Despite promises, CRISPR not yet safe enough for human gene therapy

Screen Shot at AM

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

Not too long ago, ‘designer babies,’ genome editing and gene therapy were futuristic and expensive ideas that were available only to the most affluent elite.

Yet, today, this baffling feat is becoming shockingly affordable thanks to the advancement of CRISPR. Since its initial debut in 2012, CRISPR’s capabilities have leapt forward every year. Some highlights include modifications of genomes in non-viable human embryos by Chinese scientists, modifications in pig embryos by US scientists in an effort to create pig organs viable for human organ transplants, and more recently, the authorization for UK scientists to begin experimentation in modifying viable human embryos.

CRISPR/Cas9 is not without its drawbacks. Although its precision has improved since its first introduction, the risk of off-target cuts exists and can range from 0.1 per cent to more than 60 per cent, depending on the target cell and sequence used in the experiment. Its power to wipe out entire species in under a year can be disastrous and have widespread effects on entire ecosystems.

It is a rather inexpensive and simple technique that can be easily accessed, and dangerous if not regulated. There has been such an explosive reaction to this new technique that it has outpaced our ability to create legal and ethical guidelines, and mandates for its use.

Read full, original post: Minding our makeup

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend