Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ for the children

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by heavyset_go on Saturday March 19, 2022 @07:06PM (#30738370)

"HIV resistance" is a false reduction of the gene editing that went on. Those genes that were edited encode proteins that the body uses for other things, and thus can have potential consequences, when changed, that nobody was able to consent to.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by bpodgursky on Saturday March 19, 2022 @07:50PM (#30738647)

The editing was to imitate a natural mutation of CCR5 which is already present in 1% of northern europeans.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by heavyset_go on Saturday March 19, 2022 @10:43PM (#30739559)

Sickle-cell trait is in ~5% of people, and it's a natural mutation against malaria, but that doesn't meant mean it's ethical to inflict its consequences on someone without their consent.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by freemint on Sunday March 20, 2022 @07:37AM (#30741812)

Hopefully the mother consented to it. Mothers also consent to mixing their genome with the father's genome. It don't see why this would be different with edited genomes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by elliekelly on Sunday March 20, 2022 @09:19AM (#30742398)

She did not consent:

> The scientist forged documents from an ethics review panel to recruit couples for the research

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailed baby gene scientist ‘should be made responsible’ f... by freemint on Tuesday March 22, 2022 @03:16PM (#30770241)

Are those documents that the parents where supposed sign or documents the ethic panel was supposed to sign. There is a huge difference in that.

[ Parent | on HN ]