THE first IVF baby, Louise Brown, was born in 1978. But before she was even born, more than 5000 couples had applied to undergo the procedure. Forty years on, around 8 million children have been conceived using IVF.
Can we expect a similar opening of the floodgates for gene editing, following He Jiankui鈥檚 announcement of the birth of the first two babies to have been gene edited as embryos?
Advertisement
Certainly not right away. Gene editing of embryos has the potential to affect many generations. Such 鈥済ermline鈥� genome editing is illegal in many countries. Just about every expert worldwide to use the CRISPR gene-editing technique used in this trial to create edited children.
鈥淭he field is going to have a massive backlash,鈥� says Gaetan Burgio of the Australian National University. The question is, just how bad will it be?
Opinion falls into two camps. Some would like to see germline gene editing banned. But there are plenty of researchers who support the idea of using it to prevent disease when the safety of such techniques has been established.
鈥淛ust because the first steps into a new technology are missteps, that doesn鈥檛 mean we shouldn鈥檛 step back and think of a plausible pathway for clinical translation,鈥� George Daley of Harvard Medical School told last week鈥檚 gene-editing summit in Hong Kong.
Those who have been campaigning against germline gene editing have responded to the scandal with a push for tougher regulation. Around 100 people, including some scientists, signed to ban all 鈥渞eproductive experiments with human genetic engineering鈥�.
Research involving modifying human embryos with CRISPR is already being done in several countries, including China, the US and the UK. Getting permission and funding for such work, which can help determine the safety of the technique, could now become harder.
Such research is just the first step. 鈥淓ven if the safety issues are resolved, [public] acceptability will vary from country to country,鈥� Alta Charo, of the University of Wisconsin, told the summit.
鈥淥nly time will tell whether the scandal will put a dent in public support for germline gene editing鈥�
Before He鈥檚 announcement, that support did exist in several countries. One survey found that more than half of the Chinese public supported using germline gene editing to treat diseases, including preventing HIV.
Only time will tell whether the scandal will put a dent in this support. Much may depend on the twins. Will we ever get to see them? Will they grow up to be healthy?
Back in 1978, the sight of baby Louise helped to win over many of those who were opposed to IVF. But most of all, there was a compelling reason for would-be parents to try IVF despite the unknown risks: it was their only chance of having a child.
By contrast, few would-be parents will be desperate for gene editing. So while it is possible some rogue teams might try to create more edited babies, we are unlikely to see widespread adoption of the practice.
Far from opening the gates to more gene-edited children, He鈥檚 experiment could instead delay the arrival of more rigorous trials of the technique.
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淐an we expect many more CRISPR babies to come?鈥�
