Human genome editing and moral leadership: findings of the WHO Expert Advisory Committee
By Peter Mills,
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
| 07. 14. 2021
Assistant Director Pete Mills gives his reaction to the much-anticipated reports of the World Health Organization's Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing
In 2019, the World Health Organization convened an Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing. On Monday it published its findings in three reports: a position paper (summarising the findings), a set of recommendations and a framework for governance. These documents represent a significant contribution to the literature around genome editing that has emerged since about 2015, which includes a number of major reports and a steady stream of statements and position papers emanating from learned societies, professional bodies, national ethics committees and ad hoc groups. [1] The WHO report is both the latest of the ‘big reports’ and the last in the pipeline. For now.
The scope of the ‘big reports’ on human genome editing differs: the WHO covers laboratory research, medical uses and reproductive uses, or ‘somatic’, ‘germline’ and ‘heritable’ genome editing. The reports also have different emphases. The Nuffield Council has, naturally, been concerned with ethical, social and political matters. There was an implied division of labour between the International Commission (which reported in 2020) and the WHO Committee...
Related Articles
By Rob Stein, NPR [cites CGS' Katie Hasson] | 08.06.2025
A Chinese scientist horrified the world in 2018 when he revealed he had secretly engineered the birth of the world's first gene-edited babies.
His work was reviled as reckless and unethical because, among other reasons, gene-editing was so new...
By Kristel Tjandra, Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News | 07.30.2025
CRISPR has taken the bioengineering world by storm since its first introduction. From treating sickle cell diseases to creating disease-resistant crops, the technology continues to boast success on various fronts. But getting CRISPR experiments right in the lab isn’t simple...
By Arthur Caplan and James Tabery, Scientific American | 07.28.2025
An understandable ethics outcry greeted the June announcement of a software platform that offers aspiring parents “genetic optimization” of their embryos. Touted by Nucleus Genomics’ CEO Kian Sadeghi, the $5,999 service, dubbed “Nucleus Embryo,” promised optimization of...
By Keith Casebonne and Jodi Beckstine [with CGS' Katie Hasson], Disability Deep Dive | 07.24.2025
In this episode of Disability Deep Dive, hosts Keith and Jodi explore the complex interplay between disability science, technology, and ethics with guest Katie Hasson, Associate Director at the Center for Genetics and Society. The conversation delves into...