Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1077-1096 (2018)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
In 2015 scientists called for a partial ban on genome editing in human germline cells. This call was a response to the rapid development of the CRISPR–Cas9 system, a molecular tool that allows researchers to modify genomic DNA in living organisms with high precision and ease of use. Importantly, the ban was meant to be a trust-building exercise that promises a ‘prudent’ way forward. The goal of this paper is to analyse whether the ban can deliver on this promise. To do so the focus will be put on the precedent on which the current ban is modelled, namely the Asilomar ban on recombinant DNA technology. The analysis of this case will show that the Asilomar ban was successful because of a specific two-step containment strategy it employed and that this two-step approach is also key to making the current ban work. It will be argued, however, that the Asilomar strategy cannot be transferred to human genome editing and that the current ban therefore fails to deliver on its promise. The paper will close with a reflection on the reasons for this failure and on what can be learned from it about the regulation of novel molecular tools.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s11948-017-9931-1 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds.John Harris - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):30-34.
How the Choice of Experimental Organism Matters: Epistemological Reflections on an Aspect of Biological Practice.Richard M. Burian - 1993 - Journal of the History of Biology 26 (2):351-367.
Model Organisms as Models: Understanding the 'Lingua Franca' of the Human Genome Project.Rachel A. Ankeny - 2001 - Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S251-.
From Humanized Mice to Human Disease: Guiding Extrapolation From Model to Target.Monika Piotrowska - 2013 - Biology and Philosophy 28 (3):439-455.
View all 13 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Will CRISPR Germline Engineering Close the Door to an Open Future?Rachel L. Mintz, John D. Loike & Ruth L. Fischbach - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (5):1409-1423.
Islamic Perspectives on CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Human Germline Gene Editing: A Preliminary Discussion.Noor Munirah Isa, Nurul Atiqah Zulkifli & Saadan Man - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (1):309-323.
Designing Preclinical Studies in Germline Gene Editing: Scientific and Ethical Aspects.Anders Nordgren - 2019 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 16 (4):559-570.
Designing Preclinical Studies in Germline Gene Editing: Scientific and Ethical Aspects.Anders Nordgren - 2019 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 16 (4):559-570.
Similar books and articles
CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing – New and Old Ethical Issues Arising From a Revolutionary Technology.Martina Baumann - 2016 - NanoEthics 10 (2):139-159.
Human Genome Editing and Ethical Considerations.Kewal Krishan, Tanuj Kanchan & Bahadur Singh - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):597-599.
Human Germline CRISPR-Cas Modification: Toward a Regulatory Framework.Niklaus H. Evitt, Shamik Mascharak & Russ B. Altman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):25-29.
CRISPR Critters and CRISPR Cracks.R. Alta Charo & Henry T. Greely - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):11-17.
Exploiting CRISPR/Cas Systems for Biotechnology.Timothy R. Sampson & David S. Weiss - 2014 - Bioessays 36 (1):34-38.
“Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
CRISPR-Cas9 Human Genome Editing: Challenges, Ethical Concerns and Implications.Otieno Mo - 2015 - Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics 6 (6).
CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Editing of Human?-Globin Gene in Human Cells: A Commentary on the Research Ethics.Norman K. Swazo - 2015 - Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 6 (1):22-26.
Ethical Issues in Genome Editing for Non-Human Organisms Using CRISPR/ Cas9 System.Rodriguez Eduardo - 2017 - Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics 8 (2).
CRISPR/Cas9 and Germline Modification: New Difficulties in Obtaining Informed Consent.Joanna Smolenski - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):35-37.
Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds.John Harris - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):30-34.
Limits of Responsibility: Genome Editing, Asilomar, and the Politics of Deliberation.J. Benjamin Hurlbut - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (5):11-14.
Crowdsourcing the Moral Limits of Human Gene Editing?Eric T. Juengst - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (3):15-23.
CRISPR and the Rebirth of Synthetic Biology.Raheleh Heidari, David Martin Shaw & Bernice Simone Elger - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (2):351-363.
CRISPR as a Driving Force: The Model T of Biotechnology.Carlos Mariscal & Angel Petropanagos - 2016 - Monash Bioethics Review 34 (2):1-16.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2017-06-27
Total views
61 ( #163,210 of 2,409,456 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #150,342 of 2,409,456 )
2017-06-27
Total views
61 ( #163,210 of 2,409,456 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #150,342 of 2,409,456 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads