Mulvihill John J, Capps Benjamin, Joly Yann, Lysaght Tamra, Zwart Hub A E, Chadwick Ruth
Section of Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Suite 12100, 1200 Children's Avenue, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
Department of Bioethics, Dalhousie University, 5849 University Avenue, Room C-312, CRC Bldg, PO Box 15000, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 4R2.
Br Med Bull. 2017 Jun 1;122(1):17-29. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldx002.
The avalanche of commentaries on CRISPR-Cas9 technology, a bacterial immune system modified to recognize any short DNA sequence, cut it out, and insert a new one, has rekindled hopes for gene therapy and other applications and raised criticisms of engineering genes in future generations.
This discussion draws on articles that emphasize ethics, identified partly through PubMed and Google, 2014-2016.
CRISPR-Cas9 has taken the pace and prospects for genetic discovery and applications to a high level, stoking anticipation for somatic gene engineering to help patients. We support a moratorium on germ line manipulation.
We place increased emphasis on the principle of solidarity and the public good. The genetic bases of some diseases are not thoroughly addressable with CRISPR-Cas9. We see no new ethical issues, compared with gene therapy and genetic engineering in general, apart from the explosive rate of findings. Other controversies include eugenics, patentability and unrealistic expectations of professionals and the public.
Biggest issues are the void of research on human germ cell biology, the appropriate routes for oversight and transparency, and the scientific and ethical areas of reproductive medicine.
The principle of genomic solidarity and priority on public good should be a lens for bringing clarity to CRISPR debates. The valid claim of genetic exceptionalism supports restraint on experimentation in human germ cells, given the trans-generational dangers and the knowledge gap in germ cell biology.
关于CRISPR-Cas9技术的评论如潮水般涌现，这是一种经过改造的细菌免疫系统，能够识别任何短DNA序列，将其切割下来并插入新的序列。这重新燃起了人们对基因治疗及其他应用的希望，同时也引发了对改变后代基因的批评。
本讨论借鉴了2014年至2016年期间部分通过PubMed和谷歌确定的强调伦理的文章。
CRISPR-Cas9已将基因发现及应用的速度和前景提升到了一个很高的水平，激发了人们对体细胞基因工程帮助患者的期待。我们支持暂停生殖系操作。
我们更加重视团结原则和公共利益。一些疾病的遗传基础无法通过CRISPR-Cas9得到彻底解决。与一般的基因治疗和基因工程相比，除了研究结果的爆发式增长外，我们没有看到新的伦理问题。其他争议包括优生学、可专利性以及专业人士和公众不切实际的期望。
最大的问题是人类生殖细胞生物学研究的空白、适当的监督和透明度途径以及生殖医学的科学和伦理领域。
基因组团结原则和对公共利益的优先考虑应成为为CRISPR辩论带来清晰认识的一个视角。鉴于跨代风险和生殖细胞生物学方面的知识差距，遗传例外论的合理主张支持对人类生殖细胞实验加以限制。
