The World Health Organization released two reports on Monday that address the most current and controversial issue in genetic engineering – human DNA editing. It took more than two years to prepare the official recommendations, and hundreds of experts from all over the world participated in the development of the documents: not only scientists, but also employees of charitable and other non-profit organizations (including those defending patients’ rights), as well as religious leaders, representatives of industry, indigenous peoples from different countries, etc. A total of two dozen representatives of the world scientific community have been included in the expert committee of developers, but there are no Russians among them. The absence of representatives of Russian science is particularly unexpected given that Russian biologist Denis Rebrikov is one of the few scientists who have openly declared their plans for genetic modification of children.
First of all, both documents state that any manipulation of human genetic material can only take place if three basic requirements are met: such work must be safe, effective, and ethical. According to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, genome editing technology opens up unprecedented possibilities for treating various diseases. However, these opportunities can only be fully realized if its application is designed to benefit humanity as a whole, rather than exacerbating health inequalities. It is about how technology originally intended to diagnose, treat, and prevent rare genetic diseases is being used to create “engineered children” that wealthy parents can actually genetically program before birth.
Work on both documents began after Professor He Jiankui unexpectedly announced the birth of the world’s first genetically modified babies in China in late 2018, to the surprise of the entire scientific community. According to him, the DNA of the twin girls was edited before conception to make them resistant to HIV infection. It later turned out that no one outside Professor He’s lab knew about his work, and he obtained parental consent by showing them a fake ethics committee report, for which a Chinese court sentenced him to three years in prison a year later.
However, as early as December 2018, WHO assembled a team of experts from various fields and tasked them with developing principles for conducting experiments on human DNA for the global community. The committee responsible for developing the international recommendations included 18 scientists from 14 countries: Australia, Burkina Faso, Canada, Germany, India, Kenya, China, Panama, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the United States, France, South Africa, and Japan. When asked if representatives from Moscow were involved in this work, Margaret Hamburg, co-chair of the committee, replied that Russia was involved in the discussion at the level of a representative of the Ministry of Health.
The thing is, one of the few scientists actively working on human genome editing and openly supporting He Jiankui is Russian biologist Denis Rebrikov. Shortly after the arrest of the Chinese professor, Rebrikov promised that his lab team in Moscow would also “give birth to such a child, we are just moving slowly towards it, repeatedly ensuring the safety of the technology. The scientific community responded to this statement with an editorial in the journal Nature, calling on the Russian to abandon these plans: “Rebrikov must heed our concerns and his critics – and take no further steps until all existing risks have been assessed.”
Genetic engineering promises to revolutionize the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of inherited diseases. However, the prevailing view in the scientific community is that the development of these technologies is far outpacing our understanding of the structure of the genetic code. Consequently, scientists have doubts about both the safety of this method (it is simply impossible to predict the long-term consequences of DNA intervention) and its compliance with ethical norms. That is why, after the scandal involving the Chinese professor, the WHO took the initiative in this matter. As a result of two years of work, the commission of experts produced two documents. One of them outlines the basics of a regulatory framework that can be adapted to different countries, from the introduction of a single register of experiments to copyright issues. In particular, the report considers several specific hypothetical scenarios (e.g., a genetic experiment to enhance the endurance of athletes) and proposes options for their development. The second report makes recommendations for organizing effective oversight in this area: in particular, creating a mechanism for scientists to anonymously report underground experiments with human DNA.
The problem is that a method called “genetic scissors,” invented a few years ago, makes it possible to edit the genetic code under minimal laboratory conditions and at relatively low cost. So the temptation for amateur geneticists can be great, and the consequences of such experiments can be very unpredictable. Especially when it comes to editing germ cells for the purpose of conception and birth. “At present, no sane person would even consider doing such experiments, simply because the technology itself is not sufficiently safe – even without taking ethical considerations into account,” said Professor Robin Lavelle Bage of the Francis Crick Institute in the UK at a press conference. “It would be extremely irresponsible to conduct such experiments,” the expert emphasized.