CRISPR Ethical Implications

The powerful gene-editing tool CRISPR/Cas9 has been a controversial subject since its creation in 2012 by the biochemist Jennifer Doudna and the microbiologist Emmanuelle Charpentier. CRISPR, which stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, was originally developed from the natural defense mechanism of bacteria. The ability of bacteria to break down and integrate foreign DNA in order to recognize foreign invaders in the future has now enabled humans the potential to alter our own genomes. This tool's amazing capability to alter gene expression and to either add or delete specific traits in humans has great potential for both beneficence and malfeasance.

CRISPR has been an especially contentious area of discussion lately amid recent claims by the Chinese researcher, He Jiankui. On November 25th, news emerged that He allegedly edited the genomes of twin babies with CRISPR. The edits attempted to make the babies resistant to HIV through inhibition of the CCR5 receptor. Normally the HIV virus infects a human's white blood cells through this receptor. There has already been tremendous backlash in the scientific community with the majority criticizing He's work. Many are calling this use of CRISPR unjustified and unethical including the co-creator of the tool herself. Doudna asserted that, “The clinical use of genome editing in the germline of humans is premature given that we don’t fully understand the technology and the impact of that kind of application, and it has a potentially very longstanding effect on a person’s life and their future kids,” (Weintraub, 2018). However, He has also found support through some members of the scientific community. Biologist George Church defended He's actions explaining how the moratorium on germline editing is not a permanent ban and he thinks that He is mainly guilty for inadequate paperwork.

The future use of CRISPR is currently one of the most prominent ethical issues present in the scientific community. He's experiment demonstrates the necessity for increased regulations of CRISPR use. His decision to edit the babies' genes for HIV resistance also begs the question of what conditions qualify for CRISPR editing. Should humans be able to edit our genomes for both somatic and germline mutations? Are germline edits ethical in regard to the issue of gene-drive inheritance? This is an especially scary issue as modified genes can sweep rapidly through populations and potentially force normal unedited genes into extinction. Should CRISPR regulations be similar across all countries? There are many significant ethical implications and questions surrounding CRISPR. I'm personally very excited to see what the future holds for CRISPR research.

Resources if you're interested:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientist-who-edited-babies-genomes-faces-widespread-criticism/
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/12/15-worrying-things-about-crispr-babies-scandal/577234/?fbclid=IwAR3C8qKkDsNijrQ7N_fUzBjQzgNKH5Jiedu5FSXFWd59hr2naEB1h3oVU7s
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/i-feel-obligation-be-balanced-noted-biologist-comes-defense-gene-editing-babies?utm_source=64&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=News-from-Science-(@NewsfromScience)&utm_term=SciMag&utm_content=AAAS