Gene editing regulations can’t be decided by scientists alone

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

An international summit on human gene editing drew hundreds of people to Washington, D.C., for three days, with many more joining online. The meeting, which wrapped up on Thursday, was convened by the scientific academies of the United States, the United Kingdom, and China. Its central issue: whether or not powerful new molecular engineering techniques should be used to create genetically modified children.

The summit was not designed to produce consensus among the participants, a mix of scientists, academics, ethicists and others, but its organizing committee released a statement at the end of the deliberations. Perhaps unsurprisingly, its conclusion was inconclusive.

Typically, discussions of new biomedical technologies that are organized by scientists focus on technical questions about safety and effectiveness. But when the matter at hand is a technology that may literally reshape human beings and human society, ethical and social considerations cannot be ignored. The organizers of the just-concluded summit made a real effort to include speakers, including myself, whose expertise lies in social, policy, or ethical arenas.

Unfortunately, many perspectives from outside the scientific community were not fully represented, especially those from the public interest sector. We did not hear, for example, from advocates for disability rights, racial justice, reproductive rights and justice, the LGBTQ community, environmental protection, labor, or children’s welfare. Also missing were religious and artistic voices.

Read full, original post: Human gene editing is a social and political matter, not just a scientific one

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT Image May 10, 2026, 08_16_59 PM 2
Overmedicalization? RFK Jr.’s antidepressant crackdown raises conflict questions over his fee stake in Wisner Baum, the tort firm built on suing drug makers
Picture1-5
Science Disinformation Gap: The transatlantic battle over social media and censorship
Picture1-1
Cooling the planet with balloons: Could a geoengineering gamble slow global warming?
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-13-2026-02_20_22-PM
Viewpoint: Misinformation infodemic? Why assessing evidence is so challenging 
Screenshot-2026-05-11-104424
Hantavirus outbreak research: Trump administration shut down study last year on rodent-to-human transmission
Picture1-14
When superbugs threaten vulnerable children: Can AI help solve antibiotic resistance?
S
As vaccine rejectionism spreads, measles may be taking a more dangerous turn
Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-1.29.41-PM
Viewpoint: What happens when whole grains meet modern food manufacturing? Labels don’t tell the whole story.
Screenshot 2026-05-11 at 11.30
Despite politicized disinformation, Midwest AI data centers are fueling a solar energy boom
Screenshot-2026-05-08-at-3.40.33-PM
Seeds of power: China turns to genetic engineering to become global superpower
Screenshot-2026-05-08-at-11.55.47-AM
Anti-vax activists falsely blame COVID vaccines for the rising U.S. cancer rate among younger people.
Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-2.26.27-PM
Viewpoint — Food-fear world: The latest activist scientists campaign: Cancer-causing additives
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.