Maria Kostylew
the Oxford Scientist
Gene Editing Now that we can - should we?
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not
CRISPR-Cas9 is a gene editing technique that allows for
they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should”. 25 years any region of the human genome to be specifically targeted on, this quote from Jurassic Park by the great Jeff Goldblum and edited. The field of gene editing was revolutionised. rings truer than ever. While every great scientific advance‐ Gene editing experiments were now quicker, cheaper and ment experiences some level of discussion and controversy, much more efficient. While the vast majority of researchers no field attracts more debate than that of human genetic en‐ used CRISPR-Cas9 to understand the basic functions of gineering. The development of Clustered Regularly Inter‐ genes or to target a specific disease-associated gene, there are spaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 gene several researchers whose experiments fall in a more ethical editing technology has prompted more dispute than poten‐ grey area. tially any other biological technologies. Never before have
Human Germline Modification (HGM) is the deliberate
we had the ability to so easily and effectively change the hu‐ alteration of human eggs, sperm or embryos which will affect man genome—for better or for worse. CRISPR-Cas9 is for‐ not only the individual in question, but all future generations
“Are we as a society ready to grapple with the questions gene editing forces us to consider?”
of the said individual.
From the moment CRISPR-Cas9
technology was released, scientists were well aware that this leap forward in technological potential warranted a further debate on societal consequences of HGM both positive and negative. Thus, the first International Summit on Human Genome Editing was held in 2015. It was hosted by the
cing scientists, governments and the general public to assess Chinese Academy of Sciences and the UK's Royal Society the potential consequences of gene editing technology. Are and the scientific and ethical issues associated with human we as a society ready to grapple with the questions gene edit‐ gene-editing research were discussed. A group of global ex‐ ing forces us to consider: should all perceived disabilities be perts cautioned that HGM could profoundly ‘alter future hu‐ cured? Will the likely cost of gene editing widen social in‐ man societies’, and ‘exacerbate existing inequalities in equalities? Are we ready to be able to control human evolu‐ society’. Though not against the idea that CRISPR-Cas9 tion rather than leaving it to chance ? 20
could be used as a preventative treatment for genetic diseases,
