The ethics of gene editing in human stem cells

Alangoya Tezel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-817876-8.00005-x

2022-01-01

Abstract:The American debate around stem cell research largely revolves around one question: at what point does an embryo become human? This chapter reviews the ethical debate surrounding the destruction, creation, and germline gene editing of embryos.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Chapter 12 Gene Editing in Human Embryos. A Comment on the Ethical Issues Involved

Iñigo De Miguel Beriain,Ana María Marcos del Cano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60684-2_12

2018-01-01

Abstract:CRISPR gene edition constitutes one of the most promising tools in the area of human health. However, it also involves a number of issues that require further consideration. The concerns, indeed, are twofold: the first are connected with the safety of the technology, while the second relate to some ethical issues and it is precisely those ethical issues that this chapter will deal with. To this purpose, we will focus on four main issues: the necessity of this technology and the risk issues involved; the embryo loss involved; the alteration of the human genome and human identity; and the enhancement/eugenics issue. Some of our main conclusions are the following: (1) We strongly support the idea that if further research reduces the risks involved, then the reasons for the prohibition of gene editing in human beings will vanish; (2) Embryo loss is not a key factor in terms of the ethical discussion of gene editing; (3) a general ban on human embryo editing on the grounds of the defense of the human genome is clearly unjustified, even if we really hold this approach; (4) a general ban on gene editing affecting the embryo’s germ line genetic identity is hard to understand and entails a number of questions that hinder its practical applicability; and (5) referring to eugenics can hardly justify a general ban on the use of gene editing in human embryos, considering the benefits that are at stake and the moral imperative to pursue them.
Advances in Genetic Editing of the Human Embryo

Vasile Astarăstoae,Beatrice Gabriela Ioan,Liliana M Rogozea,Bianca Hanganu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MJT.0000000000001604

Abstract:Background: Genetic engineering has allowed a major development of research in this field, with specialists attempting to edit the human genome, after the successful editing of the genomes of plants and animals. However, human gene editing technologies are at the center of ethical debates around the world. Areas of uncertainty: Ethical concerns about genetic editing of the human embryo raise several issues that can be viewed through the prism of optimism and reluctance leading to a number of recommendations regarding the acceptance of what may soon become a reality. Data sources: A literature search was conducted through PubMed, MEDLINE, Plus, Scopus, and Web of Science (2015-2022) using combinations of keywords, including: human genome or gene editing plus ethics. Ethics and therapeutic advances: Gene therapy is seen by researchers as a way to solve congenital diseases, multifactorial diseases in general or specific diseases such as cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, or can increase resistance to HIV infection. Genome editing technologies, germline gene editing, clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats gene editing technology, technologies such as zinc finger nucleases are not only advanced gene therapies that require solving technical problems, but also techniques that require complex and complete analysis of ethical problems. Genetic engineering raises many ethical concerns such as: safety concerns especially the risk of off-target effects; autonomy of the individual-with the limitation of the future generations to consent for an intervention over their genome; social justice-keeping in mind the costs of the procedures and their availability to the general population. Discussions can go further from questions such as "How can we do this?" to questions such as "Should we do this?" or "Is society ready to accept this technology and is it able to manage it rationally?" Conclusions: The ethics of biomedical research should be based on global dialogue, on the involvement of experts and the public, to achieve a broad social consensus. The fundamental review of the ethics of genetics is a desire and an opportunity of the current period.
The Ethics of Human Embryo Editing via CRISPR-Cas9 Technology: A Systematic Review of Ethical Arguments, Reasons, and Concerns

Wiley, Lindsay,Cheek, Mattison,LaFar, Emily,Ma, Xiaolu,Sekowski, Justin,Tanguturi, Nikki,Iltis, Ana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-024-09538-1

2024-09-21

HEC Forum

Abstract:The possibility of editing the genomes of human embryos has generated significant discussion and interest as a matter of science and ethics. While it holds significant promise to prevent or treat disease, research on and potential clinical applications of human embryo editing also raise ethical, regulatory, and safety concerns. This systematic review included 223 publications to identify the ethical arguments, reasons, and concerns that have been offered for and against the editing of human embryos using CRISPR-Cas9 technology. We identified six major themes: risk/harm; potential benefit; oversight; informed consent; justice, equity, and other social considerations; and eugenics. We explore these themes and provide an overview and analysis of the critical points in the current literature.

ethics
Debating Ethical Issues in Genome Editing Technology

R. Qiu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ASB.2016.0026

2016-12-29

Abstract:This paper provides an ethical analysis of the controversy that arose from the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing research involving human embryos that was conducted by a research team in Guangzhou, China, in 2015. It is argued that the researchers involved did not overstep ethical boundaries. This was confirmed to be the case in an international meeting of experts that was convened following the controversy. It is further argued that the controversy highlights the tension between two fundamentally different policies on developing genome editing technology – one proactionary and the other precautionary. This paper argues for a third approach, based on the policy of “crossing the river by probing stones”. Such an approach is consistent with current international recommendations to prioritise basic and pre-clinical research, and to allow the application of genome editing technology to somatic human cells. However, the application of the technology in germline genetic modification for human reproduction or enhancement for medical purposes should not be allowed at present. This is because the attending risks are not well understood and could be excessive or extraordinary, with little or no prospect of benefit. In addition, this paper calls for norms and regulations to be developed for genetically modifying non-human living things. Finally, the paper concludes with a letter that was sent by the author (and another) to the New York Times, setting out China’s fundamental stance on genetic modification involving humans and human derivatives.

Biology,Sociology,Philosophy,Medicine
Gene editing: the risks and benefits of modifying human DNA

Rafael Nogueira Furtado

Abstract:The article analyzes discussions on human genetic editing found in scientific articles, institutional statements and delivered at the International Summit on Gene Editing held in 2015. This analysis has the objective of to explaining and reflecting on arguments favorable and contrary to DNA modification. Gene editing techniques have benefits such as: the treatment of diseases; creation of model organisms for basic biomedical research; development of transgenic foods, among other applications. However, discussions have been held in order to determine the risks of this technology. The Interlocutors, in these discussions, assume divergent positions, condemning gene editing, praising it or recommending caution in the execution of experiments. The article critically analyzes scientific discourses around the theme, seeking to highlight the argumentative strategies present in the debates.

Biology,Philosophy
Ethics Review of the Research of Human Embryonic Stem Cells

Qi-gui SUN,Ya-ting DING

2012-01-01

Abstract:The research of human embryonic stem cells encounters ethical dilemma which is difficult to avoid.The source of this dilemma embodies in the balance of sacrifice and respect of life,and confliction of self control and natural selection.Therefore consequentialism and absolutism encounter barriers,and the cause is the differences among moral basis,moral standard,moral judgment and moral requirement of moral strangers.And the way of solution is abiding by the principle of permission which Engelhardt suggested in the procedure and maintaining the tension among a variety of bioethics principles in the entity.
Bioethics in human embryology: the double-edged sword of embryo research

George Anifandis,Peter Sutovsky,Paul J Turek,Shawn L Chavez,Tanja Kunej,Christina I Messini,Samantha B Schon,Anna Mavroforou,Eli Y Adashi,Stephen A Krawetz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19396368.2022.2052771

Abstract:There has been a significant increase in the use of assisted reproductive therapies (ARTs) over the past several decades, allowing many couples with infertility to conceive. Despite the achievements in this field, a mounting body of evidence concerning the epigenetic risks associated with ART interventions such as ovarian hormonal stimulation, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), and in vitro culture (IVC) of oocytes and embryos has also emerged. Induced development of multiple follicles, the IVC media itself, and extended culture may alter the epigenome of both gametes and embryos, resulting in yet to be fully understood developmental, postnatal, and adult life health consequences. Investigators have attempted to decipher the molecular mechanisms mediating ART-induced epigenetic changes using either human samples or animal models with some success. As research in this field continues to expand, the ethical responsibilities of embryologists and researchers have become critically important. Here, we briefly discuss the ethical aspects of ART research, concentrating on the constraints arising from the perceived 'unnaturalness' of many of these procedures. Secondly, we focus on the bioethics and morality of human embryo research in general and how ethically acceptable model systems may be used to mimic early human embryogenesis. Lastly, we review the 14-day culture limit of human embryos and the notion that this rule could be considered of taken into account using new technologies and cues from animal models. The 'black box' of early post-implantation embryogenesis might be revealed using embryo models. As long as this distinct moral line has been drawn and closely followed, we should not fear scientific growth in embryo research. Although in vitro fertilization (IVF) is ethically acceptable, research with human embryos to improve its success raises serious ethical concerns that are in need of constant revisiting.Glossary index: Moral status: the ascription of obligations and rights to embryos on the basis of sentience; Sentience: the capacity of the developing embryo to experience feelings and sensations, such as the awareness of pain; Ectogenesis: the growth of the embryo in an artificial environment outside the mother's body.
Why Human Germline Editing is More Problematic than Selecting Between Embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships

Christoph Rehmann-Sutter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2018.1441669

2018-01-02

The New Bioethics

Abstract:Do we have a moral obligation to genetically cure embryos rather than selecting between them? Such an obligation would be an ethical argument for human germline gene editing (hGGE) to avoid the inheritance of genetic conditions instead of using pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). In this article, the intuition that we do have such a moral obligation is critically evaluated. The article first develops a theoretical framework for discussing the ethical questions of hGGE. This framework is based on an exploration of the phenomenology of the germline, from both biological and philosophical points of view. It interprets the germline as an embodied intergenerational relationship that carries meanings for the parents and for the children-to-be. It relates them to previous family generations, and to their own children. Hence, the germline is a phenomenologically much richer concept than just the line of cells that carry the inheritable genetic information. Against this background, selection is compared with editing and a key moral difference is identified: editing is in effect an act of co-constructing the genome, which necessarily assumes a wider range of responsibilities that include those parts that are left unedited. Introducing hGGE into societies would hence significantly affect and change the moral structure of the intergenerational relationships. Selective implantation, on the other hand (in the context of PGD), is based on a moral choice in favour of the embryo which is to be unaffected by a disease or disability that causes suffering, rather than selecting knowingly the affected one. The claim that hGGE is in the best interests of the child-to-be counterfactually assumes the presence of a patient who has an interest in being cured. The embryo (a potential future patient) is, however, brought into existence by the same act that is also the treatment. The future children who would result from treatment by hGGE may rather have an interest in not having been treated by hGGE, since it makes the intergenerational relationships more complicated and burdensome. The question 'Is hGGE justified, or even an obligation?' is answered with a No.
Reasons and Reproduction: Gene Editing and Genetic Selection

Jeff McMahan,Julian Savulescu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2023.2250288

2023-09-13

The American Journal of Bioethics

Abstract:Many writers in bioethics, science, and medicine contend that embryo selection is a morally better way of avoiding genetic disorders then gene editing, as the latter has risks that the former does not. We argue that one reason to use gene editing is that in many cases it would be better for the person who would develop from the edited embryo, so that not to have done it would have been worse for that person. By contrast, embryo selection is never better for the person who develops from the selected embryo. This reason to use gene editing has, however, been challenged on two grounds: first, that it makes no difference, morally, whether a bad effect is worse for someone, or a good effect better for someone; and, second, that beneficent gene editing would not be unequivocally better for the person who would develop from the edited embryo. We argue that both of these objections can be satisfactorily answered and thus that there is indeed a significant moral reason, at least in some cases, to use gene editing rather than embryo selection.

ethics,medical ethics,social issues,social sciences, biomedical
An ethical pathway for gene editing.

P. Singer,J. Savulescu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12570

2019-01-29

Bioethics

Abstract:The central importance of ethics to science is exquisitely illustrated by the recent gene editing of two healthy embryos by the Chinese biophysicist He Jiankui, resulting in the birth of baby girls born this month, Lulu and Nana. A second pregnancy is underway with a different couple. To make the babies resistant to HIV, He edited out a gene (CCR5) that produces a protein which allows HIV to enter cells. One girl has both copies of the gene modified (and may be resistant to HIV), while the other has only one (making her still susceptible to HIV).1

Medicine,Psychology,Philosophy,Biology
Gene Editing in Pluripotent Stem Cells and Their Derived Organoids

Hang Zhou,Yun Wang,Li-Ping Liu,Yu-Mei Li,Yun-Wen Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8130828

2021-11-30

Abstract:With the rapid rise in gene-editing technology, pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) and their derived organoids have increasingly broader and practical applications in regenerative medicine. Gene-editing technologies, from large-scale nucleic acid endonucleases to CRISPR, have ignited a global research and development boom with significant implications in regenerative medicine. The development of regenerative medicine technologies, regardless of whether it is PSCs or gene editing, is consistently met with controversy. Are the tools for rewriting the code of life a boon to humanity or a Pandora's box? These technologies raise concerns regarding ethical issues, unexpected mutations, viral infection, etc. These concerns remain even as new treatments emerge. However, the potential negatives cannot obscure the virtues of PSC gene editing, which have, and will continue to, benefit mankind at an unprecedented rate. Here, we briefly introduce current gene-editing technology and its application in PSCs and their derived organoids, while addressing ethical concerns and safety risks and discussing the latest progress in PSC gene editing. Gene editing in PSCs creates visualized in vitro models, providing opportunities for examining mechanisms of known and unknown mutations and offering new possibilities for the treatment of cancer, genetic diseases, and other serious or refractory disorders. From model construction to treatment exploration, the important role of PSCs combined with gene editing in basic and clinical medicine studies is illustrated. The applications, characteristics, and existing challenges are summarized in combination with our lab experiences in this field in an effort to help gene-editing technology better serve humans in a regulated manner. Current preclinical and clinical trials have demonstrated initial safety and efficacy of PSC gene editing; however, for better application in clinical settings, additional investigation is warranted.
The commercialization of human stem cells: ethical and policy issues

David B Resnik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016554107663

Abstract:The first stage of the human embryonic stem (ES) cell research debate revolved around fundamental questions, such as whether the research should be done at all, what types of research may be done, who should do the research, and how the research should be funded. Now that some of these questions are being answered, we are beginning to see the next stage of the debate: the battle for property rights relating to human ES cells. The reason why property rights will be a key issue in this debate is simple and easy to understand: it costs a great deal of money to do this research, to develop new products, and to implement therapies; and private companies, researchers, and health professionals require returns on investments and reimbursements for goods and services. This paper considers arguments for and against property rights relating to ES cells defends the following points: (1) It should be legal to buy and sell ES cells and products. (2) It should be legal to patent ES cells, products, and related technologies. (3) It should not be legal to buy, sell, or patent human embryos. (4) Patents on ES cells, products, and related technologies should not be excessively broad. (5) Patents on ES cells, products, and related technologies should be granted only when applicants state definite, plausible uses for their inventions. (6) There should be a research exemption in ES cell patenting to allow academic scientists to conduct research in regenerative medicine. (7) It may be appropriate to take steps to prevent companies from using patents in ES cells, products, and related technologies only to block competitors. (8) As the field of regenerative medicine continues to develop, societies should revisit issues relating to property rights on a continuing basis in order to develop policies and develop regulations to maximize the social, medical, economic, and scientific benefits of ES cell research and product development.
Ethical issues in stem cell research and therapy

Nancy MP King,Jacob Perrin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/scrt474

2014-07-07

Abstract:Rapid progress in biotechnology has introduced a host of pressing ethical and policy issues pertaining to stem cell research. In this review, we provide an overview of the most significant issues with which the stem cell research community should be familiar. We draw on a sample of the bioethics and scientific literatures to address issues that are specific to stem cell research and therapy, as well as issues that are important for stem cell research and therapy but also for translational research in related fields, and issues that apply to all clinical research and therapy. Although debate about the moral status of the embryo in human embryonic stem cell research continues to have relevance, the discovery of other highly multipotent stem cell types and alternative methods of isolating and creating highly multipotent stem cells has raised new questions and concerns. Induced pluripotent stem cells hold great promise, but care is needed to ensure their safety in translational clinical trials, despite the temptation to move quickly from bench to bedside. A variety of highly multipotent stem cells - such as mesenchymal stem/stromal cells and stem cells derived from amniotic fluid, umbilical cord blood, adipose tissue, or urine - present the opportunity for widespread biobanking and increased access. With these increased opportunities, however, come pressing policy issues of consent, control, and justice. The imperatives to minimize risks of harm, obtain informed consent, reduce the likelihood of the therapeutic misconception, and facilitate sound translation from bench to bedside are not unique to stem cell research; their application to stem cell research and therapy nonetheless merits particular attention. Because stem cell research is both scientifically promising and ethically challenging, both the application of existing ethical frameworks and careful consideration of new ethical implications are necessary as this broad and diverse field moves forward.

cell biology,medicine, research & experimental,cell & tissue engineering
Human gene therapy: scientific and ethical considerations.

Anderson Wf

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/JMP/10.3.275

1985-08-01

Abstract:The term 'gene therapy' encompasses at least four types of application of genetic engineering for the insertion of genes into humans. The scientific requirements and the ethical issues associated with each type are discussed. Somatic cell gene therapy is technically the simplest and ethically the least controversial. The first clinical trials will probably be undertaken within the next year. Germ line gene therapy will require major advances in our present knowledge and it raises ethical issues that are now being debated. In order to provide guidelines for determining when germ line gene therapy would be ethical, the author presents three criteria which should be satisfied prior to the time that a clinical protocol is attempted in humans. Enhancement genetic engineering presents significant, and troubling, ethical concerns. Except where this type of therapy can be justified on the grounds of preventive medicine, enhancement engineering should not be performed. The fourth type, eugenic genetic engineering, is impossible at present and will probably remain so for the foreseeable future, despite the widespread media attention it has received.

Biology,Sociology,Medicine
Are null segregants new combinations of heritable material and should they be regulated?

Jack A. Heinemann,Katrin Clark,Tessa C. Hiscox,Andrew W. McCabe,Sarah Z. Agapito-Tenfen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2022.1064103

2023-01-10

Frontiers in Genome Editing

Abstract:Through genome editing and other techniques of gene technology, it is possible to create a class of organism called null segregants. These genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are products of gene technology but are argued to have no lingering vestige of the technology after the segregation of chromosomes or deletion of insertions. From that viewpoint regulations are redundant because any unique potential for the use of gene technology to cause harm has also been removed. We tackle this question of international interest by reviewing the early history of the purpose of gene technology regulation. The active ingredients of techniques used for guided mutagenesis, e.g., site-directed nucleases, such as CRISPR/Cas, are promoted for having a lower potential per reaction to create a hazard. However, others see this as a desirable industrial property of the reagents that will lead to genome editing being used more and nullifying the promised hazard mitigation. The contest between views revolves around whether regulations could alter the risks in the responsible use of gene technology. We conclude that gene technology, even when used to make null segregants, has characteristics that make regulation a reasonable option for mitigating potential harm. Those characteristics are that it allows people to create more harm faster, even if it creates benefits as well; the potential for harm increases with increased use of the technique, but safety does not; and regulations can control harm scaling.
Somatic Gene Therapy: Ethics and Access

Alison Bateman-House

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-genom-021623-104458

Abstract:Manipulation of a patient's genome for therapeutic ends is being attempted through numerous methods, some of which have resulted in disease-modifying interventions. The much anticipated promise of somatic gene therapy is starting to pay off; however, there remain many scientific unknowns, including concerns about safety and durability. A significant ethical concern is that of access to these novel interventions, an issue that is normally framed in terms of the high costs of approved products. I describe how access issues permeate gene therapy long before there is any commercial product and how even upstream decisions-such as choices of indication to pursue, viral vector, and where to site a trial-have significant implications for access to resultant products in both the developmental and commercial stages.
Human Genome Editing is Not Unethical, Says Nuffield Council

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3140

2018-01-01

Abstract:There is no moral or ethical objection to making changes to the human genome that would pass down to future generations, as long as certain preconditions are met, the Nuffield Council for Bioethics has concluded.1 Germline engineering, as the technique is sometimes called, was for a long time the red line in biology. Any changes made would become part of the genome of the individual, to be passed on to future generations. The uncertainties and risks were deemed so great that it should never be attempted. But attitudes have shifted so much that the Nuffield report does not even attempt to restrict the technique to therapeutic uses. It says, rather, that it could be ethically acceptable if it contributes to the welfare of the person born as a consequence and does not increase …
Gene Editing Technology and Ethical Issues

Barbara Jane Holland

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3479-3.ch136

2021-01-01

Abstract:CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) technology has emerged as a powerful technology for genome editing and is now widely used in basic biomedical research to explore gene function. More recently, this technology has been increasingly applied to the study or treatment of human diseases. CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing has also been applied in immunology-focused applications such as the targeting of C-C chemokine receptor type 5, the programmed death 1 gene and the creation of chimeric antigen receptors in T cells for purposes such as the treatment of the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) or promoting anti-tumor immunotherapy. Furthermore, scientist recently suggest through their study that CRISPR may not work for everyone. This paper will review gene editing technology and its ethical concerns.
Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived In Vitro Gametogenesis and Synthetic Embryos—It Is Never Too Early for an Ethical Debate

Stefanie Horer,Michael Feichtinger,Margit Rosner,Markus Hengstschläger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/stcltm/szad042

2023-07-20

Stem Cells Translational Medicine

Abstract:Abstract Recently, 2 branches of the wide area of synthetic biology—in vitro gametogenesis and synthetic embryo development—have gained considerable attention. Rodent induced pluripotent stem cells derived via reprogramming of somatic cells can in vitro be differentiated into gametes to produce fertile offspring. And even synthetic embryos with organ progenitors were generated ex utero entirely from murine pluripotent stem cells. The use of these approaches in basic research, which is rightfully accompanied by an ethical discussion, will allow hitherto unattainable insights into the processes of the beginning of life. There is a broad international consensus that currently the application of these technologies in human-assisted reproduction must be considered to be unsafe and unethical. However, newspaper headlines also addressed the putatively resulting paradigm shift in human reproduction and thereby raised expectations in patients. Due to unsolved biological and technological obstacles, most scientists do not anticipate translation of any of these approaches into human reproductive medicine, if ever, for the next 10 years. Still, whereas the usage of synthetic embryos for reproductive purposes should be banned, in the context of in vitro-derived human gametes it is not too early to initiate the evaluation of the ethical implications, which could still remain assuming all technological hurdles can ever be cleared.

cell & tissue engineering
On recent advances in human engineering Provocative trends in embryology, genetics, and regenerative medicine

Roman Anton

Abstract:Advances in embryology, genetics, and regenerative medicine regularly attract attention from scientists, scholars, journalists, and policymakers, yet implications of these advances may be broader than commonly supposed. Laboratories culturing human embryos, editing human genes, and creating human-animal chimeras have been working along lines that are now becoming intertwined. Embryogenic methods are weaving traditional in vivo and in vitro distinctions into a new "in vivitro" (in life in glass) fabric. These and other methods known to be in use or thought to be in development promise soon to bring society to startling choices and discomfiting predicaments, all in a global effort to supply reliably rejuvenating stem cells, to grow immunologically non-provocative replacement organs, and to prevent, treat, cure, or even someday eradicate diseases having genetic or epigenetic mechanisms. With humanity's human-engineering era now begun, procedural prohibitions, funding restrictions, institutional controls, and transparency rules are proving ineffective, and business incentives are migrating into the most basic life-sciences inquiries, wherein lie huge biomedical potentials and bioethical risks. Rights, health, and heritage are coming into play with bioethical presumptions and formal protections urgently needing reassessment.

The ethics of gene editing in human stem cells

Chapter 12 Gene Editing in Human Embryos. A Comment on the Ethical Issues Involved

Advances in Genetic Editing of the Human Embryo

The Ethics of Human Embryo Editing via CRISPR-Cas9 Technology: A Systematic Review of Ethical Arguments, Reasons, and Concerns

Debating Ethical Issues in Genome Editing Technology

Gene editing: the risks and benefits of modifying human DNA

Ethics Review of the Research of Human Embryonic Stem Cells

Bioethics in human embryology: the double-edged sword of embryo research

Why Human Germline Editing is More Problematic than Selecting Between Embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships

Reasons and Reproduction: Gene Editing and Genetic Selection

An ethical pathway for gene editing.

Gene Editing in Pluripotent Stem Cells and Their Derived Organoids

The commercialization of human stem cells: ethical and policy issues

Ethical issues in stem cell research and therapy

Human gene therapy: scientific and ethical considerations.

Are null segregants new combinations of heritable material and should they be regulated?

Somatic Gene Therapy: Ethics and Access

Human Genome Editing is Not Unethical, Says Nuffield Council

Gene Editing Technology and Ethical Issues

Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived In Vitro Gametogenesis and Synthetic Embryos—It Is Never Too Early for an Ethical Debate

On recent advances in human engineering Provocative trends in embryology, genetics, and regenerative medicine