Paul Knoepfler bleibt skeptisch über die Haltung der Akademie
What do National Academies, mtg organizers, etc. really think re: #CRISPR babies? Do some secretly feel happy about He’s claim?
ipscell Was davon ist nur Lippenbekenntnis?
To maintain the public’s trust that someday genome editing will be able to treat or prevent disease, the research community needs to take steps now to demonstrate that this new tool can be applied with competence, integrity, and benevolence. Unfortunately, it appears that the case presented in Hong Kong might have failed on all counts, risking human lives as well as rash or hasty political reaction.
FiftyThirtyEight mit einem Essay wie man verrückte Wissenschaftler stoppen kann.
Doctor Faustus was carried off to hell. Pneumonia and an Arctic ice flow ended Victor Frankenstein. Doctor Moreau’s own creations … Lacking the devil, or a deus ex machina, us nonfictional people are still faced with the challenge of stopping rogue researchers. …The same week that news of He’s experiments came out, the journal Nature ran a story about a team at Harvard that is planning the first real-world experiments in geo-engineering … Legal restrictions on science basically began as a byproduct of World War II. Emerging from the revelations of grotesque Nazi research, the 1947 Nuremberg Code was the first time that anybody really tried to set international rules for what you could and could not do in medical experiments.
Chemical & Engineering News über den Mann der He Jiankui noch hätte stoppen können und sich nun in Ausflüchte versteigt
I think that one of the challenges of having that broad conversation is seeing that this is not just about one guy who did one experiment that produced two children. It’s about a trajectory. And that trajectory is not only about germ-line genome editing. It’s about a whole range of emerging technologies for intervening in and manipulating human life in ways that are in some respects scientifically promising and exciting and in others worrisome.