Abstract
CRISPR gene edition constitutes one of the most promising tools in the area of human health. However, it also involves a number of issues that require further consideration. The concerns, indeed, are twofold: the first are connected with the safety of the technology, while the second relate to some ethical issues and it is precisely those ethical issues that this chapter will deal with. To this purpose, we will focus on four main issues: the necessity of this technology and the risk issues involved; the embryo loss involved; the alteration of the human genome and human identity; and the enhancement/eugenics issue. Some of our main conclusions are the following: (1) We strongly support the idea that if further research reduces the risks involved, then the reasons for the prohibition of gene editing in human beings will vanish; (2) Embryo loss is not a key factor in terms of the ethical discussion of gene editing; (3) a general ban on human embryo editing on the grounds of the defense of the human genome is clearly unjustified, even if we really hold this approach; (4) a general ban on gene editing affecting the embryo’s germ line genetic identity is hard to understand and entails a number of questions that hinder its practical applicability; and (5) referring to eugenics can hardly justify a general ban on the use of gene editing in human embryos, considering the benefits that are at stake and the moral imperative to pursue them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Annas G (2005) American bioethics: crossing human rights and health law boundaries. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Baltimore D, Berg P, Botchan M et al (2015) A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germ line gene modification. Science 348(6230):36–38
Bartke A, Brown-Borg H, Mattison J et al (2001) Prolonged longevity of hypopituitary dwarf mice. Exp Gerontol 36:21–28. doi:10.1016/S0531-5565(00)00205-9
British Medical Association (2007) Boosting your brain power: ethical aspects of cognitive enhancements. British Medical Association, London
Brock DW (2013) Creating embryos for use in stem cell research. J Law Med Ethics 38(2):229–237
Burgess JA (1993) The great slippery-slope argument. J Med Ethics 19(3):169–174
Callaway E (2016) UK scientists gain licence to edit genes in human embryos. Nature. http://www.nature.com/news/uk-scientists-gain-licence-to-edit-genes-in-human-embryos-1.19270. Accessed 21 May 2016
Caplan AL, McGee G, Magnus D (1999) What is immoral about eugenics? West J Med 171(5–6):335–337
Carroll D, Charo RA (2015) The societal opportunities and challenges of genome editing. Genome Biol 16(242). doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0812-0
Center for Genetics and Society (2015) About human germline gene editing. http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=8711. Accessed 2 May 2016
Daesik K, Sangsu B, Jeongbin P et al (2015) Digenome-seq: genome-wide profiling of CRISPR-Cas9 off-target effects in human cells. Nat Methods 12:237–243. doi:10.1038/nmeth.3284
Darnovsky M (2016) Should heritable gene editing be used on humans? Wall Str J Apr 10 2016. http://www.wsj.com/articles/should-heritable-gene-editing-be-used-on-humans-1460340173. Accessed 2 May 2016
Devolder K (2005) Creating and sacrificing embryos for stem cells. J Med Ethics 31(6):366–370. doi:10.1136/jme.2004.008599
Devolder K (2013) Killing discarded embryos and the nothing-is-lost principle. J Appl Philos 30(4):289–303. doi:10.1111/japp.12033
Douglas T (2015) The harms of enhancement and the conclusive reasons view. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 24(1):23–36. doi:10.1017/S0963180114000218
European Group on Ethics (2015) Statement on Gene Editing https://ec.europa.eu/research/ege/pdf/gene_editing_ege_statemen.pdf. Accessed 02 May 2016
Farah MJ, Illes J, Cook-Deegan R et al (2004) Neurocognitive enhancement: what can we do and what should we do? Nat Rev Neurosci 5(5):421–425
Foht B (2016) Experiments on human embryos offer little hope for curing genetic diseases. Natl Rev http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430771/genetic-modification-embryos-morally-wrong-still. Accessed 2 May 2016
Habermas J (2003) The future of human nature. Polity, Malden
Hayes R (2008) Is there an emerging international consensus on the proper uses of the new human genetic technologies? Testimony given for the subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade. http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/downloads/20080619_hayes_testimony.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2016
Hinxton Group (2015) Statement on genome editing technologies and human germ line genetic modification. http://www.hinxtongroup.org/hinxton2015_statement.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2016
Isasi R, Knoppers BM (2015) Oversight of human inheritable genome modification. Nat Biotechnol 33:454–455
Isasi R, Kleiderman E, Knoppers BM (2016) Editing policy to fit the genome? Science 351 (6271):337–339
Ishii T (2017) Germ line genome editing in clinics: the approaches, objectives and global society. Brief Funct Genomics 16(1):46–56
Kang X et al (2016) Introducing precise genetic modifications into human 3PN embryos by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing. J Assist Reprod Genet 33(5):581–588
Kass LR (2004) Life, liberty and the defense of dignity. Encounter Books, San Francisco
Lander ES (2015) What we don’t know? In: Commissioned papers for the International summit on gene editing. Washington, DC, 1–3 Dec 2015
Lanphier E, Urnov F, Haecker SE et al (2015) Don’t edit the human germ line. Nature 519:410–411
Liang P, Xu Y, Zhang X et al (2015) CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein Cell 6:363–372
Lunshof JE (2016) Human germ line editing – roles and responsibilities. Protein Cell 7(1):7–10
Mehlman MJ (2012) Will directed evolution destroy humanity, and if so, what can we do about it? St Louis Univ J Health Law Policy 3:93–122
Morar N (2015) An empirically informed critique of Habermas’ argument from human nature. Sci Engin Ethics 21(1):95–113
Outka G (2009) The ethics of embryonic stem cell research and the principle of “nothing is lost”. Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics 9(3):585–602
Pennings G, Van Steirteghem A (2002) The subsidiarity principle in the context of embryonic stem cell research. Hum Reprod 19(2):1060–1064
Pollack R (2015) Eugenics lurk in the shadow of CRISPR. Science 348(6237):871
Prieur MR, Atkinson J, Hardingham L et al (2006) Stem cell research in a Catholic institution: yes or no? Kennedy Inst Ethics J 16(19):73–98
Sunshine Project (2003) Emerging technologies: genetic engineering and biological weapons. http://www.sunshine-project.org/publications/bk/bk12. Accessed 2 May 2016
Regalado A (2016) Top US Intelligence Official calls gene editing a WMD threat. MIT Technology Review (February). https://www.technologyreview.com/s/600774/top-us-intelligence-official-calls-gene-editing-a-wmd-threat/. Accessed 2 May 2016
Rifkin J (1983) Algeny. Viking, New York
Robertson JA (1999) Ethics and policy in embryonic stem cell research. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 109:109–136
Savulescu J (2002) Deaf lesbians, “designer disability,” and the future of medicine. Brit Med J 325(7367):771–773
Savulescu J (2008) Is it wrong to deliberately select embryos which will have disabilities? Practical Ethics. March 10 2008. http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2008/03/is-it-wrong-to-deliberately-select-embryos-which-will-have-disabiltites/. Accessed 2 May 2016
Savulescu J, Pugh J, Douglas T et al (2015) The moral imperative to continue gene editing research on human embryos. Protein Cell 6(7):476–479. doi:10.1007/s13238-015-0184-y
Skerret P (2016) Is do-it-yourself CRISPR as scary as it sounds? STAT. https://www.statnews.com/2016/03/14/crispr-do-it-yourself/#Lentzos. Accessed 2 May 2016
Thompson Ch (2015) Governance, regulation, and control: public participation. In: Commissioned papers for the International summit on gene editing. Washington, DC, 1–3 Dec 2015
Thomson Ch (2015) The human germline genome editing debate. Impact ethics. http://impactethics.ca/2015/12/04/the-human-germline-genome-editing-debate/. Accessed 2 May 2016
Wilson J (2007) Transhumanism and moral equality. Bioethics 21(8):419–425
Zoloth L (2002) Jordan’s banks, a view from the first years of human embryonic stem cell research. Amer J Bioethics 2(1):3–30
Acknowledgments
We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the support from the Spanish Ministry of Economy, award DER 2013-41462-R, Regional Government of Madrid, award H2015-HUM/3330 and COST Actions IS1303 Citizen’s Health through public-private Initiatives: Public health, Market and Ethical perspectives (CHIP ME) and CA15105 European Medicines Shortages Research Network – addressing supply problems to patients (Medicines Shortages)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
De Miguel Beriain, I., Marcos del Cano, A.M. (2018). Chapter 12 Gene Editing in Human Embryos. A Comment on the Ethical Issues Involved. In: Soniewicka, M. (eds) The Ethics of Reproductive Genetics. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 128. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60684-2_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60684-2_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60683-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60684-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)