Human Genome Editing: Our Future Belongs to All of Us
By Françoise Baylis,
Issues in Science and Technology
| 05. 15. 2019
In late November 2018, the Chinese scientist He Jiankui ignited a media firestorm with the birth announcement of “healthy” twin girls, Lulu and Nana (pseudonyms), born following germline genome editing to provide resistance to HIV. This announcement was followed by swift and nearly unanimous condemnation. A common theme among the critics was He’s failure to respect international consensus.
As a strong and steady advocate of “broad societal consensus” as the threshold for ethically acceptable heritable human genome editing, I was intrigued by this response. What is this “consensus” whereof they speak?
A quick review of media reports and various commentaries chastising He for having violated international consensus suggests considerable equivocation about the scope and meaning of consensus. Some commentators referred to a perceived political consensus, others intuited a somewhat amorphous scientific consensus, and a few others complained of a failure to respect the call for broad societal consensus issued in December 2015 at the International Summit on Human Gene Editing.
POLITICAL CONSENSUS
Globally, the political consensus on heritable human genome editing—such as it is—inclines toward an outright ban, and...
Related Articles
By Katie Hunt, CNN | 07.30.2025
Scientists are exploring ways to mimic the origins of human life without two fundamental components: sperm and egg.
They are coaxing clusters of stem cells – programmable cells that can transform into many different specialized cell types – to form...
By Ewen Callaway, Nature | 08.04.2025
For months, researchers in a laboratory in Dallas, Texas, worked in secrecy, culturing grey-wolf blood cells and altering the DNA within. The scientists then plucked nuclei from these gene-edited cells and injected them into egg cells from a domestic dog ...
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...
