Monday , December 6 2021

Scientists' studies on genetically regulated babies show that there is no way to stop research with a DNA monkey.



[ad_1]

HONG KONG – At the beginning of last year, a little-known Chinese researcher emerged at an elite meeting in Berkeley, California, where scientists and ethnists discussed a technology that shook its core, a tool that "regulates" its own "gene" genes. DNA strings that make up the plan of life.

The young scientist He Jiankui has changed the power of this tool, CRISPR, not only to the genes but also to his own career.

On her visits to the United States, Jennifer Doudna from the University of California at Berkeley, MD from Stanford University. Dr. Matthew Porteus and Stanford ethics expert. Like the great thinkers like William Hurlbut, CRISPR called the pioneers.

Last week, these shocking researchers watched as they missed an international conference, helping them to organize with a surprising argument: he said that although it was an open scientific consensus of making genetic changes to future generations, it helped to make the world's first gen regulated babies. no attempt should be made at this point.

Francis Collins, US National Director of Health Directors, sought a Direktör big misunderstanding Direktör experiment of Direktör a scientist who thought he was a hero ABD. In fact, he took every line scientifically and ethically. "

But no one stopped him. How could it be?

On October 9, 2018, Qin Jinzhou, an embryologist who is part of the team working with scientist He Jiankui, sets up microplate-containing embryos injected with Cas9 protein and PCSK9 sgRNA in a laboratory in Shenzhen, South China. Guandong province. The Chinese government ordered on Thursday (November 29th) to be stopped by a medical team claiming to help the world's first gen regulated babies. (AP Photo / Mark Schiefelbein)

To be fair, scientists, no matter what laws or standards apply, say there is no way to stop someone who wants to deal with DNA. CRISPR is inexpensive and easy to use – so scientists have begun to worry immediately after the invention of technology as such would happen.

And researchers in science and medicine have a long history. These initiate experiments that have been met with early acquaintance or fear – some of which have led to widespread practices such as in-vitro fertilization.

Genetic regulation for reproduction is effectively prohibited in most of the US and Europe. In China, the ministry directives prohibit embryo research, which violates ethical or moral principles.

Apparently she wasn't exactly wrapped up about her goals. He trained international experts at Stanford and Rice Universities, where he did his graduate studies and made recommendations before and during the experiment elsewhere.

Did scientists talk about their plans? Did they bother him?

The answers are not clear.

. It doesn't fall into the category of legal responsibility, but ethical responsibility, “says Collins. He said bilim it doesn't look like a scientist taking responsibility Konuş to speak.

The Chinese National Health Commission, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and its own university, said they were in the dark and that they therefore condemned it.

But the three Stanford scientists – Hurlbut, Porteus and former fraternity counselor Stephen Quake – have had extensive contact with him over the past few years. They and other scientists knew that they were planning to try to make genetically regulated babies or were strongly suspicious.

Some assurances did not think he would follow; others have expressed concerns that never been ignored.

Stanford didn't answer an interview request.

Quake, a professor of bioengineering, was one of the first to learn O's ambition. Quake said he had met his hometown for years to come while his former student was in the city and he was intrigued by organizing embryos for live births to make them resistant to the AIDS virus a few years ago.

Quake said that he only gave a general recommendation and that he talked with mainstream scientists, agreed to verify the risks, met the highest ethical standards, and asked him to publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal.

I My advice was very broad, Qu Quake said.

Hurlbut thinks that at the beginning of 2017, Doudna, the inventor of CRISPR, first thought in organizing the first three meetings with leading scientists and ethical experts to discuss technology.

Er However, it ended in our meeting, Hur Hurlbut said.

Since then, he has returned to Stanford a number of times, and Hurlbut says he has "spent many hours" talking to his client about situations in which gene regulation might be appropriate.

Four or five weeks ago, Hurlbut said he had come to see him again and discussed embryonic gene regulation to try to prevent HIV. Hurlbut said he was suspected of trying to implant a modified embryo in the womb.

”I warned him,“ he said. Im I didn't give the green light to work. I challenged him. I didn't approve what you did. "

Porteus said that he spoke to Hurlbut and that he knew that Hurlbut encouraged the Chinese scientist. In February he wanted to meet with Porteus and said he had received approval from a hospital ethics committee to proceed.

Orum I think I expect to be more open and I think I'm very negative, Port said Porteus. Mış I was angry with his naives, angry with his recklessness. “

Porteus said he was meslek talking to your senior Chinese colleagues Port.

Im I didn't hear from him and assumed that he wouldn't go on, sonra said Porteus. ”When we look back, I could have a tint and cry.“

In a draft article on teenage girls he planned to present to magazines, he thanked Mark DeWitt, UC Berkeley biophysicist, for, writing Der. DeWitt said that he had tried to dismantle his work and objected that he had edited the newspaper. He said he saw the newspaper, but the feedback he provided was ü quite general Gaz.

Claims that his work resulted in a second pregnancy, could not be independently confirmed, and that his work had not been published.

In contrast, another US scientist said that he not only encouraged Oye but also played a major role in the project.

Michael Deem, a professor of bioengineering at Rice University and doctoral dissertation consultant, said the scientist has worked and served on its advisory boards since he returned to China until 2012 and has a small stake in ğ two genetic companies R. Shenzhen & # 39; as well. Deem argued that the team of action said that the research team conducted earlier experiments on animals.

. We have a large number of animal generations that produce genetically regulated and liveable offspring, nes said Deem. Deem also said that some study participants were present in China when they approved to try embryo gene regulation.

Rice said he had no knowledge of Deem's involvement and is now investigating.

So far, most of the focus has focused on regulatory gaps in China.

But not all of this story, Rosario Isasi, an expert on genomics in the United States and China, at Miami University.

. How was the focusguna and why was the focusguna and focus on what was focusguna, Isasi. A How can we build a system with better transparency? “

There is no international governing body to implement the rules of bioethics, but scientific institutions and universities may use other means.

Hank Greely, a law professor and genetic professor at Stanford, said, ler If someone violates these rules, scientists may be excluded, refuse to publish magazines, employers may refuse to hire, and funders may refuse funding. Stan

Greed, whether regulators act or not, hopes that experience will have a fluctuation effect in the academic field. Lar Universities will look more at what's going on. This event will alert everyone about relevant research. "

Of course, sometimes bad beginnings can turn into better endings.

In 1980, Martin Cline, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, was approved to undertake the first female gene therapy for two women in Israel and Italy, as they did not get approval to test it in UCLA.

Cline announced his work rather than publishing it in a scientific journal, and was subjected to criticism to try people for "genetic engineering" when his safety and efficacy in animals had not yet been established. Gene therapy has now been established, although it is still quite a new treatment method.

Two years ago, in 1978, Robert Edwards similarly condemned the press in his announcement of the world's first ğı test tube;, Louise Brown. The job then won a Nobel Prize, and the IFV helped make millions of children.

And this year, Louise Brown – the mother of her two sons, was designed in the old-fashioned way – she turned 40.

[ad_2]
Source link