Human genome editing and moral leadership: findings of the WHO Expert Advisory Committee
By Peter Mills,
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
| 07. 14. 2021
Assistant Director Pete Mills gives his reaction to the much-anticipated reports of the World Health Organization's Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing
In 2019, the World Health Organization convened an Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing. On Monday it published its findings in three reports: a position paper (summarising the findings), a set of recommendations and a framework for governance. These documents represent a significant contribution to the literature around genome editing that has emerged since about 2015, which includes a number of major reports and a steady stream of statements and position papers emanating from learned societies, professional bodies, national ethics committees and ad hoc groups. [1] The WHO report is both the latest of the ‘big reports’ and the last in the pipeline. For now.
The scope of the ‘big reports’ on human genome editing differs: the WHO covers laboratory research, medical uses and reproductive uses, or ‘somatic’, ‘germline’ and ‘heritable’ genome editing. The reports also have different emphases. The Nuffield Council has, naturally, been concerned with ethical, social and political matters. There was an implied division of labour between the International Commission (which reported in 2020) and the WHO Committee...
Related Articles
By Liyan Qi and Jonathan Cheng, The Wall Street Journal | 03.26.2025
photo via Wikimedia Commons licensed under CC by 3.0
Chinese scientist He Jiankui set off global outrage and landed in prison after he skirted ethical guidelines and claimed he had produced genetically modified babies designed to resist HIV infection.
Now, the self-styled ...
By Anna Louie Sussman, The New York Times | 03.25.2025
On June 24, 2022, the same day the Supreme Court issued its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, I received a call from the fertility clinic where I’d been undergoing in vitro fertilization, informing me that seven of...
By Michael Gibney, PharmaVoice | 03.20.2025
The death this week of a teenager receiving Sarepta Therapeutics’ gene therapy Elevidys for Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a tragic reminder of the stakes involved in cutting-edge biotech innovation.
While gene therapies like Sarepta’s offer an opportunity to treat and...
By Staff, The Medicine Maker | 03.21.2025
"The Promise and Peril of CRISPR" cover by Johns Hopkins University Press
As a paediatrician taking care of children with sickle cell disease, Neal Baer, a Harvard Medical School graduate, was in awe of the power of CRISPR technologies. Later...