He Jiankui’s Genetic Misadventure, Part 2: How Different Are Chinese and Western Bioethics?
By Jing-Bao Nie, Neil Pickering,
Hastings Bioethics Forum
| 12. 13. 2018
When the world’s first research on editing the genes of human embryos by Chinese scientists was published in an international journal in 2015, a report in the New York Timescharacterised the key issue involved as “a scientific ethical divide between China and West.” Earlier this year, an article in the magazine Foreign Policy by a researcher with Chinese origin put it bluntly that “China will always be bad at bioethics.” Now, He Jiankui’s announcement on gene-edited babies appears to provide more compelling evidence that China is the “radical other” of the West, a wild land where bioethics matters little.
Is this really the right way to look at things? Our answer is, no. The evidence doesn’t bare these beliefs out; it is a misdiagnosis, and it risks obscuring the real issues that He Jiankui’s experimentation raises. Since the news on the gene-edited babies came out on November 26 via Baidu and Google, one of us (Nie) has been closely following reactions to it in journalists’ reports, commentaries, and posts on Chinese and international mass media, as well as on...
Related Articles
Has a commentary in Nature shifted the landscape of the debate about editing the genomes of future children? Or will germline-editing proponents ignore calls for a pause from some of the biggest names in the field?
On March 13, an international group of high-profile scientists and scholars who have been active in global discussions of human gene editing—including a Nobel laureate, the former co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology under Barack Obama, a prominent...
Nature published a commentary on March 13th with the forthright title “Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing.”
It was signed by a remarkable group of scientists from seven countries led by Eric Lander, Françoise Baylis, Feng Zhang, Emmanuelle Charpentier, and Paul Berg, with 13 other signatories of great distinction. Nature accompanied this with an Editorial, “Germline gene-editing research needs rules,” which applauded but did not entirely endorse the call for a moratorium, and two letters: Victor J. Dzau,...
By George J. Annas, Science | 03.10.2019
In 2011, poet and writer George Estreich wrote about the impact of biotechnology on family life in his first book, The Shape of the Eye. The memoir centers on how his family’s life was changed, and enriched, by the...
By Karen Weintraub, Scientific American [cites CGS' Marcy Darnovsky] | 03.13.2019
A group of 18 prominent scientists—including some who helped develop CRISPR–Cas9, the current leading tool for gene editing—issued a call Wednesday for an international moratorium on gene edits to eggs, sperm or embryos, and for establishing a process to discuss...
