Support NeoGAF

[DOWN]

Being called "the biggest biotech discovery of the century," a team of Chinese scientists made attempts to modify a gene in a non-viable embryo that would have caused a deadly blood disorder. They were able to introduce preferred viable DNA into a fraction of the embryos being tested and there were a number of "off-target" mutations, meaning there are major issues still with accuracy. This stopped them from continuing because they need to be closer to 100% accurate to make continued testing more possible, especially in a medical context.

Other scientists have called for a moratorium on the practice until it is further understood. While it may have the potential to eliminate numerous diseases someday, it also causes fears about "designer humans."

It's very likely that these studies will continue soon.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/chinese-scientists-just-admitted-tweaking-205300657.html

The genome-editing enzyme known as CAS9 at work on a strand of DNA.A group of Chinese scientists just reported that they modified the genome of human embryos, something that has never been done in the history of the world, according to a report in Nature News.

A recent biotech discovery — one that has been called the biggest biotech discovery of the century — showed how scientists might be able to modify a human genome when that genome was still just in an embryo.

This could change not only the genetic material of a person, but could also change the DNA they pass on, removing "bad" genetic codes (and potentially adding "good" ones) and taking an active hand in evolution.

Concerned scientists published an argument that no one should edit the human genome in this way until we better understood the consequences after a report uncovered rumors that Chinese scientists were already working on using this technology.

But this new paper, published April 18 in the journal Protein and Cell by a Chinese group led by gene-function researcher Junjiu Huang of Sun Yat-sen University, shows that work has already been done, and Nature News spoke to a Chinese source that said at least four different groups are "pursuing gene editing in human embryos."

Specifically, the team tried to modify a gene in a non-viable embryo that would have been responsible for a deadly blood disorder. But they noted in the study that they encountered serious challenges, suggesting there are still significant hurdles before clinical use becomes a reality.

Huang's group successfully introduced the DNA they wanted in only "a fraction" of the 28 embryos that had been "successfully spliced" (they tried 86 embryos at the start and tested 54 of the 71 that survived the procedure). They also found a "surprising number of ‘off-target’ mutations," according to Nature News.

Huang told Nature News that they stopped then because they knew that if they were do this work medically, that success rate would need to be closer to 100%.

New York Times article
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/h...s-of-human-embryos-raising-concerns.html?_r=0

The experiment with human embryos was dreaded, yet widely anticipated. Scientists somewhere, researchers said, were trying to edit genes with a technique that would permanently alter the DNA of every cell so that any changes would be passed on from generation to generation.

Those concerns drove leading researchers to issue urgent calls in major scientific journals last month to halt such work on human embryos, at least until it could be proved safe and until society decided if it was ethical.

Now, scientists in China report that they tried it.

The experiment failed, in precisely the ways that had been feared.

Jennifer A. Doudna, an inventor of a new genome-editing technique, in her office at the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Doudna is the lead author of an article calling for a worldwide moratorium on the use of the new method, to give scientists, ethicists and the public time to fully understand the issues surrounding the breakthrough.

The Chinese researchers did not plan to produce a baby — they used defective human embryos — but did hope to end up with an embryo with a precisely altered gene in every cell but no other inadvertent DNA damage. None of the 85 human embryos they injected fulfilled those criteria. In almost every case, either the embryo died or the gene was not altered. Even the four embryos in which the targeted gene was edited had problems. Some of the embryo cells overrode the editing, resulting in embryos that were genetic mosaics. And speckled over their DNA was a sort of collateral damage – DNA mutations caused by the editing attempt.

Issue moratorium if old.

 

[Charles Foster Kane]

Intriguing stuff. Even if they didn't succeed

 

[Nyoro SF]

As suspected, altering genes is not flipping a switch...

 

[DirtyManos]

Unbelievable they would go through with it given how taboo the subject seems to be? Or at least publish it...

 

[CadetMahoney]

"edit" sounds like a character designer in a game.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I just had a job interview at a company that's using a CRISPR-like technology. The applications are nearly limitless, and obviously, so are the ethical concerns.

The company I interviewed at is using gene editing to potentially cure HIV, among other disorders.

As suspected, altering genes is not flipping a switch...

The biggest flaw of this kind of technology is that DNA sequencing is still very expensive. So if you design an RNA molecule against a specific DNA sequence of interest and then cut it out, you basically have to sequence the entire genome to ensure you 100% did not get any off-site effects. It's a daunting but necessary precaution before it's ever ready for clinical use.

 

[Air]

As suspected, altering genes is not flipping a switch...

Exactly.

 

[LyleLanley]

I want to be a designer human.

 

[geomon]

It's happening

 

[Air]

I also think this is good- at least in the aspect of designer babies. It sounds like the information in DNA is so intertwined there's a lot that could go wrong in selectively editing something out- as opposed to looking at a set of fetus' and discarding the ones you don't want. Itll be interesting to see where this goes in the future.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I'm all aboard this train.

 

[metalslimer]

This is pretty cool, despite the ethical concerns. The technology is still decades from being viable anyway

 

[Epsilon-delta]

I'm all aboard this train.

Same here.

 

[Sectorseven]

Super Baby Method?

 

[Seventy70]

I'm hoping this doesn't take off in our lifetime. This would probably lead to different classes of human bred specifically for one job. Like a stupid working class or soldiers with no emotions. If anyone would do that, it would be the Chinese.

 

[CrocMother]

It's happening

This is the first thing I thought of too

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

This is pretty cool, despite the ethical concerns. The technology is still decades from being viable anyway

Eh, not really. Especially not with the money being thrown at it currently. Before the end of the decade realistically.

 

[Africanus]

I feel society must halt in attempting to stop these advancements for some far off fear of "designer babies" when the results regarding diseases can benefit everyone in the immediate twenty years.

Even considering designer babies, no region of the world is the same, standards of beauty can and do change drastically, and beauty is subjective in its base form. Combining that with the fact that a child's appearance also greatly depends on factors mostly outside of a person's control such as environment, response to certain foods, accidents in life, and it all leads me to be very skeptical of some "Aryan-race" of babies drivel.

I'll take beautiful, perfect children over the diseases we have today.

 

[ilium]

That's the beginning of Kojima's viral marketing campaign for Metal Gear Solid 6, isn't it?!

 

[vpance]

No bald people means the end of wars.

 

[Snaku]

No bald people means the end of wars.

And porn star dicks.

 

[pants]

And porn star dicks.

Give everyone on earth a porn star dick, except me, give me a normal dick.

Guess who's got the special dick then partner!

 

[kess]

I wonder how fast they'll find the "gay" gene.

 

[danwarb]

To eliminate desease, sure, but natural variety trumps design for always.

 

[Nekofrog]

if they ever figure this out the human race is going to turn into a 100% smoking hot species

then our standards of beauty will go up even more

and it will be a never ending cycle of prettier eyes, more flaxen hair, bigger boobs, longer dongs

WHATAFUTURE

 

[a Master Ninja]

I feel like I took the wrong lessons from this movie. Where others saw a cautionary tale featuring the triumph of the human spirit, it was kinda selling me on genetically engineered humans.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Designer babies first then mature adults shortly after.

*joins queue and raises hand to be upgraded

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

if they ever figure this out the human race is going to turn into a 100% smoking hot species

then our standards of beauty will go up even more

and it will be a never ending cycle of prettier eyes, more flaxen hair, bigger boobs, longer dongs

WHATAFUTURE

Scars and minor imperfections will become fashionable in a world where everyone looks like a movie star. Even today some people get modelling gigs based on looking in some way unique or distinctive, rather than conforming perfectly to one of the "standard looks" for attractive people. Exceptional beauty is about standing out, not just about having golden mean ratios on your face or something like that.

 

[Kenshin001]

If it can eliminate a lot of genetic diseases I say go for it. Why scientists would want a moratorium on the research is baffling to me.

 

[Chairman Yang]

China's been making a big push in these areas for a while now, free of the political and religious concerns that hamper American research. I'm excited to see this progress.

 

[Kenshin001]

if they ever figure this out the human race is going to turn into a 100% smoking hot species

then our standards of beauty will go up even more

and it will be a never ending cycle of prettier eyes, more flaxen hair, bigger boobs, longer dongs

WHATAFUTURE

It'll cost money and the vast majority of the population won't be able to afford the procedure. It'll be no different than those who can afford cosmetic surgery, boob jobs and penile enhancements.

 

[Replicant]

As someone who's been disadvantaged by my gene makeup, I'm all for this.

 

[Nekofrog]

It'll cost money and the vast majority of the population won't be able to afford the procedure. It'll be no different than those who can afford cosmetic surgery, boob jobs and penile enhancements.

they will work more hours to afford it

 

[Mimosa97]

Chinese scientists don't give a fuck.

I'm just surprised that they published their results so early.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

China's been making a big push in these areas for a while now, free of the political and religious concerns that hamper American research. I'm excited to see this progress.

 

[SuperEpicGuy]

Hope this gets good by the time I have a kid but that probably won't be the case. Still, I wouldn't mind having a 6'2 genius hunk of a son or a top 0.1% looks genius model daughter with both of them having the best genes against cancer/any other diseases.

 

[Aylinato]

China's been making a big push in these areas for a while now, free of the political and religious concerns that hamper American research. I'm excited to see this progress.

I believe you mean the word Ethics.

 

[Noobcraft]

Eh, not really. Especially not with the money being thrown at it currently. Before the end of the decade realistically.

Ehhhh... Alternative gene splicing could easily be messed up by altering genes containing the consensus sequences utilized during intron splicing/alternative splicing. I think it will be a while before we get everything sorted. CRISPR is cool though, and definitely has immense potential for preventing viral infections.

 

[Mailenstein]

Wow, crazy.. but somehow interesting.

First thing I thought of was Josef Mengele and Gattaca D: ...

 

[Eighty Deuce]

I wonder how fast they'll find the "gay" gene.

I hear Doctor Venture is pretty close

 

[Cow Mengde]

I believe you mean the word Ethics.

It's a non-viable embryo. I see no ethical concern with this.

 

[jerry1594]

Rich people: more beautiful, smarter, stronger and more lightskinned than ever before.
Everyone else: can eat shit and are classed as an inferior species after rich people agree to all get three nuts.
Can't wait for the designer gene utopia.

 

[Noobcraft]

Rich people: more beautiful, smarter, stronger and more lightskinned than ever before.
Everyone else: can eat shit and are classed as an inferior species after rich people agree to all get three nuts.
Can't wait for the designer gene utopia.

This experiment (fortunately) proved that we are nowhere close to that lol. 85 embryos and none of them were successfully altered into viable embryos. The trick is altering the DNA reliably in enough cells (every non-germline cell in the body has a full copy of the human genome) to make the alteration permanent, but as proven here there are too many variables for it to happen reliably. Edit the wrong gene/region and you kill/mutate the cell. Edit not enough cells and you get a sort of mosaic (some cells work as intended, others don't). Despite having the same genes in every cell of your body (eye cells, skin cells, liver cells, etc) different cells synthesize different proteins from the same genes. If you alter one of those genes incorrectly, you can run into a mind blowing amount of unintended results. It's one huge puzzle.

As an aside though, using genetic material from 3 parents to remove mitochondrial diseases from offspring is very cool, and way easier than what these researchers tried.

 

[Blizzard]

A number of "off-target" mutations makes me think of some sort of Half-Life scientist description.

"I'm showing a small discrepancy in...well, no, it's well within acceptable bounds again." *continues experiment*

 

[subrock]

There will be a time in the near future when we look back and wonder why we ever thought this was taboo. Imagine the heights we can reach if we are able to improve each successive generation.

 

[Alchemy]

My only issue about designer babies is the economic factor and availability of this for the general population. Otherwise this is great, I have plenty of genetic problems I'd love to have been fixed before even being born.

 

[dluu13]

The headline I saw today for this news was that China "admitted" to editing human embryo genes as if it was a bad thing. Don't remember which news outlet it was. All I thought was "cool". This gene stuff is pretty sensitive, but somebody's gotta do it eventually.

 

[Aylinato]

It's a non-viable embryo. I see no ethical concern with this.

So there's no ethical results due to this research? Yeah..lol okay, sure buddy.

 

[MMarston]

Just a few more years until I get my Cyber-Newtype Solid Snake played by Ethan Hawke.

 

[DOWN]

I'm all aboard this train.

I'm pretty fine with it too. Non-viable embryos seem like a logical place to start and I'm sure since they've published, there will be guidelines developed before this resumes.

I wonder how fast they'll find the "gay" gene.

Not a gene, so that'll be different research