CGS-authored

The first day of BEINGS2015(link is external), “A Gathering of Global Thought Leaders to Reach Consensus on the Direction of Biotechnology for the 21st Century”, in Atlanta, coincided with the announcement by the National Academy of Science and National Academy of Medicine(link is external) of an initiative to look into “promising new treatments for disease,” given that “recent experiments to attempt to edit human genes also have raised important questions about the potential risks and ethical concerns of altering the human germline.”

It is the time of prizes and tussles over intellectual property and experiments on non-viable human embryos, and, calls for caution from CRISPR-CAS9(link is external) scientists (here(link is external) and here(link is external) and here(link is external)). Also still in the air is the UK’s political vote, despite an EU consensus against germline genetic modification (was this the first step of ‘Brexit’?) to allow clinics to apply for permission to undertake IVF with mitochondrial DNA donation(link is external), a form of germ cell genetic modification(link is external) that requires egg donation. These technologies are widely considered threshold technologies with unknown and irreversible consequences for individuals, humanity and the environment.

During...