Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Risks and benefits of human germline genome editing: An ethical analysis

Risks and benefits of human germline genome editing: An ethical analysis With the arrival of new methods of genome editing, especially CRISPR/Cas 9, new perspectives on germline interventions have arisen. Supporters of germ line genome editing (GGE) claim that the procedure could be used as a means of disease prevention. As a possible life-saving therapy, it provides benefits that outweigh its risks. Opponents of GGE claim that the medical and societal risks, especially the use of GGE for genetic enhancement, are too high. In our paper, we analyze the risks and benefits of GGE. We show that the medical risk on an individual level might be reduced by further research in the near future so that they may be outweighed by the benefits. We also show that the societal risks of the procedure, i.e. genetic enhancement, are manageable by establishing a regulative framework before the GGE is implemented. Since the effects of modifying genes for the genepool of a given population are extremely difficult to model, the medical risks on the population level might be too high. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asian Bioethics Review Springer Journals

Risks and benefits of human germline genome editing: An ethical analysis

Rubeis, Giovanni; Steger, Florian
Asian Bioethics Review , Volume 10 (2) – Jul 16, 2018
Download PDF
9 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/risks-and-benefits-of-human-germline-genome-editing-an-ethical-q47iwLoAzC
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by National University of Singapore and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
Subject
Philosophy; Bioethics; Ethics; Medical Law; Public Health; Biomedicine, general; Health Administration
ISSN
1793-8759
eISSN
1793-9453
DOI
10.1007/s41649-018-0056-x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

With the arrival of new methods of genome editing, especially CRISPR/Cas 9, new perspectives on germline interventions have arisen. Supporters of germ line genome editing (GGE) claim that the procedure could be used as a means of disease prevention. As a possible life-saving therapy, it provides benefits that outweigh its risks. Opponents of GGE claim that the medical and societal risks, especially the use of GGE for genetic enhancement, are too high. In our paper, we analyze the risks and benefits of GGE. We show that the medical risk on an individual level might be reduced by further research in the near future so that they may be outweighed by the benefits. We also show that the societal risks of the procedure, i.e. genetic enhancement, are manageable by establishing a regulative framework before the GGE is implemented. Since the effects of modifying genes for the genepool of a given population are extremely difficult to model, the medical risks on the population level might be too high.

Journal

Asian Bioethics Review – Springer Journals

Published: Jul 16, 2018

References

  • A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification
    Baltimore, D; Berg, P; Botchan, M; Carroll, D; Charo, RA; Church, G; Corn, JE; Daley, GQ; Doudna, JA; Fenner, M; Greely, HT; Jinek, M; Martin, GS; Penhoet, E; Puck, J; Stemberg, SH; Weissman, JS; Yamamoto, KR
  • The ethics of creating children with three genetic parents
    Baylis, F
  • The ethics of germline gene editing
    Gyngell, C; Douglas, T; Savulescu, J
  • Germ line genome editing in clinics: the approaches, objectives and global society
    Ishii, T
  • Reproductive medicine involving genome editing: clinical uncertainties and embryological needs
    Ishii, T
  • Introducing precise genetic modifications into human 3PN-embryos by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing
    Kang, X; He, W; Huang, Y; Yu, Q; Chen, Y; Gao, X; Sun, X; Fan, Y
  • Don’t edit the human germ line
    Lanphier, E; Urnov, F; Haecker, SE; Werner, M; Smolenski, J
  • CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes
    Liang, P; Xu, Y; Zhang, X; Ding, C; Huang, R; Zhang, Z; Lu, J; Xie, X; Chen, Y; Li, Y; Sun, Y; Bai, Y; Zhou, S; Ma, W; Zhou, C; Huang, J
  • Prevention of muscular dystrophy in mice by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated editing of germline DNA
    Long, C; McAnally, JR; Shelton, JM; Mireault, AA; Bassel-Duby, R; Olson, EN
  • Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos
    Ma, H; Marti-Gutierrez, N; S-W Park, JW; Lee, Y; Suzuki, K; Koski, A; Ji, D; Hayama, T; Ahmed, R; Darby, H; Dyken, C; Li, Y; Kang, E; Park, A-R; Kim, D; Kim, S-T; Gong, J; Gu, Y; Xu, X; Battaglia, D; Krieg, SA; Lee, DM; Wu, DH; Wolf, DP; Heitner, SB; Izpisua Belmonte, JC; Amato, P; Kim, J-S; Kaul, S; Mitalipov, S
  • Human Germline Genome Editing
    Ormond, KE; Mortlock, DP; Scholes, DT; Bombard, Y; Brody, LC; Faucett, WA; Garrison, NA; Hercher, L; Isassi, R; Middleton, A; Musunuru, K; Shriner, D; Virani, A; Young, CE
  • Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik - Annual Review of Law and Ethics
    Rubeis, G; Steger, F
  • The medical case for gene editing
    Savulescu, J; Gyngell, C
  • The moral imperative to continue gene editing research on human embryos
    Savulescu, J; Pugh, J; Douglas, T; Gyngell, C
  • Biological therapy for non-obstructive azoospermia
    Vij, SC; Sabanegh, E; Ashok, A