Cargando…
A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results
This paper reports the results of a public engagement study on heritable human genome editing (HHGE) carried out in South Africa, which was conducted in accordance with a study protocol that was published in this journal in 2021. This study is novel as it is the first public engagement study on HHGE...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441783 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275372 |
_version_ | 1784840090905739264 |
---|---|
author | Thaldar, Donrich Shozi, Bonginkosi Steytler, Michaela Hendry, Gill Botes, Marietjie Mnyandu, Ntokozo Naidoo, Meshandren Pillay, Siddharthiya Slabbert, Magda Townsend, Beverley |
author_facet | Thaldar, Donrich Shozi, Bonginkosi Steytler, Michaela Hendry, Gill Botes, Marietjie Mnyandu, Ntokozo Naidoo, Meshandren Pillay, Siddharthiya Slabbert, Magda Townsend, Beverley |
author_sort | Thaldar, Donrich |
collection | PubMed |
description | This paper reports the results of a public engagement study on heritable human genome editing (HHGE) carried out in South Africa, which was conducted in accordance with a study protocol that was published in this journal in 2021. This study is novel as it is the first public engagement study on HHGE in Africa. It used a deliberative public engagement (DPE) methodology, entailing inter alia that measures were put in place to ensure that potential participants became informed about HHGE, and that deliberations between the participants were facilitated with the aim of seeking consensus. A diverse group of 30 persons was selected to participate in the DPE study, which took place via Zoom over three consecutive weekday evenings. The main results are: Provided that HHGE is safe and effective, an overwhelming majority of participants supported allowing the use of HHGE to prevent genetic health conditions and for immunity against TB and HIV/Aids, while significant majorities opposed allowing HHGE for enhancement. The dominant paradigm during the deliberations was balancing health benefits (and associated improvements in quality of life) with unforeseen health risks (such as loss of natural immunity). The seriousness of a health condition emerged as the determining factor for the policy choice of whether to allow an application of HHGE. More generally, equal access to HHGE qua healthcare service featured as an important value, and it was uncontested that the South African government should allocate resources to promote scientific research into HHGE. These results are aligned with the policy principles for regulating HHGE in South Africa suggested by Thaldar et al. They call for urgent revision of South African ethics guidelines that currently prohibit research on HHGE, and for dedicated HHGE legal regulations that provide a clear and comprehensive legal pathway for researchers who intend to conduct HHGE research and clinical trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9704621 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97046212022-11-29 A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results Thaldar, Donrich Shozi, Bonginkosi Steytler, Michaela Hendry, Gill Botes, Marietjie Mnyandu, Ntokozo Naidoo, Meshandren Pillay, Siddharthiya Slabbert, Magda Townsend, Beverley PLoS One Research Article This paper reports the results of a public engagement study on heritable human genome editing (HHGE) carried out in South Africa, which was conducted in accordance with a study protocol that was published in this journal in 2021. This study is novel as it is the first public engagement study on HHGE in Africa. It used a deliberative public engagement (DPE) methodology, entailing inter alia that measures were put in place to ensure that potential participants became informed about HHGE, and that deliberations between the participants were facilitated with the aim of seeking consensus. A diverse group of 30 persons was selected to participate in the DPE study, which took place via Zoom over three consecutive weekday evenings. The main results are: Provided that HHGE is safe and effective, an overwhelming majority of participants supported allowing the use of HHGE to prevent genetic health conditions and for immunity against TB and HIV/Aids, while significant majorities opposed allowing HHGE for enhancement. The dominant paradigm during the deliberations was balancing health benefits (and associated improvements in quality of life) with unforeseen health risks (such as loss of natural immunity). The seriousness of a health condition emerged as the determining factor for the policy choice of whether to allow an application of HHGE. More generally, equal access to HHGE qua healthcare service featured as an important value, and it was uncontested that the South African government should allocate resources to promote scientific research into HHGE. These results are aligned with the policy principles for regulating HHGE in South Africa suggested by Thaldar et al. They call for urgent revision of South African ethics guidelines that currently prohibit research on HHGE, and for dedicated HHGE legal regulations that provide a clear and comprehensive legal pathway for researchers who intend to conduct HHGE research and clinical trials. Public Library of Science 2022-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9704621/ /pubmed/36441783 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275372 Text en © 2022 Thaldar et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Thaldar, Donrich Shozi, Bonginkosi Steytler, Michaela Hendry, Gill Botes, Marietjie Mnyandu, Ntokozo Naidoo, Meshandren Pillay, Siddharthiya Slabbert, Magda Townsend, Beverley A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title | A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title_full | A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title_fullStr | A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title_full_unstemmed | A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title_short | A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results |
title_sort | deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among south africans: study results |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704621/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441783 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275372 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thaldardonrich adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT shozibonginkosi adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT steytlermichaela adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT hendrygill adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT botesmarietjie adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT mnyanduntokozo adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT naidoomeshandren adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT pillaysiddharthiya adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT slabbertmagda adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT townsendbeverley adeliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT thaldardonrich deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT shozibonginkosi deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT steytlermichaela deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT hendrygill deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT botesmarietjie deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT mnyanduntokozo deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT naidoomeshandren deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT pillaysiddharthiya deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT slabbertmagda deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults AT townsendbeverley deliberativepublicengagementstudyonheritablehumangenomeeditingamongsouthafricansstudyresults |