Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1077-1096 (2018)

Authors
Stephan Guttinger
London School of Economics
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
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,903
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds.John Harris - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):30-34.
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-.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Human Genome Editing and Ethical Considerations.Kewal Krishan, Tanuj Kanchan & Bahadur Singh - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):597-599.
CRISPR Critters and CRISPR Cracks.R. Alta Charo & Henry T. Greely - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):11-17.
“Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds.John Harris - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):30-34.
Crowdsourcing the Moral Limits of Human Gene Editing?Eric T. Juengst - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (3):15-23.

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 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes