Researchers Seek Ways to Minimize Off-Target Effects
Literature Review: Dials for Cas9
Methods to Control Cas9-Based Technologies Across Numerous Dimensions Is Still Lacking
Opening Up Relieves Downstream Bottlenecks
Celebrate the Downstream Improvements That Have Been Achieved, Even If They Fail to Match Upstream Improvements
Top 10 European Biopharma Clusters
The Continent’s Key Academic and Industrial Centers for Drug Development
Bioethics of GM Humans
The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine recently published two opposing viewpoints on the ethics of using gene-editing technology human embryos. One article, written by an actress who has a rare form of dwarfism, maintains that gene editing does not represent a benefit to healthcare. The other, written by an Oxford research fellow, makes the case that while gene editing is not without controversy it should be developed.
The first author makes the point that social inequality would increase between those who were and were not genetically modified. While the second author makes the distinction that gene editing embryos is about modifying life where it already existed versus artificial selection which chooses which embryo is allowed to continue developing.