Written evidence for the Genomics and Genome-Editing Inquiry of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee
By Edward Hockings and Lewis Coyne,
Ethics and Genetics [cites CGS]
| 01. 20. 2017
KEY POINTS
- UK biosciences policy has become increasingly motivated by economic considerations in recent years, at the expense, we believe, of substantive public consultation and broader deliberation
- Freedom of Information requests show that the 100,000 Genome Project misinformed participants and the public as to the nature of access to genomic data granted to third parties
- Genome editing raises major ethical concerns which require comparable public deliberation, prior to which all further research should be prohibited
- 1.Introduction
Three years have passed since the government revealed its plans to sequence 100,000 genomes. The 100,000 Genome Project is expected to achieve that goal later this year. There is reason to be optimistic about it being of value, scientifically and clinically. There are also, however, reasons to be concerned about both the Genome Project and other areas of the developing fields of genomic medicine. In the following we outline some of those reasons.
- 2.Responsible Governance of the Biosciences
The 100,000 Genome Project forms part of a recent (post-2010) trend in the UK’s biosciences policy. Example initiatives include the integration of personalised medicine in mainstream...
Related Articles
By Pallab Gosh and Gwyndaf Hughes, BBC News | 06.26.2025
Work has begun on a controversial project to create the building blocks of human life from scratch, in what is believed to be a world first.
The research has been taboo until now because of concerns it could lead to...
Since the “CRISPR babies” scandal in 2018, no additional genetically modified babies are known to have been born. Now several techno-enthusiastic billionaires are setting up privately funded companies to genetically edit human embryos, with the explicit intention of creating genetically modified children.
Heritable genome editing remains prohibited by policies in the overwhelming majority of countries that have any relevant policy, and by a binding European treaty. Support for keeping it legally off limits is widespread, including among scientists...
By Ron Leuty, San Francisco Business Times | 06.16.2025
23andMe's two-step sale to a nonprofit led by former CEO Anne Wojcicki is nothing more than a dance around California's genetic privacy law, state Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a filing late Monday, one day before a judge will...
By Ed Cara, Gizmodo | 06.22.2025
In late May, several scientific organizations, including the International Society for Cell and Gene Therapy (ISCT), banded together to call for a 10-year moratorium on using CRISPR and related technologies to pursue human heritable germline editing. The declaration also outlined...