Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Gac Med Mex ; 156(1): 53-59, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32026884

ABSTRACT

In this essay, the bioethical implications of the recent genetic manipulation in human embryos with CRISPR-Cas9 to eliminate the CCR5 gene and the birth of a pair of discordant twin girls are analyzed. The experiment was disseminated via social media. The main bioethical flaws identified include the justification of the model, the informed consent process and the lack of disclosure of evident conflicts of interest. The consequences of the experiment on the life of the twins that were born were not properly evaluated, such as the impact on their autonomy, the alleged benefits to be received and the future risks of harm during their lifetime. Having manipulated the germ cell line, the effects on their future offspring were not considered. This type of actions negatively affects the way society conceives science. Genetic engineering should be reserved to the basic experimental context or as clinical research for the correction of known serious diseases of genetic origin under strict regulatory and bioethical supervision and using a gradualist approach in accordance with the advances of gene editing techniques.


En este ensayo se analizan las implicaciones bioéticas de la reciente manipulación genética en embriones humanos con CRISPR-Cas9 para eliminar el gen CCR5 y el nacimiento de dos gemelas discordantes. El experimento se divulgó en medios sociales. Los principales problemas bioéticos identificados son la justificación del modelo, el proceso de consentimiento informado y la falta de declaración de evidentes conflictos de interés. No se evaluaron apropiadamente las consecuencias del experimento sobre la vida de las gemelas nacidas como la afectación a su autonomía, los supuestos beneficios por recibir y los riesgos futuros de daño durante su vida. Habiendo manipulado la línea celular germinal, no se consideraron los efectos sobre su descendencia futura. Este tipo de acciones tiene un impacto negativo en la forma como la sociedad concibe la ciencia. La ingeniería genética debe reservarse al contexto experimental básico o bien como investigación cínica para la corrección de enfermedades conocidas graves de origen genético, bajo estricta supervisión regulatoria y bioética y de manera gradualista de acuerdo con el progreso de las técnicas de edición genética.


Subject(s)
CRISPR-Cas Systems , Gene Editing/ethics , Receptors, CCR5/genetics , Bioethical Issues , China , Conflict of Interest , Female , Genetic Engineering/classification , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genome, Human , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Informed Consent/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Research Design , Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic , Therapeutic Human Experimentation/ethics , Twins, Dizygotic
2.
Gac. méd. Méx ; 156(1): 53-59, ene.-feb. 2020.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1249870

ABSTRACT

Resumen En este ensayo se analizan las implicaciones bioéticas de la reciente manipulación genética en embriones humanos con CRISPR-Cas9 para eliminar el gen CCR5 y el nacimiento de dos gemelas discordantes. El experimento se divulgó en medios sociales. Los principales problemas bioéticos identificados son la justificación del modelo, el proceso de consentimiento informado y la falta de declaración de evidentes conflictos de interés. No se evaluaron apropiadamente las consecuencias del experimento sobre la vida de las gemelas nacidas como la afectación a su autonomía, los supuestos beneficios por recibir y los riesgos futuros de daño durante su vida. Habiendo manipulado la línea celular germinal, no se consideraron los efectos sobre su descendencia futura. Este tipo de acciones tiene un impacto negativo en la forma como la sociedad concibe la ciencia. La ingeniería genética debe reservarse al contexto experimental básico o bien como investigación cínica para la corrección de enfermedades conocidas graves de origen genético, bajo estricta supervisión regulatoria y bioética y de manera gradualista de acuerdo con el progreso de las técnicas de edición genética.


Abstract In this essay, the bioethical implications of the recent genetic manipulation in human embryos with CRISPR-Cas9 to eliminate the CCR5 gene and the birth of a pair of discordant twin girls are analyzed. The experiment was disseminated via social media. The main bioethical flaws identified include the justification of the model, the informed consent process and the lack of disclosure of evident conflicts of interest. The consequences of the experiment on the life of the twins that were born were not properly evaluated, such as the impact on their autonomy, the alleged benefits to be received and the future risks of harm during their lifetime. Having manipulated the germ cell line, the effects on their future offspring were not considered. This type of actions negatively affects the way society conceives science. Genetic engineering should be reserved to the basic experimental context or as clinical research for the correction of known serious diseases of genetic origin under strict regulatory and bioethical supervision and using a gradualist approach in accordance with the advances of gene editing techniques.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Receptors, CCR5/genetics , CRISPR-Cas Systems , Gene Editing/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Research Design , Twins, Dizygotic , Genetic Engineering/classification , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genome, Human , HIV Infections/prevention & control , China , Conflict of Interest , Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic , Bioethical Issues , Therapeutic Human Experimentation/ethics , Informed Consent/ethics
4.
Nat Biotechnol ; 27(12): 1071-3, 2009 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20010573
5.
BMC Bioinformatics ; 9: 260, 2008 Jun 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18522755

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since more than one hundred events of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have been developed and approved for commercialization in global area, the GMO analysis methods are essential for the enforcement of GMO labelling regulations. Protein and nucleic acid-based detection techniques have been developed and utilized for GMOs identification and quantification. However, the information for harmonization and standardization of GMO analysis methods at global level is needed. RESULTS: GMO Detection method Database (GMDD) has collected almost all the previous developed and reported GMOs detection methods, which have been grouped by different strategies (screen-, gene-, construct-, and event-specific), and also provide a user-friendly search service of the detection methods by GMO event name, exogenous gene, or protein information, etc. In this database, users can obtain the sequences of exogenous integration, which will facilitate PCR primers and probes design. Also the information on endogenous genes, certified reference materials, reference molecules, and the validation status of developed methods is included in this database. Furthermore, registered users can also submit new detection methods and sequences to this database, and the newly submitted information will be released soon after being checked. CONCLUSION: GMDD contains comprehensive information of GMO detection methods. The database will make the GMOs analysis much easier.


Subject(s)
Database Management Systems , Databases, Factual/standards , Genetic Engineering/classification , User-Computer Interface , Animals , Genetic Engineering/methods , Organisms, Genetically Modified/genetics , Organisms, Genetically Modified/metabolism , Reference Standards
6.
J Agric Environ Ethics ; 19(3): 225-38, 2006.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17061380

ABSTRACT

Public policy on the development and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has mainly been concerned with defining proper strategies of risk management. However, surveys and focus group interviews show that although lay people are concerned with risks, they also emphasize that genetic modification is ethically questionable in itself. Many people feel that this technology "tampers with nature" in an unacceptable manner. This is often identified as an objection to the crossing of species borders in producing transgenic organisms. Most scientists reject these opinions as based on insufficient knowledge about biotechnology, the concept of species, and nature in general. Some recent projects of genetic modification aim to accommodate the above mentioned concerns by altering the expression of endogenous genes rather than introducing genes from other species. There can be good scientific reasons for this approach, in addition to strategic reasons related to greater public acceptability. But are there also moral reasons for choosing intragenic rather than transgenic modification? I suggest three interrelated moral reasons for giving priority to intragenic modification. First, we should respect the opinions of lay people even when their view is contrary to scientific consensus; they express an alternative world-view, not scientific ignorance. Second, staying within species borders by strengthening endogenous traits reduces the risks and scientific uncertainty. Third, we should show respect for nature as a complex system of laws and interconnections that we cannot fully control. The main moral reason for intragenic modification, in our view, is the need to respect the "otherness" of nature.


Subject(s)
Genetic Engineering/classification , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genetic Engineering/methods , Plants, Genetically Modified/classification , Plants, Genetically Modified/genetics , Plants/classification , Plants/genetics , Public Opinion , Species Specificity , Community Participation , Crops, Agricultural , Food Supply , Food, Genetically Modified , Organisms, Genetically Modified/genetics , Risk Assessment , Uncertainty , Wedge Argument
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...