Reflections about the Molecular Tool That Could Change the Course of Human History: Genome Editing

Pedro Alexander Velasquez-Vasconez

doi:10.5294/pebi.2022.26.1.3

Autores/as

Pedro Alexander Velasquez-Vasconez Autor/a Universidade de São Paulo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7564-4519

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/pebi.2022.26.1.3

Palabras clave:

eugenesia, bebé de diseño, terapia genética, mutación, terapéutica, ingeniería genética

Resumen

La edición genética tiene muchas aplicaciones en casi todos los ámbitos de la sociedad, pero también puede tener consecuencias impredecibles. La edición del genoma de la línea germinal humana es el centro de una discusión mundial. Debido al creciente número de cuestionamientos científicos, éticos y políticos, muchos sin una respuesta concreta, el consenso de la comunidad científica manifiesta que sería inapropiado modificar genéticamente embriones humanos. Se considera necesario un debate serio y abierto para decidir si se debe suspender o fomentar la investigación en este sentido. En el presente documento, se exponen algunos argumentos audaces a favor de la eliminación de los genes nocivos del genoma humano y los riesgos que supone el eugenismo liberal.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Pinello L, Canver MC, Hoban MD, Orkin SH, Kohn DB, Bauer DE, et al. Analyzing CRISPR genome-editing experiments with CRISPR. Nature Biotech. 2016;34:695–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3583

Komor AC, Kim YB, Packer MS, Zuris JA, Liu DR. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature. 2016;533(7603):420–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17946

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genome editing and human reproduction. Social and ethical issues; 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jwiet-2019-0012

Gyngell C, Bowman-Smart H, Savulescu J. Moral reasons to edit the human genome: Picking up from the Nuffield report. J Med Ethics. 2019;45(8):514–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-105084

Gaskell G, Bard I, Allansdottir A, Vieira da Cunha R, Eduard P, Hampel J, et al. Public views on gene editing and its uses. Nature Biotech. 2017;35:1021-1023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3958

Hajiahmadi Z, Movahedi A, Wei H, Li D, Orooji Y, Ruan H, et al. Strategies to increase on-target and reduce off-target effects of the CRISPR/Cas9 system in plants. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(15):3719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20153719

Li D, Zhou H, Zeng X. Battling CRISPR-Cas9 off-target genome editing. Cell Biol Toxicol. 2019;35:403–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10565-019-09485-5

Coelho MA, De Braekeleer E, Firth M, Bista M, Lukasiak S, Cuomo ME, et al. CRISPR GUARD protects off-target sites from Cas9 nuclease activity using short guide RNAs. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17952-5

Naeem M, Majeed S, Hoque MZ, Ahmad I. Latest developed strategies to minimize the off-target effects in CRISPR-Cas mediated genome editing. Cells. 2020;9(7):1608. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9071608

Shevidi S, Uchida A, Schudrowitz N, Wessel GM, Yajima M. Single nucleotide editing without DNA cleavage using CRISPR/ Cas9-deaminase in the sea urchin embryo. Dev Dyn. 2017;246(12):1036–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.24586

Chen C-L, Rodiger J, Chung V, Viswanatha R, Mohr SE, Hu Y, et al. SNP-CRISPR: a web tool for SNP-Specific genome editing. G3-Genes Genom Genet. 2020;10(2):489–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.119.400904

Wang Y, Wang M, Zheng T, Hou Y, Zhang P, Tang T, et al. Specificity profiling of CRISPR system reveals greatly enhanced off-target gene editing. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58627-x

Miga KH, Koren S, Rhie A, Vollger MR, Gershman A, Bzikadze A, et al. Telomere-to-telomere assembly of a complete human X chromosome. Nature. 2020;585(7823):79–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2547-7

Cohen J. Commission charts narrow path for editing human embryos. Science. 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe6341

Ranisch R. Germline genome editing versus preimplantation genetic diagnosis: Is there a case in favour of germline interventions? Bioethics. 2020;34(1):60–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12635

Mai LD, Saporiti AEL. Negative and positive eugenics: meanings and contradictions. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2006;14(2):251–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-11692006000200015

Arzheimer K. Secular citizens, pious MPs: why German attitudes about genetic testing are much more permissive than German laws. Polit Res Exch. 2020;2(1):1765693. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2020.1765693

Shaw J. Selecting for disabilities: selection versus modification. New Bioeth. 2018;24(1):44–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2018.1441671

Rehmann-Sutter C. Why human germline editing is more problematic than selecting between embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships. New Bioeth. 2018;24(1):9–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2018.1441669

Campeau PM, Foulkes WD, Tischkowitz MD. Hereditary breast cancer: New genetic developments, new therapeutic avenues. 2008;124:31–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-008-0529-1

Naciones Unidas. La Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. Available from: https://www.un.org/es/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html

Savulescu J. Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. In: Bioethics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2001. p. 413–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00251

Andorno R, Baylis F, Darnovsky M, Dickenson D, Haker H, Hasson K, et al. Geneva statement on heritable human genome editing: The Need for Course Correction. Trends Biotechnol.2020;38(4):351–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.12.022

Lander ES, Baylis F, Zhang F, Charpentier E, Berg P, Bourgain C, et al. Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing. Nature. 2019;567(7747):165–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5

National Academy of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, the RS. Heritable human genome editing. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2020. p. 224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/25665

Dalege J, Borsboom D, van Harreveld F, van der Maas HLJ. The attitudinal entropy framework as a general theory of individual attitudes. Psychol Inq. 2018;29(4):175–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2018.1537246

Xavier MJ, Roman SD, Aitken RJ, Nixon B. Transgenerational inheritance: How impacts to the epigenetic and genetic information of parents affect offspring health. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(5):519–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz017

Godfrey KM, Lillycrop KA, Burdge GC, Gluckman PD, Hanson MA. Epigenetic mechanisms and the mismatch concept of the developmental origins of health and disease. Pediatr Res; 2007;61:5-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1203/pdr.0b013e318045bedb

Ramírez-Alarcón K, Sánchez-Agurto Á, Lamperti L, Martorell M. Epigenetics, maternal diet and metabolic programming. Open Biol J. 2019 Oct 18;7(1):45–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1874196701907010045

Pentecost M, Meloni M. “It’s Never Too Early”: Preconception Care and Postgenomic Models of Life. Front Sociol. 2020;5:21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2020.00021

Roseboom T, de Rooij S, Painter R. The Dutch famine and its long-term consequences for adult health. Early Hum Dev. 2006;82(8):485–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2006.07.001

Kuniyoshi KM, Hang B, Rehan VK. Early-life tobacco smoke/nicotine exposure and offspring health. In: Early-life Environmental Exposure and Disease. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2020. p. 23–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3797-4_2

Yankai X. Early-life Environmental Exposure and Disease. Xia Y, editor. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3797-4

Goubert D, Beckman WF, Verschure PJ, Rots MG. Epigenetic editing: towards realization of the curable genome concept. Converg Sci Phys Oncol. 2017;3(1):013006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1739/aa5cc0

Datta Gupta N, Etcoff NL, Jaeger MM. Beauty in Mind: The Effects of physical attractiveness on psychological well-being and distress. J Happiness Stud. 2016;17(3):1313–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/maq.12025

Aquino YSJ. Is ugliness a pathology? An ethical critique of the therapeuticalization of cosmetic surgery. Bioethics. 2020;34(4):431–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12721

Harari YN. Sapiens: Uma breve história da humanidade. L&PM. 2015. Available from: https://www.amazon.com.br/Sapiens-Uma-breve-história-humanidade-ebook/dp/B00UZLPCGQ

Caioli L. Messi: the inside story of the boy who became a legend. Thriplow: Corinthian; 2012. Available from: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Messi-The-Inside-Story-of-the-Boy-Who-Became-a-Legend-ExLibrary-/312484387280

Persaud A, Desine S, Blizinsky K, Bonham VL. A CRISPR focus on attitudes and beliefs toward somatic genome editing from stakeholders within the sickle cell disease community. Genet Med. 2018 Aug 1;21(8):1726-1734 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-018-0409-6

Juengst ET, Henderson GE, Walker RL, Conley JM, MacKay D, Meagher KM, et al. Is Enhancement the Price of Prevention in Human Gene Editing? Cris J. 2018;1(6):351–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2018.0040

Blendon RJ, Gorski MT, Benson JM. The public and the Gene-editing revolution. N Engl J Med. 2016;1(6):1406–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2018.0040l

Rosemann A, Balen A, Nerlich B, Hauskeller C, Sleeboom-Faulkner M, Hartley S, et al. Heritable genome editing in a global context: national and international policy challenges. Hastings Cent Rep. 2019;49(3):30–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1006

Halpern J, O’Hara SE, Doxzen KW, Witkowsky LB, Owen AL. Societal and ethical impacts of germline genome editing: how can we secure human rights? Cris J. 2019;2(5):293–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0042

Scheufele DA, Xenos MA, Howell EL, Rose KM, Brossard D, Hardy BW. U.S. attitudes on human genome editing. Science. 2017;357(6351):553–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan3708

Shew AM, Nalley LL, Snell HA, Nayga RM, Dixon BL. CRISPR versus GMOs: public acceptance and valuation. Glob Food Sec. 2018;19:71–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.10.005

McCaughey T, Sanfilippo PG, Gooden GEC, Budden DM, Fan L, Fenwick E, et al. A global social media survey of attitudes to human genome editing. Cell Stem Cell. 2016 May 5;18(5): 569–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2016.04.011

Erich F. The art of Loving. The centennial edition A&C Black. 2000. 128 p. Available from: https://www.amazon.com/Erich-Fromm-Art-Loving-Inquiry/dp/B002278W40