stats
globeinteractive.com: Making the Business of Life Easier

   Finance globeinvestor   Careers globecareers.workopolis Subscribe to The Globe
The Globe and Mail /globeandmail.com
Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels
space


Search

space
  This site         Tips

  
space
  The Web Google
space
   space



space

  Where to Find It


Breaking News
  Home Page

  Report on Business

  Sports

  Technology

space
Subscribe to The Globe

Shop at our Globe Store


Print Edition
  Front Page

  Report on Business

  National

  International

  Sports

  Arts & Entertainment

  Editorials

  Columnists

   Headline Index

 Other Sections
  Appointments

  Births & Deaths

  Books

  Classifieds

  Comment

  Education

  Environment

  Facts & Arguments

  Focus

  Health

  Obituaries

  Real Estate

  Review

  Science

  Style

  Technology

  Travel

  Wheels

 Leisure
  Cartoon

  Crosswords

  Food & Dining

  Golf

  Horoscopes

  Movies

  Online Personals

  TV Listings/News

 Specials & Series
  All Reports...

space

Services
   Where to Find It
 A quick guide to what's available on the site

 Newspaper
  Advertise

  Corrections

  Customer Service

  Help & Contact Us

  Reprints

  Subscriptions

 Web Site
  Advertise

  E-Mail Newsletters

  Free Headlines

  Globe Store New

  Help & Contact Us

  Make Us Home

  Mobile New

  Press Room

  Privacy Policy

  Terms & Conditions


GiveLife.ca

    

PRINT EDITION
Chinese scientist causes stir with claim of first gene-edited babies
space
space
By NATHAN VANDERKLIPPE
  
  

Email this article Print this article
Tuesday, November 27, 2018 – Page A3

BEIJING -- A Chinese researcher has provoked furor and calls for new laws on genetic experimentation in his own country after claiming to have helped produce the world's first genetically edited babies.

The claim, if true, would mark a major technological milestone: the birth of twins with a genetic code manipulated to make them less vulnerable to HIV. It's a step with far-reaching implications, promising both the utopian eradication of heritable disease and the dystopian fashioning of human beings designed with innate biological advantages.

China has been at the forefront of such genetic advancement, with vast funds devoted to cutting-edge research and a less rigid legal environment than other countries including Canada, which has banned the alteration of inheritable genomes.

Even so, China's scientific community was stunned by the announcement that babies with edited genetics have already been born, with one prominent researcher calling it "reckless" and others calling for new rules.

On Monday, 122 scientists - some from China's most prestigious research institutions, including Peking University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences - signed a petition of condemnation. "Direct human experimentation can only be described as 'madness,' " the petition says. It calls the genetically edited babies "a huge blow to the global reputation and development of Chinese science and biomedical research," and demands strict and speedy supervision by authorities.

"Pandora's Box has been opened, but we may have a chance to close it before it's too late," the petition says.

Indeed, it's time for China to "pass a law on these types of studies," said Huang Zhiwei, dean of the School of Life Science and Technology at Harbin Institute of Technology. If government fails to intervene, he warned, "you could imagine that our society will one day be fraught with people carrying engineered genes."

The ferocious backlash came after He Jiankui, a researcher who runs a laboratory at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, revealed at a conference and to the Associated Press that he had used technology called CRISPRcas9 to edit embryos for seven couples. The male member of each couple had HIV, and in some of their embryos Dr. He disabled a gene, CCR5, that is a key pathway for the transmission of HIV.

Earlier this month, one of those couples gave birth to twins, though the outcome was not the same for the two children. In one, both genes include the alteration, which is expected to give that child protection against contracting HIV. In the other twin, only one gene carried the alteration, AP reported Monday. That child is therefore still considered vulnerable to HIV.

Dr. He's research has not been published in a peer-reviewed paper, and he has declined to provide any identifying details on the babies - save their names, Lulu and Nana - or immediately respond to inquiries from other researchers. According to AP, Dr.

He conducted his research with the approval of Shenzhen Harmonicare Women's and Children's Hospital, and Lin Zhitong, a hospital administrator who heads the ethics panel, told the news agency: "We think this is ethical."

The institution, however, was not one of the four hospitals Dr.

He said had provided the embryos for his research. On Monday, a Harmonicare official, who refused to provide her name, told The Globe and Mail the research remains under investigation.

In a statement, the Southern University of Science and Technology said Dr. He has been on leave from the school since February, his research was done without the university's knowledge and his work "seriously violates academic ethics and academic norms."

Gene-editing technology is already being used on plants and animals, and scientists said what Dr. He described is not considered an enormous technical challenge.

It does, however, directly confront ethical boundaries erected to ensure genetic research is not responsible for unanticipated harm.

Dr. He himself sought to address the implications of his work. In a series of videos posted to YouTube Sunday, the Stanford-educated researcher said the gene-editing was in line with societal expectations and designed solely to treat a serious disease. He published a set of ethical guidelines meant to govern the practice.

"The first principle is mercy for families in need," he said, in English. "We believe a gene defect should not take away children's life. And a gene defect should not prevent a loving couple to start their family."

What he calls "genetic surgery" should only be used "for serious disease, never vanity," he said, and there should be no "increasing IQ, improving sports performance or changing skin colour." It should also be available to people regardless of economic stature, he said, calling it a tool to lessen inequality.

But the notion that genetically edited children are already alive in China should prompt "horror," said Dianne Nicol, director of the Centre for Law and Genetics at the University of Tasmania.

"It seems to be so premature, in the sense that the basic science, as far as I can see it, is not at the stage yet where you could contemplate actually bringing a live baby into the world," she said. "We're not at the stage yet where we know what we're doing is 100-per-cent sure of achieving the results that we want."

Dr. He's assurances aside, Prof.

Nicol added, "one of the ethical concerns is the floodgates argument, that if we allow genome editing for serious diseases - does that mean we can do it for intelligence or sports ability?" What Dr. He claims to have done stands in contrast to what he himself wrote in a science blog in February, 2017. "The human behaviour of any person who performs germ cell editing or gene editing is extremely irresponsible, both in terms of science and social ethics," he wrote, if it does not first address a series of safety issues, including multigenerational animal testing "to explore whether the descendants of genome editing are healthy and normal."

The Shenzhen researcher now offers a different explanation.

Some parents "carry lethal genetic diseases, often a small mistake in a single gene out of 20,000," he said in a YouTube video. "If we can help these families protect their children, it's inhuman for us not to." Ethical considerations should defer to the needs of parents, he told AP: They "are as much authorities on what is correct and what is wrong because it's their life on the line."

Still, scientists questioned Dr.

He's reasoning, including his choice of the CCR5 gene for alteration. Current technology already allows scientists to prevent the transmission of HIV to newborns, said Fan Yong, a leading researcher at Guangzhou Medical University who was part of a team that in 2016 produced a paper that was the second published academic claim of genetic editing in human embryos.

That research was also focused on achieving AIDS-resistant embryos, although Prof. Fan at the time said further work should be halted "until after a rigorous and thorough evaluation and discussion are undertaken by the global research and ethics communities."

On Monday, he expressed concern over Dr. He's claims, saying "nobody knows what kind of consequences will befall those infants."

It's possible that this kind of procedure may be considered acceptable in a decade or two, he said. But "what I am certain of is that it's not something we should do today," he said, adding: "Testing on newborn babies is too fast. It's just reckless."

With reporting by Alexandra Li

Associated Graphic

Chinese researcher He Jiankui, left, and a colleague work at a laboratory in Shenzhen on Oct. 10. Dr. He's claim that he helped produce the first genetically edited babies has caused an uproar - one petition calls the claim a blow to the reputation of Chinese science.

MARK SCHIEFELBEIN/AP


Huh? How did I get here?
Return to Main Drew_Fagan Page
Subscribe to
The Globe and Mail
 

Email this article Print this article

space  Advertisement
space

Need CPR for your RSP? Check your portfolio’s pulse and lower yours by improving the overall health of your investments. Click here.

Advertisement

7-Day Site Search
    

Breaking News



Today's Weather


Inside

Rick Salutin
Merrily marching
off to war
Roy MacGregor
Duct tape might hold
when panic strikes


Editorial
Where Manley is going with his first budget




space

Columnists



For a columnist's most recent stories, click on their name below.

 National


Roy MacGregor arrow
This Country
space
Jeffrey Simpson arrow
The Nation
space
Margaret Wente arrow
Counterpoint
space
Hugh Winsor  arrow
The Power Game
space
 Business


Rob Carrick arrow
Personal Finance
space
Drew Fagan arrow
The Big Picture
space
Mathew Ingram arrow
space
Brent Jang arrow
Business West
space
Brian Milner arrow
Taking Stock
space
Eric Reguly arrow
To The Point
space
Andrew Willis arrow
Streetwise
space
 Sports


Stephen Brunt arrow
The Game
space
Eric Duhatschek arrow
space
Allan Maki arrow
space
William Houston arrow
Truth & Rumours
space
Lorne Rubenstein arrow
Golf
space
 The Arts


John Doyle arrow
Television
space
John MacLachlan Gray arrow
Gray's Anatomy
space
David Macfarlane arrow
Cheap Seats
space
Johanna Schneller arrow
Moviegoer
space
 Comment


Murray Campbell arrow
Ontario Politics
space
Lysiane Gagnon arrow
Inside Quebec
space
Marcus Gee arrow
The World
space
William Johnson arrow
Pit Bill
space
Paul Knox arrow
Worldbeat
space
Heather Mallick arrow
As If
space
Leah McLaren arrow
Generation Why
space
Rex Murphy arrow
Japes of Wrath
space
Rick Salutin arrow
On The Other Hand
space
Paul Sullivan arrow
The West
space
William Thorsell arrow
space





Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels
space

© 2003 Bell Globemedia Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Help & Contact Us | Back to the top of this page