Experts urge oversight of experiments
Scientists, researchers say gene editing project was unnecessary, irresponsible
The world urgently needs better international oversight of genome editing in human embryos, and to clarify the boundaries for related research, according to an editorial published in the journal Science on Friday.
The editorial, titled Wake-up Call from Hong Kong, is co-written by the presidents of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the United States National Academy of Sciences and the US National Academy of Medicine.
The authors denounced the experiment by Chinese researcher He Jiankui, who used the genome editor CRISPR in an attempt to create HIV-resistant people.
He, who is also an assistant professor at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, Guangdong province, said during a genome-editing conference in Hong Kong last month that he tried to achieve his goal by disabling genes from in vitro embryos that were implanted and produced twin girls.
Scientists, ethics experts and research agencies around the world universally condemned He’s experiment, saying his project was unnecessary, irresponsible and unprofessional, according to media reports.
“To maintain the public’s trust that someday genome editing will be able to treat or prevent disease, the research community needs to take steps now to demonstrate that this new tool can be applied with competence, integrity and benevolence,” the editorial said.
“Unfortunately, it appears that the case presented in Hong Kong might have failed on all counts, risking human lives as well as rash or hasty political reaction.”
China’s National Health Commission said in a statement last month that it is highly concerned about He’s research and has launched an investigation.
Victor Dzau, head of the US National Academy of Medicine, told Science that He’s experiment has cast scrutiny on the credibility of scientists and science in China.
“The Chinese government is now put under a microscope to say where it stands on this. They’re taking it very seriously,” he added.
The editorial urges the international academies of sciences to “quickly” convene experts and stakeholders and create an “expedited report” that spells out criteria and standards for germline editing — DNA modifications to embryos, eggs or sperm that can be passed on to future generations.
These standards should complement existing national regulations from countries around the world, reducing the likelihood that researchers can take advantage of loopholes to “conduct dangerous and unethical experimentations”, it added.
There should also be an international mechanism that allows scientists to raise concerns about research that does not conform to accepted rules.
The mechanism should also help speed the development of regulatory science, provide information about governance options, contribute to the long-term development of common regulatory standards, and enhance coordination of research and clinical applications through an international registry.
“We need to build upon the work done at recent international summits and the guidance provided by numerous organizations to achieve broad agreement on specific standards and criteria for human germline genome editing research and clinical applications,” the editorial added.