The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our 2019 Annual Report

Should we use gene editing on human newborns? Exploring scientific arguments for, and against, what may be inevitable

| October 29, 2019

[L]et’s take a closer look at the headline question in own words of scientists. Below are exact quotes from documents, memos, and publications.

Not to edit:

It is irresponsible at this time for anyone to proceed with clinical applications of human germline genome editing [WHO committee].

Unequal access to the technology could increase inequality. Genetic enhancement could even divide humans into subspecies [Nature call].

To edit:

We enhance the intelligence of our children, we have been doing it for millennia: we educate them. (…) I just don’t think that blue eyes and (an extra) 15 IQ points is really a public health threat, I don’t think it’s a threat to our morality [G. Church].

Related article:  May election offers Europe chance to embrace gene editing and 'smart agriculture,' boost sustainable farming

We conclude that so long as heritable genome editing interventions are consistent with the welfare of the future person and with social justice and solidarity, they do not contravene any categorical moral prohibition [Nuffield Council on Bioethics].

We are not there yet, but inevitably we will be. What side will you choose? What side will choose the humanity?

For sure, we are going to change what is known as Homo sapiens.

Read full, original post: Context Watch: To edit or not to edit? At the brink of newborn genome editing

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Click the link above to read the full, original article.
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend