Viewpoint: Why we need a 3-year moratorium on gene-edited babies

hi
Chinese scientist He Jiankui speaks at the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing in Hong. Image credit: AFP

Chinese researcher He [Jiankui] dropped the bomb with his claim that he produced twin CRISPR’d babies. He cited a 2017 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine consensus report as one reason he felt it was alright for him to proceed with his efforts to do this.

I question He’s interpretation of that report, but in my view the experts issuing various reports left the door too open to this kind of work.

He’s announcement was likely timed to coincide with last week’s Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing in Hong Kong.

…

As the Hong Kong meeting wrapped up, the organizers released a statement that did not explicitly call for a moratorium on making gene-edited babies.

…

Unlike the meeting organizers, I favor a low-risk, temporary, three-year moratorium on implantation of gene-edited human embryos to make genetically modified babies. A moratorium won’t stop the most driven rogue, and one can reasonably ask how it would be enforced. … Three years is enough time for both the science and societal discussions to advance without being a burden.

…

The scientific community needs to take a firmer and clearer stance that making genetically modified babies is prohibited for the time being. A temporary moratorium specifically on implantation of gene-edited human embryos would achieve that with minimal risk of over-regulating research and no impact on in vitro research.

Read full, original post: We need a temporary moratorium on using gene editing to create babies

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-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-10-02-at-9.11.36-AM
The genetics of personality
Screenshot 2025-09-17 at 12.41
Jump-starting global warming: Rising temperatures are driving up emissions from wildfires, fermenting wetlands, and melting permafrost
Supreme-Court-Amid-Climate-Crisis
Should fossil fuel companies be shielded from lawsuits over climate change damage? The Supreme Court takes up the question
Screenshot-2026-10-06-at-2.36.47-PM
Is organic farming really more sustainable? 100 recent studies say ‘no’
Radioactive-Americana-Collage-2
The kooky logic behind the raft of spurious cancer claims from Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health
Screenshot-2026-09-28-at-11.26.17-AM
Viewpoint: Wellness movement activists reposition nicotine from a killer addictive drug into a cure-all for brain ills
Kind-People-Kind-Futures-Hands
Patches for sleep, weight, NAD+, energy, focus, periods. No evidence to support the latest social media wellness scams
Screenshot-2026-10-02-at-8.56.38-AM
Trump finalizes Medicare drug price cuts, drawing Big Pharma’s fury and a legal challenge
Childrens-Health-Defense-Press-Briefing
Court links patient’s death to anti-vaccine doctor promoted by Kennedy’s Children’s Health Defense
Screenshot-2026-10-02-at-11.12.24-AM
‘Why do we keep falling for this stuff?’ America’s love affair with snake oil salesmen and scams
strand of dna genetics
No, GMO foods do not “damage genes, natural disposition and hormones, or decrease physical health and intelligence”
glp menu logo outlined

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