SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Genome-edited baby claim provokes international outcry
A Chinese scientist claims that he has helped make the world's first genome-edited babies — twin girls who were born this month. The announcement has provoked shock, and some outrage, among scientists around the world.
He Jiankui, a genome-editing researcher from the Southern University of Science and Technology of China in Shenzhen, says that he implanted into a woman an embryo that had been edited to disable the genetic pathway that allows a cell to be infected with HIV.
In a video posted to YouTube, He says the girls are healthy and now at home with their parents. Genome sequencing of their DNA has shown that the editing worked, and only altered the gene they targeted, he says.
The scientist's claims have not been verified through independent genome testing or published in a peer-reviewed journal. But, if true, the birth would represent a significant — and controversial — leap in the use of genome-editing. So far these tools have only be used in embryos for research, often to investigate the benefit of using them to eliminate disease-causing mutations from the human germline. But reports of off-target effects in some studies have raised significant safety concerns.
Documents posted on China's clinical trial registry show that He used the ubiquitous CRISPR-Cas9 genome-editing tool to disable a gene called CCR5, which forms a protein that allows HIV to enter a cell. Genome-editing scientist Fyodor Urnov was asked to review documents that described DNA sequence analysis of human embryos and fetuses gene-edited at the CCR5 locus for an article in MIT Technology Review. "The data I reviewed are consistent with the fact that the editing has, in fact, taken place," says Urnov, from the Altius Institute for Biomedical Sciences in Seattle. But he says the only way to tell if the children's genomes have been edited is to independently test their DNA.
Also at STAT News:
The Chinese university where He is an associate professor issued a statement saying that it had been unaware of his research project and that He had been on leave without pay since February, Reuters reported. The work is a "serious violation of academic ethics and standards," Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen said in the statement. The university said it would immediately launch an investigation.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Monday November 26 2018, @06:35PM (11 children)
Well. Unless instead of "might", they "do." Then it does matter. Hence, caution is called for.
And of course, the potential for an edit at this stage to have further reaching consequence than those intended is also a concern.
OTOH, if you might have a stupid child, and a genetic edit would see to it that you would have a brilliant child... would it be abuse to not do the edit? "I'm sorry, Timmy, yes, you're stupid, and we could have fixed that, but you'll just have to cope." Hmmm. :)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 26 2018, @07:24PM (10 children)
There is always "don't" as the other possibility.
What's the cost/benefit? If it costs a billion dollars to get a moderately smarter kid, then it's not worth it except possibly for the most wealthy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 26 2018, @08:04PM
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Monday November 26 2018, @08:09PM (8 children)
Well, since we don't know the cost, and it's impossible to measure the benefit until the prospective resulting edited person does something (or not) with said smarts, seems to me that you're hand-waving about my hand-waving WRT any hand-waving the resulting person might engage in, and that's way too far down the rabbit hole for me.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 26 2018, @08:26PM (5 children)
Doesn't seem that way over here. Being unable to afford the process is a great reason for having a "stupid" child instead of a "brilliant" child.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Monday November 26 2018, @08:50PM
Seems like a great reason not to have a child at all to me. But again, no idea of the cost(s), so... meh.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 26 2018, @09:59PM (3 children)
It might be the state who monopolizes production of new humans, as documented in a well known book. There, however, the state intentionally reduced the intelligence of some workers, so that they can be unthinking slaves. But now we know better - the state is richer not when it has a million slaves, but when it has a million of geniuses. (In earlier centuries being genius was no fun.)
We truly need very smart people right now to just be a worker, for FSM's sake, just to program the fine CNC lathes and mills. It's hard. I have decent education, so additional coordinate systems that you define in multiple places is something that I can algebraically accept and set aside. If you have poor education or low intelligence, you will not be able to run the machines [youtube.com] - a robot will take your job at a mass production facility, and a specialist of a genius level [youtube.com] will take your job in a small machining business.
Note also that humans simply cannot provide replacement if the population in developed countries. People do not want children at all, or a woman wants a token single child, and that's it. Children are more and more expensive with every passing day, considering the required helicopter parenting. Who has time for that? Who has money for that? Here comes the state - softly and without much opposition. Maybe it will be better this way? Most children are cared for in schools anyway. Most parents are not specialists in child care, they are not available full time...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:16AM (2 children)
And that book would be?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 27 2018, @01:44AM (1 child)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 27 2018, @02:13AM
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Monday November 26 2018, @09:19PM (1 child)
Queue jazz hands.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 4, Funny) by fyngyrz on Monday November 26 2018, @09:25PM
(imagines a line of dancers, all waving hands)
...or perhaps you meant cue jazz hands?