In March, a rumor surfaced in the scientific community that was intriguing, and perhaps a bit chilling: According to those in the know, researchers in China had successfully edited the genomes of human embryos, altering their DNA in a way never accomplished in our own species. MIT Technology Review reported on the murmurings that someone had altered the germ line -- the genetic information that come together and form something new when eggs and sperm collide. Even unconfirmed, those rumors led to a lot of debate about the potential downsides of altering the germ line. Carl Zimmer has more on the controversy at his blog on National Geographic.

But it turns out the rumors are true.

On Wednesday, Nature News reported that the paper in question had been quietly published in a low-profile journal called Protein & Cell.

But no, you can't expect to see any genetically altered humans running around in the coming months, for better or for worse. From MIT Technology Review:

The team did not try to establish a pregnancy and say for ethical reasons they did their tests only in embryos that were abnormal.

“These authors did a very good job pointing out the challenges,” says Dieter Egli, a researcher at the New York Stem Cell Foundation in Manhattan. “They say themselves this type of technology is not ready for any kind of application.”

[img]https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_908w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2014/09/12/Production/Health/Images/bigstock-Laboratory-Fertilization-Of-Eg-51452554.jpg&w=1484[/img]

The work, led by Junjiu Huang of Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, focused on modifying the gene responsible for β-thalassaemia, a blood disorder that can be fatal. They used CRISPR, a cutting-edge gene editing tool that's already made serious waves in the genome editing of other species. By going after genes at the earliest stage of human development -- in a single-celled embryo -- theoretically one can make sure all the subsequent copies of the gene are the superior version.

But we have a long way to go before that's actually the case. From Nature News:

The team injected 86 embryos and then waited 48 hours, enough time for the CRISPR/Cas9 system and the molecules that replace the missing DNA to act — and for the embryos to grow to about eight cells each. Of the 71 embryos that survived, 54 were genetically tested. This revealed that just 28 were successfully spliced, and that only a fraction of those contained the replacement genetic material. “If you want to do it in normal embryos, you need to be close to 100%,” Huang says. “That’s why we stopped. We still think it’s too immature.”

Indeed, not all of the embryos that successfully received the new gene had it throughout all of their cells. Many were mosaics, with some good copies of the gene and some bad ones. Carl Zimmer points out that this could end really badly: If a doctor tested the potential embryos of a couple looking to edit out a deadly gene mutation, they might take a cell sample that showed the embryo as having the healthy gene. If it was a mosaic, the resulting baby might in fact have enough copies of the bad gene to cause problems.

And in some of the embryos, the gene editing caused unintended mutations in other genes.

"I believe this is the first report of CRISPR/Cas9 applied to human pre-implantation embryos and as such the study is a landmark, as well as a cautionary tale," George Daley, a stem-cell biologist at Harvard Medical School, told Nature. "Their study should be a stern warning to any practitioner who thinks the technology is ready for testing to eradicate disease genes."

So it's an exciting first step, but nothing more. Science has a long way to go before this is something we can do on embryos intended for implantation, and some are already trying to discourage researchers from taking the next steps toward that goal. Even the study authors themselves are incredibly cautious about their findings, firmly reporting that the technique is far from ready.

But you can be sure that such a caveat won't stop a lot of hoopla about the pros and cons of "designer babies."

Source

andico34:
China Again?

yes China.....i strongly believe believe the chinese will lead the way in this gene editing research and sectors because the chinese work like mad!
A top notch american professor will have about 500 research publicatrions to his name but a top notch chinese professor in the US will have about 4000!

CRISPR/CAS9 enzyme system developed in 2012 is far better than ZFNs and TALENs for gene editing....the problem lies with the fact human embryos or IPSCs or even EPSCs do not readily take up this modified DNA segments (and thus are less successful) when compared to murine models...thus the high failure rate. Till we get to the stage whereby we can overcome this challenge....gene editing on stem cells ex vivo remains the best bet

xdos:
no be small designer babies..
I hope this will not end up turning to what the world will regret cos at the end of the day, they may end up creating zombies.. (maybe I have been seeing too much of zombie movies).
On a serious note, this is more like tampering with human life and am not sure we want 'made in China' babies

Feraz:
No doubt about the fact that the Chinese work very hard.

I will not deny that I do not understand this. . .

While this its good side, there are also draw backs. . . Imagine creating super soldiers with this. . .

xdos:
I think you've been seeing a lot of sci-fi movies..

Feraz:
Brother, we no dey know finish oh . . . No be for this world person dey attempt head transplant?

xdos:
head transplant kwa? Hahahahahahaha abeg for which country

andico34:


I will not deny that I do not understand this. . .

hmmm...ok let me try and break this down......ZFNs and TALENs are enzymes that are used for cutting DNA and were employed extensively in the 1990s and early 2000s but they have a major draw back.....they do not cut DNA at precise points.....and this could lead to development of abnormalities like cancer.....CRISPR/CAS 9 enzyme system cuts DNA at precise points and thus it is a far better technology. when we say murine models it means research work that has been conducted on mice. In mice research, a single stem cell can readily take up one or two copies of Corrected DNA segments (or genes) and thus the high success rates noted here.....but in human embryos or stem cells....the ability to take may be 1/100 of this and thus the higher failure rates.... for now....but the technology is improving and we can get there in less than 5 years...and the chinese will probably spearhead this breakthrough (i believe those working in the USA have a better chance)

Feraz:
Ok. . .makes sense!

Do you see the world ready to accept such feat?

Blakjewelry:

When the time is right the world will. I believe one day with gene editing we will able to improve our sight like that of Eagle, see via infra ray and maybe get echo location like dolphins, I mean that will be cooooool

Feraz:
LOL!!! You highlighted the pros. . .what of the cons?

Feraz:
Ok. . .makes sense!

Do you see the world ready to accept such feat?

andico34:


well....first of all there are ethical considerations and the whole program needs to be tightly regulated....the first world is ready and africa will come around with time

the scientific world is certainly ready and extensive work is already ongoing with Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (ICs) and Human Embryos in certain research centers

Here in Africa we are pioneering research work on the use of Human Erythroid Progenitor Stem Cells (EPSCs) and K562 and JK 1 cell lines to bring about amelioration to millions of sufferers with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD)

Feraz:
Which of the countries here in Africa?

andico34:


Nigeria...our research group

andico34:
and this

http://www.genengnews.com/gen-articles/a-crispr-look-at-genome-editing/5475/

Blakjewelry:

What are the cons though I know it is still faraway but once we can perfect the process except you wan to let me on what I did not consider before

xdos:
I think you've been seeing a lot of sci-fi movies..