The current debate and policy surrounding the use of genome editing in humans typically relies on a binary distinction between therapy and human enhancement. Here, we argue that this dichotomy fails to take into account perhaps the most significant potential uses of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in humans. We argue that genetic treatment of sporadic Alzheimer's disease, breast and ovarian cancer predisposing mutations, and the introduction of human immunodeficiency virus resistance in humans should be considered within a new category of genetic protection treatments. We suggest that if this category is not introduced, life-altering research might be unnecessarily limited by current or future policy. Otherwise decisions might be made, which introduce a risk of unforeseen moral costs, and might overlook or fail to address some important opportunities.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0024DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

genome editing
12
genetic protection
8
binary distinction
8
distinction therapy
8
editing humans
8
protection modifications
4
modifications moving
4
moving binary
4
therapy enhancement
4
enhancement human
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!