8 ms·

CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

76 points by jbsimpson 8y ago

porpoisely 8y ago
I've read that He self-funded the project. Anyone know if he comes from wealth or how he got the funds to run a team of scientists? Also, it's interesting that he was a trained physicist who turned to gene modification experiments. Is CRISPR and gene editing the popular draw in academia and research? I've always assumed academics mainly stayed in their lane, so to speak. As for the ethics, if gene editing research is inevitable and/or simple as claimed, then perhaps it should be carried out in public universities so as to prevent glory seeking people from causing unnecessary harm. Also, perhaps anyone who carries out gene editing should be held financially liable and even criminally liable for any damage to individuals. If CRISPR and gene editing lives up to its hype, it feels like we are on the cusp of a brave new world.
- radicaldreamer 8y ago
  A lot of private donors or individuals act as patrons for labs and even individual scientists or artists. Don’t see why a leading scientist in the field would have trouble attracting this funding.
- daveFNbuck 8y ago
  Gene editing research is being carried out in public universities. It's not yet at the point where edited human embryos are carried to term.
cheeze 8y ago
Does anybody really believe that China is upholding strong ethical standards here? Sure the uni dumped this guy, but I'd assume there is a large project that the government is at minimum aware of to edit genes.
- xiphias2 8y ago
  There are of course worse projects. He was just unlucky that the government made an example of him. Still, probably people in Chinese healthcare research will be more careful from now on probably.
- songco 8y ago
  Maybe many countries have similar secret projects.... but obviously public projects are not allowed.
- echevil 8y ago
  It doesn't really need strong ethical standards here. This scientist received almost universal criticism in China.
jostmey 8y ago
Direct gene editing was invented about 45 years ago. I am surprised, even shocked, that no one tried this until now. CRISPR has certainly made it easier to do, but other techniques have existed since the 70s. He Jiankui is being vilified now, but I wonder how history will remember him (if at all)
- radicaldreamer 8y ago
  It has certainly been tried before, but in secret or without publicity. He Jiankui is being fired for publicly announcing his experiment and the subsequent backlash (mostly deserved) from his peers.
- api 8y ago
  I am not at all opposed to the idea of gene editing, but I wonder if the issue here isn't that he didn't have proper medical authorization to do this. Most countries have laws against cowboy medicine for a reason.
  - jostmey 8y ago
    If you seek medical authorization, you will find that no one will approve it
    - kingkawn 8y ago
      Because it will most likely lead to inhumane atrocities that would turn the general public against the technology for a generation
      - CamperBob2 8y ago
        We'd never have developed vaccines with that attitude, though. The Precautionary Principle sounds great in theory, but it's a recipe for permanent stasis.
        api 8y ago
aasasd 8y ago
Atrocious! Babies' interest in science should be supported, not squashed.
- wavefunction 8y ago
  Babies have the same interest in science as the rest of us, to be squashed or supported as required by various groups and institutions or human aspirations as might exist.
- colordrops 8y ago
  I normally prefer humor to stay on Reddit, but nice one.
foo101 8y ago
> The investigation also found that He’s experiment ran counter to national regulations forbidding people with HIV from using assisted reproduction — an allegation reported for the first time in the Xinhua article. What is the rationale behind this regulation? Is it that the baby is likely to be infected with HIV or is there some other reason?
- stupidprizes 8y ago
  >What is the rationale behind this regulation? Unknown to me >Is it that the baby is likely to be infected with HIV or is there some other reason? With modern medicine the baby can survive birth without getting infected.
- jrumbut 8y ago
  I have no idea what their actual rationale is, but many STIs including HIV can be passed from mother to newborn. With an intensive treatment regimen the risk can be made very low: https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/understanding-hiv-aids/fact-sheets/20/50/preventing-mother-to-child-transmission-of-hiv https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/understanding-hiv-aids/fact-sheets/...
- rqs 8y ago
  Well, if you want to dig more, I've found one regulation[0](technical standard rather) mentioning something maybe related. It says, I quote: > 2、禁忌症 > （1）有如下情况之一者，不得实施体外受精-胚胎移植及其衍技术 > ① 男女任何一方患有严重的精神疾患、泌尿生殖系统急性感染、性传播疾病； > ② 患有《母婴保健法[1]》规定的不宜生育的、目前无法进行胚胎植入前遗传学诊断的遗传性疾病； > ... Translated to English and overly sum up: IVF-ET is forbidden if: 1, The donor or the receptor is currently carrying STD (Or genitourinary infection, or severe mental illness); 2, The patient not recommended to be pregnant according to the 《母婴保健法[1]》(Mother and child health-care law); 3, The patient is suffering from hereditary diseases that cannot be diagnosed with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. The rationale that you are curious about is still unknown here, but I do think this document and the law mentioned can be a good start if you want to figure it out. Sadly though, this field is far out of my range of knowledge, I can't even translate most of them for you (And That page on npc.gov.cn is still loading after 5 mins of waiting). [0] http://www.moh.gov.cn/open/uploadfile/2005112816435508.doc http://www.moh.gov.cn/open/uploadfile/2005112816435508.doc (人类辅助生殖技术规范) [1] http://www.npc.gov.cn/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_5004627.htm http://www.npc.gov.cn/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_500462... (母婴保健法)
state_less 8y ago
I feel like this turns babies into technology. We might have version 1 where babies aren't likely to get HIV or some other malady. Next round, perhaps we'll see more height, different skin color, increased intelligence. If it's like any other product, it appears babies would be coming out of a factory and with tiers for different features you can buy based on your purchasing power. Sort of like buying an iPhone except with babies. Commercializing children doesn't seem right, but then should the technology be held back and children be damned to suffer for the sake of keeping the status quo? Is there a just way to deal with this?
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  The worst part is that by the time they were in Kindergarten, the newer models would obsolete them. Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter! Now 10% off!
  - CBLT 8y ago
    I think that a newer generation having advantages over a previous one doesn't mean any improvement of our stature is forbidden.
    - xrjrj 8y ago
      Yes, if the time scales of the updates were spaced across generations. But I guess commercial availability of such technology would mean much shorter time scales leading to very bad consequences for the aging population. Eventually, perhaps leading events like one generation deciding to stop manufacturing babies. Could lead to scary consequences if not thought through...
  - songco 8y ago
    It's ok and good thing if the results is only positive like "Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter". (Maybe not include Bigger?) The worst part of this is that it may not safe. If this introduced some flaws in the babies gene, how to control this, don't allow them have babies?
AlphaWeaver 8y ago
I know this is the current title of the article, but would it possible to entitled the article "He Jiankui (CRISPR-baby scientist) fired by university"? While I'll refrain from commenting on his work, he is a real person and has a name...
rfreiberger 8y ago
Given the age of the babies and CRISPR technology, how long before we find a rush of Olympic records suddenly broken by surprise athletes?
- anonytrary 8y ago
  You mean, how long until the olympic records stop being important to society? There are many things that were made obsolete by technology. Exerting human strength for sport may be made obsolete, and that wouldn't be a bad thing.
sam0x17 8y ago
translation: the experiment didn't work so China is disavowing him. This would have played out differently if he had succeeded I would be willing to bet.
drvortex 8y ago
And yet, most people do not care. The elephant in the room is, did the gene editing work? If yes, are those babies protected from HIV? If yes...the world is not the same anymore.
SudoEpoch 8y ago
I really thought China would take a lesser stance on this publically. This ordeal is surprising in a sense that they are going to have a real health crisis in the next 25 years along with population issue.

76 points by jbsimpson 8y ago

I've read that He self-funded the project. Anyone know if he comes from wealth or how he got the funds to run a team of scientists? Also, it's interesting that he was a trained physicist who turned to gene modification experiments. Is CRISPR and gene editing the popular draw in academia and research? I've always assumed academics mainly stayed in their lane, so to speak. As for the ethics, if gene editing research is inevitable and/or simple as claimed, then perhaps it should be carried out in public universities so as to prevent glory seeking people from causing unnecessary harm. Also, perhaps anyone who carries out gene editing should be held financially liable and even criminally liable for any damage to individuals. If CRISPR and gene editing lives up to its hype, it feels like we are on the cusp of a brave new world.

radicaldreamer 8y ago
A lot of private donors or individuals act as patrons for labs and even individual scientists or artists. Don’t see why a leading scientist in the field would have trouble attracting this funding.
daveFNbuck 8y ago
Gene editing research is being carried out in public universities. It's not yet at the point where edited human embryos are carried to term.

cheeze 8y ago

Does anybody really believe that China is upholding strong ethical standards here? Sure the uni dumped this guy, but I'd assume there is a large project that the government is at minimum aware of to edit genes.

xiphias2 8y ago
There are of course worse projects. He was just unlucky that the government made an example of him. Still, probably people in Chinese healthcare research will be more careful from now on probably.
songco 8y ago
Maybe many countries have similar secret projects.... but obviously public projects are not allowed.
echevil 8y ago
It doesn't really need strong ethical standards here. This scientist received almost universal criticism in China.

jostmey 8y ago

Direct gene editing was invented about 45 years ago. I am surprised, even shocked, that no one tried this until now. CRISPR has certainly made it easier to do, but other techniques have existed since the 70s. He Jiankui is being vilified now, but I wonder how history will remember him (if at all)

radicaldreamer 8y ago
It has certainly been tried before, but in secret or without publicity. He Jiankui is being fired for publicly announcing his experiment and the subsequent backlash (mostly deserved) from his peers.
api 8y ago
I am not at all opposed to the idea of gene editing, but I wonder if the issue here isn't that he didn't have proper medical authorization to do this. Most countries have laws against cowboy medicine for a reason.
- jostmey 8y ago
  If you seek medical authorization, you will find that no one will approve it
  - kingkawn 8y ago
    Because it will most likely lead to inhumane atrocities that would turn the general public against the technology for a generation
    - CamperBob2 8y ago
      We'd never have developed vaccines with that attitude, though. The Precautionary Principle sounds great in theory, but it's a recipe for permanent stasis.
      - api 8y ago

aasasd 8y ago

Atrocious! Babies' interest in science should be supported, not squashed.

wavefunction 8y ago
Babies have the same interest in science as the rest of us, to be squashed or supported as required by various groups and institutions or human aspirations as might exist.
colordrops 8y ago
I normally prefer humor to stay on Reddit, but nice one.

foo101 8y ago

> The investigation also found that He’s experiment ran counter to national regulations forbidding people with HIV from using assisted reproduction — an allegation reported for the first time in the Xinhua article. What is the rationale behind this regulation? Is it that the baby is likely to be infected with HIV or is there some other reason?

stupidprizes 8y ago
>What is the rationale behind this regulation? Unknown to me >Is it that the baby is likely to be infected with HIV or is there some other reason? With modern medicine the baby can survive birth without getting infected.
jrumbut 8y ago
I have no idea what their actual rationale is, but many STIs including HIV can be passed from mother to newborn. With an intensive treatment regimen the risk can be made very low: https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/understanding-hiv-aids/fact-sheets/20/50/preventing-mother-to-child-transmission-of-hiv https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/understanding-hiv-aids/fact-sheets/...
rqs 8y ago
Well, if you want to dig more, I've found one regulation[0](technical standard rather) mentioning something maybe related. It says, I quote: > 2、禁忌症 > （1）有如下情况之一者，不得实施体外受精-胚胎移植及其衍技术 > ① 男女任何一方患有严重的精神疾患、泌尿生殖系统急性感染、性传播疾病； > ② 患有《母婴保健法[1]》规定的不宜生育的、目前无法进行胚胎植入前遗传学诊断的遗传性疾病； > ... Translated to English and overly sum up: IVF-ET is forbidden if: 1, The donor or the receptor is currently carrying STD (Or genitourinary infection, or severe mental illness); 2, The patient not recommended to be pregnant according to the 《母婴保健法[1]》(Mother and child health-care law); 3, The patient is suffering from hereditary diseases that cannot be diagnosed with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. The rationale that you are curious about is still unknown here, but I do think this document and the law mentioned can be a good start if you want to figure it out. Sadly though, this field is far out of my range of knowledge, I can't even translate most of them for you (And That page on npc.gov.cn is still loading after 5 mins of waiting). [0] http://www.moh.gov.cn/open/uploadfile/2005112816435508.doc http://www.moh.gov.cn/open/uploadfile/2005112816435508.doc (人类辅助生殖技术规范) [1] http://www.npc.gov.cn/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_5004627.htm http://www.npc.gov.cn/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_500462... (母婴保健法)

state_less 8y ago

I feel like this turns babies into technology. We might have version 1 where babies aren't likely to get HIV or some other malady. Next round, perhaps we'll see more height, different skin color, increased intelligence. If it's like any other product, it appears babies would be coming out of a factory and with tiers for different features you can buy based on your purchasing power. Sort of like buying an iPhone except with babies. Commercializing children doesn't seem right, but then should the technology be held back and children be damned to suffer for the sake of keeping the status quo? Is there a just way to deal with this?

bilbo0s 8y ago
The worst part is that by the time they were in Kindergarten, the newer models would obsolete them. Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter! Now 10% off!
- CBLT 8y ago
  I think that a newer generation having advantages over a previous one doesn't mean any improvement of our stature is forbidden.
  - xrjrj 8y ago
    Yes, if the time scales of the updates were spaced across generations. But I guess commercial availability of such technology would mean much shorter time scales leading to very bad consequences for the aging population. Eventually, perhaps leading events like one generation deciding to stop manufacturing babies. Could lead to scary consequences if not thought through...
- songco 8y ago
  It's ok and good thing if the results is only positive like "Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter". (Maybe not include Bigger?) The worst part of this is that it may not safe. If this introduced some flaws in the babies gene, how to control this, don't allow them have babies?

AlphaWeaver 8y ago

I know this is the current title of the article, but would it possible to entitled the article "He Jiankui (CRISPR-baby scientist) fired by university"? While I'll refrain from commenting on his work, he is a real person and has a name...

rfreiberger 8y ago

Given the age of the babies and CRISPR technology, how long before we find a rush of Olympic records suddenly broken by surprise athletes?

anonytrary 8y ago
You mean, how long until the olympic records stop being important to society? There are many things that were made obsolete by technology. Exerting human strength for sport may be made obsolete, and that wouldn't be a bad thing.

sam0x17 8y ago

translation: the experiment didn't work so China is disavowing him. This would have played out differently if he had succeeded I would be willing to bet.

drvortex 8y ago

And yet, most people do not care. The elephant in the room is, did the gene editing work? If yes, are those babies protected from HIV? If yes...the world is not the same anymore.

SudoEpoch 8y ago

I really thought China would take a lesser stance on this publically. This ordeal is surprising in a sense that they are going to have a real health crisis in the next 25 years along with population issue.