BBSRC. (2015, ). Genome-editing position statement. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/bbsrcnews?fref=nf
BBSRC explains the United Kingdom's point of view on the issue and includes quotes from researchers. This will be useful to help explain the side of the people who support the use of genome engineering. It also includes their beliefs on the ethics that need to be followed and the rules that they believe should be followed while experimenting.
This source is the best representation I have seen of what CRISPR Cas9 does. It is a video and animations of the actual process. It shows DNA being cut and the new pieces being brought in and fused. It also talks a little about how the process was discovered. The animation shows the process of how the body fights a virus' DNA when it is invading the body and that was part of how CRISPR Cas9 was discovered.
Hsu, P. D., Lander, E. S., & Zhang, F. (2014). Development and applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell, 157(6), September 4, 2015.
Hsu, Lander, and Zhang explain how CRISPR-Cas9 works in their article. This is useful because it gives some background about what scientists are doing. By knowing what they are doing it gives me a better understanding of what the conflict is about. It is easier to understand the ethics that are being disputed if I know what they are being applied to and trying to guide.
Johns Hopkins Medicine. (2015, ). Recent CRISPR/Cas9 research ignites ethical concerns. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/Johns.Hopkins.Medicine?fref=nf
Johns Hopkins Medicine's article addresses concerns that people have about the future of CRISPR/Cas9. It offers questions about what will happen and should we be doing things like that. An example is designer babies. If we have the ability to should we genetically engineer babies to be what the parents want. The article also addresses the recently done Chinese study and points out the flaws and the low success rate. With the Chinese study it asks questions about weather that study was ethically acceptable.
Newman reports that the National Institutes of Health will no longer by funding research involving the editing of DNA in human embryos. However they will still be funding research for genome editing technologies. This is reported in a quote by the director of NIH, Francis Collins. Collins says that there is ethical concerns within the agency and there is laws that say that government agencies can't be funding this type of research. This decision has met some backlash as some scientists believe that there should be more funding of this because it will be a big part of the future.
Psgurel. (April 25, 2014). More controversy in the CRISPR/Cas9 debate. editing DNA in human embryos: Good or bad idea? Retrieved from http://causescience.com/2015/04/24/more-controversy-in-the-crisprcas9-debate-editing-dna-in-human-embryos-good-or-bad-idea/
Psgurel attempts to host a debate about whether or not there should be a moratorium should be place on clinical practices of genome editing. In it a summary of a piece from a NPR report is used that includes quotes from researchers. Many are not happy with the recent Chinese study done and believe a moratorium should be put up because they believe the technology is not accurate enough to be used on human embryos yet.
Ran, F. A., Hsu, P. D., Lin, C., Gootenberg, J. S., Konermann, S., Trevino, A. E., . . . Zhang, F. (10 October, 2013). Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR Cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell, 154(6), September 4, 2015.
In this article, the authors are reporting their findings for an experiment they did where they were attempting to develop a more accurate technique for CRISPR/Cas9. Currently it can cause unwanted mutations in the process of trying to edit the desired location. In the article they also explain how CRISPR/Cas9 works which is useful for understanding the controversy over gene editing and the ethics.
In this article, Reardon identifies some US groups that are currently trying to establish an ethics code for gene editing on the human genome. They are planning to hold a summit in autumn with researchers and groups from all over the world. The goal is to develop a set of rules for everyone to follow.
Stein, R. (2015). In Stein R. (Ed.), Scientists urge temporary moratorium on human genome edits. NPR: NPR.
In a short NPR radio report and a written portion, Stein reports about the advances in genome editing and how with the creation of the CRISPR Cas9 method it has become quicker, cheaper, and easier. Later in the report he identifies the fears of some scientists which center on the accidental creation of a new genetic disease that gets passed down and people trying to create designer babies. The report then gets into how many scientists, including one of the creators of CRISPR Cas9, believe that there should be a global moratorium put in place to prevent people from attempting to modify human genomes. There needs to be more public discourse and research done to guarantee that it is safe.
In a short NPR radio report and a written portion, Stein reports about the advances in genome editing and how with the creation of the CRISPR Cas9 method it has become quicker, cheaper, and easier. Later in the report he identifies the fears of some scientists which center on the accidental creation of a new genetic disease that gets passed down and people trying to create designer babies. The report then gets into how many scientists, including one of the creators of CRISPR Cas9, believe that there should be a global moratorium put in place to prevent people from attempting to modify human genomes. There needs to be more public discourse and research done to guarantee that it is safe.
Tatlow, D. K. (2015, ). A scientific ethical divide between china and west. New York Times
Tatlow writes about the recent Chinese study where they attempted to fix genetically defective embryos. The study did not have a very successful rate and also received a lot of criticism because it may or may not have crossed the ethical line. Tatlow also addresses cultural differences that can lead to the West and East's different views on what is ethically acceptable.
whatafoolidbe. (2015, 9 May). Designer humans: A response to the first report of human germ cell line editing with CRISPR-Cas9. Retrieved from https://www.reddit.com/r/biology/comments/35ghix/designer_humans_a_respose_to_the_first_report_of/
In this article it gives a summary about the recently done Chinese study. Next it talks about the opinions of some scientists and how they don't think that any research like the Chinese study should be done until the scientific community knows more about the effectiveness of CRISPR Cas9. They believe there needs to be public discourse to assess the safety and ethical guidelines. The author of the article however is in support of the Chinese study and doing more studies like it. The author believes that genetic engineering is going to be a big part of the future and that the way the Chinese study was done was a good model cause embryos that had no chance at survival were used. This way they weren't putting possibly healthy humans at risk of new genetic diseases and they weren't trying to engineer an embryo and then have it fully develop.
No comments:
Post a Comment