Sunday , April 5 2020
Home / argentina / What can be done to prevent another crisis CRISPR?

What can be done to prevent another crisis CRISPR?



[ad_1]

Public announcement last fall of China regarding the editing of genes on human embryos, is carried out without the use of scientific review and ethical discussions, it was greeted with worldwide scorn. He also raised global concerns that more stringent standards should be established to guide future research efforts in the germline gene therapy, according to a new publication of an article on April 30 in the open access journal PLoS Biology medical ethics Arthur L. Caplan, Ph.D., founder and director of the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University School of Medicine.

In the article, Kaplan lists fateful November 25, 2018, press conference in Hong Kong, where he Jiankui, a scientist at the Southern University of Science and Technology in China Shenzen on & # 39; has identified that he created the first baby of the germ of the annotated human embryos . A group of more than 100 well-known Chinese scholars said after that he was in the "beyond a reasonable science", and the Chinese Vice-Minister of Science and Technology called the study "illegal and unacceptable". The Chinese government has closed the investigation of it almost immediately.

"There is little room for anything but vociferous condemnation of the & # 39; waking He," says Kaplan article.

But Kaplan also points to a major flaw in global research that it brings to light. "A deep understanding of the mechanisms and potential side effects of the embryo editing & # 39 is an absolute precondition for any further consideration of its implementation," he says. "Currently, human embryonic editing, in particular with regard to how the DNA repair after induced break, poorly understood."

So, what can be done to ensure that the editing of the gene germline standards-compliant? Many are calling for a moratorium, but they existed when He was made outcasts experiment. Kaplan offers a number of recommendations in the article, which provide some means of coercion, such as direct management of conflicts of interest by overseeing the organization of research; a ban on the "exclusive" rights to research results for all media; No publications incorrectly assessed outcomes related embryos; expansion of the informed consent of research participants, to ensure the independence of the sub & # 39; object; attracting qualified and properly trained internal supervisory boards and ethics committees; and the creation of a common database for all relevant documentation.

Kaplan acknowledges that there may be additional recommendations to be made – but the point is made. "It is not enough to establish that the study of germ should be suspended or cautiously continue, despite the ethical lapses," he says. "Regulation and penalties should have sufficient bite to persuade the public that a renegade science has no future in the development of our descendants."

###

Review / opinion Part / N / A

In your coverage, please use the URL that, to ensure access to freely available article PLoS Biology: Http: // journals.PLoS.org /plosbiology /Article? ID =10.1371 /magazine.PBIO.3000223

Citation: Kaplan A (2019) Production of sur & # 39; ozna relates to the problem of regulating germline gene therapy. PLoS Biol 17 (4): e3000223. https: //doi.org /10.1371 /magazine.PBIO.3000223

Funding: Author (s) did not receive any special funding for this work.

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that there are no competing interests.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! is not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! from institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert system.

[ad_2]
Source link