When a Chinese scientist revealed last November that he helped bring out “gene edited” babies, many in the international scientific community sounded a note of caution on the ethical lines being crossed. Last week, reports quoted Chinese authorities saying the “gene edited babies” experiment was illegal. In the same week, though, the ethical line was crossed again as Chinese scientists used the gene-editing technology, this time, to clone five monkeys with disorders linked to sleep, depression and Alzheimer’s. The intention being to do more of the same to study human brain disorders. This development is being seen as “wrong in science” for various reasons, including the use of ‘gene manipulation’ in the vulnerable with little mention of the trauma that the subject, the animal in this case, will undergo.

At a time when science, research and international regulatory laws are increasingly becoming sensitive and looking to technology, simulations, etc., towards decreasing the use of animals in research, the “insomaniac” monkeys are a regressive step. Especially so as lawyers in different parts of the world fight for the rights of animals as sentient beings that are conscious and feel pain, emotions. This is not to say scientific research should not be undertaken. But the research community too is pushing for “progressive science” that brings out good medicine and therapies — not medicine developed from many tortured animals that eventually fail in humans as well. The new technology that helps tinker with the gene and edit out hereditary problem-areas has to be validated in limited laboratory settings before being exposed to public.

The implications of gene-edited changes need to be studied in not just consenting humans but on the surrounding ecosystem as well, to prevent creating an unknown danger in trying to tackle a known one. International regulators should develop strong laws on the use of such technology in health and agriculture, possibly even hold its owner culpable, to ensure the technology is used for progressive research and not in “Frankenstein” science.

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW