{"id":50276,"date":"2022-12-25T14:29:32","date_gmt":"2022-12-25T22:29:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=50276"},"modified":"2022-12-25T14:29:32","modified_gmt":"2022-12-25T22:29:32","slug":"everyday-erinyes-350","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2022\/12\/25\/everyday-erinyes-350\/","title":{"rendered":"Everyday Erinyes #350"},"content":{"rendered":"

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto<\/span><\/strong>, Megaera<\/strong><\/span>, and Tisiphone<\/span><\/strong>. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”<\/p>\n

It’s still the holiday season, and I am still – sort of – on break. Not on break from posting the blog, but on break from the kind of news that warns us and may scare us into some kind of action. This story may scare us, but only because a development so major can open up so many possibilities for noth good and evil. Still, it’s exciting, and it’s inspiring to think about the good which can be done.<\/p>\n

And for sure this technology is going to be used. By humans. Who can and do make mistakes (as the article makes very clear.) But innocent mistakes – even when catastrophic – are a different matter from deliberate misuse, generally done for money or power. That absolutely must be reckoned with.
\n==============================================================<\/p>\n

Did He Jiankui \u2018Make People Better\u2019? Documentary spurs a new look at the case of the first gene-edited<\/span>\u00a0babies<\/h1>\n
He Jiankui seemed unprepared for the furor set off by his bombshell announcement.
\nThe He Lab\/Wikimedia Commons<\/a>, CC BY<\/a><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

G. Owen Schaefer<\/a>, National University of Singapore<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

In the four years since an experiment by disgraced scientist He Jiankui resulted in the birth of the first babies with edited genes<\/a>, numerous articles, books and international<\/a> commissions<\/a> have reflected on whether and how heritable genome editing \u2013 that is, modifying genes that will be passed on to the next generation \u2013 should proceed. They\u2019ve reinforced an international consensus that it\u2019s premature to proceed with heritable genome editing. Yet, concern remains that some individuals might buck that consensus and recklessly forge ahead \u2013 just as He Jiankui did.<\/p>\n

Some observers \u2013 myself included<\/a> \u2013 have characterized He as a rogue<\/a>. However, the new documentary \u201cMake People Better<\/a>,\u201d directed by filmmaker Cody Sheehy, leans toward a different narrative. In its telling, He was a misguided centerpiece of a broader ecosystem that subtly and implicitly supported rapid advancement in gene editing and reproductive technologies. That same system threw He under the bus \u2013 and into prison<\/a> \u2013 when it became evident that the global community strongly rejected his experiments.<\/p>\n

Creation of the \u2018CRISPR babies\u2019<\/h2>\n

\u201cMake People Better\u201d outlines an already well-documented saga, tracing the path of He from a promising young scientist at Rice and Stanford to a driven researcher establishing a laboratory in China that secretly worked to make heritable genome editing a reality.<\/p>\n

He\u2019s experiment involved using the CRISPR-Cas9 technique<\/a>. Sometimes compared to \u201cmolecular scissors,\u201d this precision tool allows scientists to make very specific edits to DNA in living cells. He used CRISPR to alter the CCR5 gene in human embryos with the goal of conferring immunity to HIV. These embryos were brought to term, resulting in the birth of at least three children with altered DNA<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The revelation of the births of the first gene-edited babies in November 2018 resulted in an international uproar. A laundry list<\/a> of ethical failings in He\u2019s experiment quickly became evident<\/a>. There was insufficient proof that editing embryos with CRISPR was safe enough to be done in humans. Appropriate regulatory approval had not been obtained<\/a>. The parents\u2019 consent was grossly inadequate<\/a>. And the whole endeavor was shrouded in secrecy<\/a>.<\/p>\n