Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • EMBO reports (Home)
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Life Science Alliance
Login

   

Search

Advanced Search

Journal

  • Home
  • Latest Online
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections
  • Review Series & Focuses

Authors & Referees

  • Submit
  • Author Guidelines
  • Aims & Scope
  • Editors & Board
  • Transparent Process
  • Bibliometrics
  • Referee Guidelines
  • Open Access

Info

  • E-Mail Editorial Office
  • Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions & Access
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Advertise & Sponsor
  • Media Partners
  • News & Press
  • Recommend to Librarian
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • Latest Online

Correspondence

No time to waste on the road to a liberal eugenics?

Guenther Witzany
DOI 10.15252/embr.201541855 | Published online 05.02.2016
EMBO reports (2016) e201541855
Guenther Witzany
Telos‐Philosophische Praxis, Buermoos, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site

Author Affiliations

  1. Guenther Witzany (witzany{at}sbg.at)1
  1. 1Telos‐Philosophische Praxis, Buermoos, Austria
View Abstract
  • Article
  • Transparent Process
Loading

In their article “No time to waste”, Arthur L Caplan, Brendan Parent, Michael Shen and Carolyn Plunkett make a valid point that there is “no time to waste” to regulate the application of CRISPR and other tools for genome editing [1]. Preventing the misuse of this new technology requires time for open discussions and should not be driven by the results of applying this technology, which cannot be justified in hindsight [2].

We first need to get a better understanding of how genome editing by CRISPR or any other technology would interfere with intricate regulatory networks and natural genome editing. This refers to the “deep grammar” of the genetic text beyond the sequence of nucleotides, which is represented by epigenetic mechanisms, long‐range interactions of genes, gene clusters, and networks of regulatory elements such as non‐coding RNAs, persistent viruses, and mobile genetic elements. There are currently investigations of how artificial genome editing could interfere with these complex and sophisticated mechanisms.

Second, the genetic engineering of the human germ line opens the door to downgrading humans from individual subjects to objects of technical applications and thereby objects of interests of his or her parents [3]. A human thus conceived would lose his or her status of autonomy, equality, and liberty if their genome is no longer the result of contingency but of genetic engineering and, as an adult, may develop identity problems. How do we justify this later on to the adult person who has been object to genetic manipulation in his pre‐personal developmental stage? How to justify the fact that these manipulations will be part of his or her children too? There is indeed “No time to waste” to regulate these techniques; not doing so is similar to driving a car too fast into a curve hoping that no other car will come. Would we think this responsible?

References

  1. ↵
    Baltimore D, Berg P, Botchan M et al (2015) Science 348: 36–38
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Lanphier E, Urnov F, Haecker SE et al (2015) Nature 519: 410–411
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Henrich DC (2011) Eth Persp 18: 249–268
    OpenUrl
  • © 2016 The Author
View Abstract
Next Article in this Issue
Back to top

  • PDF
  • Share
  • Export
  • Print
Loading

PDF

In this Issue
Volume 20, Issue 2
01 February 2019
EMBO reports: 20 (2)
About the cover
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted

Article

  • Article
    • References
  • Transparent Process

Related Content

More Correspondence

  • Comment on “A planet too rich in fiber”
    Jianli Liu, Bo Zhu, Weidong Gao
    EMBO reports : e47514
  • Response by the author
    Melissa Suran
    EMBO reports : e47720
  • Response by the author
    Iñigo de Miguel Beriain
    EMBO reports 20: e47346
More Correspondence

Related Articles

Cited By...

Request Permissions

Subject Areas

  • S&S: Ethics
  • S&S: History & Philosophy of Science

Journal

  • Latest Online
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Bibliometrics
  • E-Mail Editorial Office
  • Privacy Policy

Authors & References

  • Aims & Scope
  • Editors & Board
  • Transparent Process
  • Author Guidelines
  • Referee Guidelines
  • Open Access
  • Submit

Info

  • Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions & Access
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Advertise & Sponsor
  • News & Press
  • Recommend to Librarian
  • Customer Service

EMBO

  • Funding & Awards
  • Events
  • Science Policy
  • Members
  • About EMBO

Online ISSN  1469-3178

Copyright© 2019 EMBO

This website is best viewed using the latest versions of all modern web browsers. Older browsers may not display correctly.