Getting serious about the challenge of regulating germline gene therapy

• Published in: PLoS biology Vol. 17; no. 4; p. e3000223
• Main Author: Caplan, Arthur
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 30.04.2019; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Bans; Bioethics; China; Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats; CRISPR; Deoxyribonucleic acid; DNA; Editing; Embryos; Ethical standards; Ethics; Experiments; Gene Editing - ethics; Gene therapy; Genetic engineering; Genetic Therapy - ethics; Genetic Therapy - legislation & jurisprudence; Genomes; Germ Cells; Germ-Line Mutation - ethics; Germ-Line Mutation - genetics; He Jiankui; Human subjects; Humans; Innovations; Medical research; Morals; Press conferences; Proteins; Science; Scientists; Trust; China; New York; United States > US
• ISSN: 1545-7885; 1544-9173; 1545-7885
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000223

The announcement of He Jiankui's germline editing of human embryos has been followed by a torrent of almost universal criticism of the claim on scientific and ethical grounds. That criticism is warranted. There is little room for anything other than vociferous condemnation of He's announcement. Presenting the results of groundbreaking work by press conference and YouTube is not science. The issue now is not whether the work supporting the claims reported from China was done in an ethical manner. It was not. What is required to move forward is a justification for doing germline editing in humans. Many think there is none, and prohibitions abound. If such work is justifiable, a serious, rigorous framework must be imposed that insures that such research is done following the highest ethical standards that both protect human subjects and insure public trust and support.