Cargando…
Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡)
Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, including editing of the germline. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommenda...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6276657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31490459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox024 |
_version_ | 1783378052499111936 |
---|---|
author | de Wert, Guido Heindryckx, Björn Pennings, Guido Clarke, Angus Eichenlaub-Ritter, Ursula van El, Carla G Forzano, Francesca Goddijn, Mariëtte Howard, Heidi C Radojkovic, Dragica Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle Dondorp, Wybo Tarlatzis, Basil C Cornel, Martina C |
author_facet | de Wert, Guido Heindryckx, Björn Pennings, Guido Clarke, Angus Eichenlaub-Ritter, Ursula van El, Carla G Forzano, Francesca Goddijn, Mariëtte Howard, Heidi C Radojkovic, Dragica Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle Dondorp, Wybo Tarlatzis, Basil C Cornel, Martina C |
author_sort | de Wert, Guido |
collection | PubMed |
description | Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, including editing of the germline. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. This document provides the background to the Recommendations. Germline gene editing is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if germline gene editing would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique could help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? This Background document summarizes the scientific developments and expectations regarding germline gene editing, legal regulations at the European level, and ethics for three different settings (basic research, pre-clinical research and clinical applications). In ethical terms, we argue that the deontological objections (e.g. gene editing goes against nature) do not seem convincing while consequentialist objections (e.g. safety for the children thus conceived and following generations) require research, not all of which is allowed in the current legal situation in European countries. Development of this Background document and Recommendations reflects the responsibility to help society understand and debate the full range of possible implications of the new technologies, and to contribute to regulations that are adapted to the dynamics of the field while taking account of ethical considerations and societal concerns. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6276657 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62766572019-03-20 Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) de Wert, Guido Heindryckx, Björn Pennings, Guido Clarke, Angus Eichenlaub-Ritter, Ursula van El, Carla G Forzano, Francesca Goddijn, Mariëtte Howard, Heidi C Radojkovic, Dragica Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle Dondorp, Wybo Tarlatzis, Basil C Cornel, Martina C Hum Reprod Open ESHRE Pages Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, including editing of the germline. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. This document provides the background to the Recommendations. Germline gene editing is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if germline gene editing would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique could help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? This Background document summarizes the scientific developments and expectations regarding germline gene editing, legal regulations at the European level, and ethics for three different settings (basic research, pre-clinical research and clinical applications). In ethical terms, we argue that the deontological objections (e.g. gene editing goes against nature) do not seem convincing while consequentialist objections (e.g. safety for the children thus conceived and following generations) require research, not all of which is allowed in the current legal situation in European countries. Development of this Background document and Recommendations reflects the responsibility to help society understand and debate the full range of possible implications of the new technologies, and to contribute to regulations that are adapted to the dynamics of the field while taking account of ethical considerations and societal concerns. Oxford University Press 2018-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6276657/ /pubmed/31490459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox024 Text en This article has been co-published with permission in HROpen and European Journal of Human Genetics. © The Authors, 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits noncommercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | ESHRE Pages de Wert, Guido Heindryckx, Björn Pennings, Guido Clarke, Angus Eichenlaub-Ritter, Ursula van El, Carla G Forzano, Francesca Goddijn, Mariëtte Howard, Heidi C Radojkovic, Dragica Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle Dondorp, Wybo Tarlatzis, Basil C Cornel, Martina C Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title | Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title_full | Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title_fullStr | Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title_full_unstemmed | Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title_short | Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE(†)(‡) |
title_sort | responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. background document to the recommendations of eshg and eshre(†)(‡) |
topic | ESHRE Pages |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6276657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31490459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox024 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dewertguido responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT heindryckxbjorn responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT penningsguido responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT clarkeangus responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT eichenlaubritterursula responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT vanelcarlag responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT forzanofrancesca responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT goddijnmariette responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT howardheidic responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT radojkovicdragica responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT rialsebbagemmanuelle responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT dondorpwybo responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT tarlatzisbasilc responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT cornelmartinac responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre AT responsibleinnovationinhumangermlinegeneeditingbackgrounddocumenttotherecommendationsofeshgandeshre |