorders from being passed down — but for now the technique is too risky to be used in embryos destined for implantation, according to a high-profile international commission. And even when the technology is mature, it would initially apply only in a narrow set of circumstances, the panel says.The recommendations, released in a report on 3 September, were produced by experts from 10 countries convened by the US National Academy of Medicine, US National Academy of Sciences, and the UK Royal Society. They join a line of reports in recent years that have argued against deploying gene editing in the clinic until researchers are able to address safety worries, and the public has had a chance to comment on ethical and societal concerns. (Ledford, 9/3)
