100+ countries have outlined legal restrictions on editing human embryos. Here’s a guide

Credit: Tag Hartman-Simkins
Credit: Tag Hartman-Simkins

Discussions and debates about the governance of human germline and heritable genome editing should be informed by a clear and accurate understanding of the global policy landscape. This policy survey of 106 countries yields significant new data. A large majority of countries (96 out of 106) surveyed have policy documents—legislation, regulations, guidelines, codes, and international treaties—relevant to the use of genome editing to modify early-stage human embryos, gametes, or their precursor cells.

Most of these 96 countries do not have policies that specifically address the use of genetically modified in vitro embryos in laboratory research (germline genome editing); of those that do, 23 prohibit this research and 11 explicitly permit it.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Seventy-five of the 96 countries prohibit the use of genetically modified in vitro embryos to initiate a pregnancy (heritable genome editing). Five of these 75 countries provide exceptions to their prohibitions. No country explicitly permits heritable human genome editing.

images medium crispr figure

Read the original post

{{ 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

Screenshot-2026-04-14-at-11.11.06-AM
‘Turbo cancer’ or mRNA cancer cure? Strategies to counter misinformation
ChatGPT Image May 28, 2026, 08_16_38 PM
Viewpoint: Why the EPA mismeasures cancer risk of chemicals and what should be done to fix it
fda_logo_decimated
Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s FDA is on a screaming downward path—and why it may never recover
edb7f6d7-2370-418f-9578-74e29678e35c
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Nicotine vaping—public health miracle, or risk to children? Professor Cliff Douglas
ChatGPT-Image-May-22-2026-10_56_42-AM-2
‘It’s not super useful’: As wariness about AI grows, Trump proposes rollback of healthcare safeguards
ChatGPT-Image-May-22-2026-10_26_09-AM
Gutting the National Science Board: How the Trump-RFK, Jr. crusade is erasing the separation of science and state
ChatGPT-Image-May-28-2026-11_31_47-AM-2
Relying on your doctor or AI miracle cure, death and debilitation? Neurologist makes the wrong choice
Screenshot-2026-05-27-at-10.51.25-AM
Viewpoint: ‘Monsanto’ blues—Planned Netflix movie promises yet another round of anti-glyphosate disinformation
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-11_51_01-AM
Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s ‘sadistic’ solution to autism, depression, and other ills looks a lot like prison camp
Picture1
The Orange Bowl without oranges: Can CRISPR save Florida citrus?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-12.36.18-PM
MAGA’s latest ‘health obsession’? Nicotine patches promoted by ‘Zynfluencers’—including some in the Trump administration 
glp menu logo outlined

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