Let people most affected by gene editing write CRISPR rules
By Jessica Hamzelou,
New Scientist
| 04. 29. 2016
Untitled Document
Who stands to benefit from – or lose out on – gene editing? Advances in our ability to tweak the human genome using CRISPR Cas-9 and similar techniques won’t only affect those at risk of genetic disorders. Women and disabled people are likely to be disproportionately affected. And people living in poor countries – who are at the greatest risk of disease – could miss out on the benefits.
These were among the points raised at a summit held by the US National Academies of Science and Medicine’s Committee on Human Gene Editing in Paris today. The committee will draw up a set of recommendations based on the questions and comments raised by the audience – a mix of scientists, ethicists and lawyers.
The CRISPR editing tool offers scientists a way to cut out sections of DNA and potentially replace them with others. Since it took the research world by storm last year, some have suggested it could be used to treat genetic disorders by precisely targeting the responsible genetic mutation. Disorders like Duchenne muscular dystrophy, which causes...
Related Articles
By Jessica Hamzelou, MIT Technology Review | 01.13.2025
Lisa Holligan already had two children when she decided to try for another baby. Her first two pregnancies had come easily. But for some unknown reason, the third didn’t. Holligan and her husband experienced miscarriage after miscarriage after miscarriage.
Like...
By Melissa Dahl, Slate | 01.13.2025
Mia used to say she’d never do in vitro fertilization. It’s a detail that feels significant now, looking back on the three long years that she and her husband, Chris, have spent trying to conceive. “When we first started trying...
By Tatiana Giovannucci, PET | 01.13.2025
Ten pregnant women and three others with their babies were repatriated to the Philippines after being pardoned by the Royal Government of Cambodia.
The women were recruited to act as surrogates in Cambodia, and were all pregnant at the time...
By Kristen V. Brown, The Atlantic | 01.15.2025
The first time Jamie Cassidy was pregnant, the fetus had a genetic mutation so devastating that she and her husband, Brennan, decided to terminate in the second trimester. The next time they tried for a baby, they weren’t taking chances...