CRISPR implications less than crystal clear

Thursday, November 29, 2018
 | 
Chris Woodward (OneNewsNow.com)

DNA strandWhat some people might consider a new era of medicine, others deem unethical.

A Chinese scientist is making headlines after he reportedly used CRISPR to make the first genetically edited babies. CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats.

"It's a blockbuster development that has been predicted for some time that scientists somewhere in the world would sooner or later use this gene editing technique to genetically alter babies at the embryonic stage," explains Clarke Forsythe of Americans United for Life (AUL). "It's unethical, and it breaches understood ethical prohibitions, ethical moratorium on such research because it's basically experimenting on the embryos and not therapeutic."

Forsythe thinks everyone needs to be informed about the nature of what is going on here and how it differs from, say, being the first heart transplant patient.

"These children were not asked to give their consent. They were not informed. They were not adult patients who were told about the risks and potential benefits before they underwent this procedure," he submits. "Apparently the parents gave consent, but it's questionable whether they were even informed about what's going on here and what the implications are."

Forsythe

The scientist in question reportedly removed from the embryos a gene that may be a factor in HIV infection. According to Wired.com, the scientist said his trial was not just for these few patients, but for the millions of children suffering from HIV all over the world.

Wire.com tells of the scientist's personal experience with a village in China where 30 percent of the residents are infected and children have to live with their relatives for fear of contracting the virus.

Still, Forsythe questions what the implications are from removing the gene.

"Apparently some of the embryos died, possibly from the procedure," he reports. "Apparently two babies were eventually born, but what are the implications for their health?"

Forsythe adds there are other ways of protecting against HIV infection. 

"What if the gene has other life-sustaining properties or traits that these children will eventually realize as their life goes on?" he poses. "What are the implications of taking out a gene for such a purpose, when these embryos weren't babies who had an identifiable disease?"

Comments

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWS BRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

FEATURED PODCAST

VOTE IN OUR POLL

Which upcoming event will have the greatest bearing on your vote for president?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Organizer arrested after driving car into California protest
Fighting erupts between Armenia, Azerbaijan; 18 killed
Greek police arrest 3 human traffickers, free 7 captives
Thousands march in Washington to pray for the country
Late night protest in Portland, Oregon, declared unlawful
California will house transgender inmates by gender identity
Trump picks conservative Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court

LATEST FROM THE WEB

Hawley warns Schumer not to criticize Barrett over religion during SCOTUS hearing
Trump calls for Biden to take a drug test before upcoming presidential debate
Ted Cruz turned down Supreme Court offer from Trump
Trump tells 'Fox & Friends' he wanted to choose a textualist for Supreme Court
Senate Republicans ready quick push on Trump's Supreme Court pick Barrett

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
'Fuzzy' predictions present scary possibilities

DNA strandA new form of genetic tests is raising a serious question of ethics.