The controversy has broken out in a thousand pieces wounding the entire scientific community: the first genetically modified humans would have been born during this month of November. Experts have not taken in raising their screams and condemn the fact.
On the other hand, the most critical voices doubt that this is possible, while those responsible for such a "feat" have been dismissed and condemned by the community. But what's the stir? How can a baby's genetics be modified? And that's wrong? And good? The questions do not stop growing.
What is a genetically modified baby?
In science fiction movies, human beings are born "on demand", with our DNA modified to be stronger, smarter and better. In the scientific community, however, this reality is harshly criticized. Yes, we have said reality, because as they announced just a few days ago, a team of Chinese researchers has managed to carry out the first genetically modified babies.
In XatakaChina states that he is creating the first genetically edited babies with CRISPR and there are good reasons to think it's trueAs announced, the team of He Jiankui has achieved the successful birth of Lulu and Nana, two twin sisters whose DNA has been modified to be resistant to the HIV virus, responsible for AIDS. All our cells have inside an instruction book called DNA, which is the same for all. When we talk about genetically modified babies, we mean that DNA has been altered forever voluntarily.
What the Chinese researchers have done is cause a mutation, a change in the DNA, beneficial for the cell. This mutation has modified a gene called CCR5. Genes are parts of DNA that contain specific and important information. This particular gene, when it presents a mutation known as "delta32", makes the cell immune to the attack of HIV.
Although the two twins received the treatment, only one is supposedly immune to the AIDS virus. To cause immunity, all copies of that gene, the CCR5, must have the delta32 mutation. The other sister has a "genetic mosaic", that is, it presents both the delta32 mutation and the original gene, before trying to modify it, so it is not immune.
It is important not to confuse this genetic modification technique with the selection technique used in artificial reproduction. For example, in Spain, after causing the fertilization of an egg, it is legal to select a healthy embryo after verifying that they do not have any inherited genetic disease (stipulated by law). On the contrary, a modified baby has undergone a change caused by a treatment, so that it is not a selection, but a voluntary and directed genetic modification. This treatment, in this case, is CRISPR.
CRISPR, what is the technique for genetically modifying?
To modify an organism (such as a baby), several techniques are used. The most advanced, accurate, safe and effective is called CRISPR. This, gross mode, is to select a piece of this instruction book that is DNA and cut it with precision. Then, another DNA fragment can be "pasted" into place.
In the case of the twins, the researchers cut the CCR5 gene and exchanged it for a copy with the delta mutation32. This technique uses a virus that is designed, and not dangerous, to change all the cells in the body.. The virus is injected into the embryo, which has a few cells, instead of the adult baby. The technique, CRISPR, is relatively new, although well known.
Its use is daily in laboratories around the world to work with all types of organisms, in research. It is still being legislated to what extent it can be used in food and products for consumers. As far as we know, the technique is completely safe, but we still need more time using it to know for sure that it does not imply any danger for health when used to modify human cells.
In XatakaThe 10 "advantageous and no side effects" genetic variants that George Church wants to put in our children with CRISPROn the other hand, the decision to change this gene, CCR5, is because it is known that the delta32 mutation is completely safe. This means that making this genetic change does not involve any kind of risk, but a benefit: that girls do not get AIDS. This is one of the genes that, according to some experts, we could modify without fear of a negative consequence.
If we know that it does not involve risks, why is there an ethical debate?
In the first place, although we are quite sure that it does not imply any kind of health problem, genetic manifestations have a certain degree of spontaneity. We have to be much more confident than we are now to be able to "commercialize" a treatment based on the modification of our genes with CRISPR.
Suppose we manage to reach a sufficient level of security: we know that there are certain variants of genes that can help improve the human being. Should we introduce them? Currently, almost everywhere in the world, It is illegal to genetically modify human beings. A strange exception is China, which among its legal verdicts has allowed certain modifications, in an overlapping way, to treat cancer. However, genetic modification of embryos is completely outlawed.
That has not prevented this team from performing the experiments we are talking about, although there are those who doubt that they are real. On the other hand, the scientific community has been quick to complain for a simple reason: ethics. The main reason that such experiments are not legal is because ethically speaking there is no justification for its.
In Babies and more, how can a baby have three parents? Eugenics, that is, the voluntary selection of genetic characteristics, is a very sensitive issue. In favor of these twins we could talk that we are doing good without any harm to them. Who chooses who should receive the privilege? Is it a matter of money? Politics? Social? Linking the development of humanity to this question raises many concerns.
At the other end we have the complaints, founded, that we still do not fully master the technique. The example is in the same twins: in one of them the treatment has not been 100% effective. What more bugs will we find as they grow? And as there are more cases? At the moment, it is clear that the genetic edition, in humans, is already here, and it is here to stay.
