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

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

DOI:

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

Palavras-chave:

Eugenia, bebês design, terapia gênica, mutação, terapêutica, engenharia genética

Resumo

A edição de genoma tem muitas aplicações em todos os âmbitos da sociedade, no entanto pode ter consequências imprevisíveis. A edição do genoma da linha germinal humana é o centro de uma discussão mundial. Devido ao número crescente de questionamentos científicos, éticos e políticos, muitos sem resposta concreta, o consenso da comunidade científica manifesta que não seria apropriado modificar geneticamente embriões humanos. Consideramos que é necessário um debate sério e aberto para decidir se é necessário suspender ou fomentar a pesquisa nesse sentido. Aqui mencionamos alguns argumentos audazes a favor da eliminação de genes nocivos do genoma humano e os riscos decorrentes do eugenismo liberal.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

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