Friday , March 5 2021

In his open letter, scientists in China say the baby gene that regulates madness.



SHANGHAI (Reuters) – More than 100 scientists in China have condemned "crazy" and unethical condemnation of the claim of geneticists to create first genetically regulated babies by changing the genes of twins born this month.

In an open letter circulating on the Internet, scientists said that the use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology to regulate the genes of human embryos is risky, unfair, and undermines the credibility and development of the biomedical community in China.

In videos published on the internet, the scientist, He Jiankui, argued that he succeeded by claiming that he was editing the gene to help protect the HIV-infected AIDS from the viruses that caused it.

Var It's just called biomedical ethics review for so-called research. Carrying out direct human experiments can only be described as insane, ini a copy of the letter published by the Chinese news site The Paper.

Dı Pandora's box is opened. We can be a glimmer of hope to turn it off before it's too late, Çok he said. Letter written in chinese post and about 120 scientists.

Click on tmsnrt.rs/2ReKG1R for the graph describing the technique of Crispr DNA editing

Yang Zhengang, a Fudan University professor, said in a letter to Reuters that the gene arrangement was Yang very dangerous Bir.

South University of Science and Technology, where he holds an associate professorship, is unaware of the research project and said that since February he has been paid without grace.

The Chinese National Health Commission said on Monday that it was "extremely alarming" and ordered the provincial health authorities "to investigate and clarify the matter immediately".

The government's medical ethics committee in Shenzhen, China, said it was investigating the case, according to Southern Metropolis Daily, the provincial media agency, on the Guangdong provincial health commission.

CRISPR-Cas9 is a technology that allows scientists to essentially cut and paste DNA and increase the hope of genetic modifications to diseases. However, there are concerns about security and ethics.

Reporting by John Ruwitch; Editing by Darren Schuettler

Our standards:Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source link