Abstract:This paper reports the results of a public engagement study on heritable human genome editing (HHGE) carried out in South Africa, which was conducted in accordance with a study protocol that was published in this journal in 2021. This study is novel as it is the first public engagement study on HHGE in Africa. It used a deliberative public engagement (DPE) methodology, entailing inter alia that measures were put in place to ensure that potential participants became informed about HHGE, and that deliberations between the participants were facilitated with the aim of seeking consensus. A diverse group of 30 persons was selected to participate in the DPE study, which took place via Zoom over three consecutive weekday evenings. The main results are: Provided that HHGE is safe and effective, an overwhelming majority of participants supported allowing the use of HHGE to prevent genetic health conditions and for immunity against TB and HIV/Aids, while significant majorities opposed allowing HHGE for enhancement. The dominant paradigm during the deliberations was balancing health benefits (and associated improvements in quality of life) with unforeseen health risks (such as loss of natural immunity). The seriousness of a health condition emerged as the determining factor for the policy choice of whether to allow an application of HHGE. More generally, equal access to HHGE qua healthcare service featured as an important value, and it was uncontested that the South African government should allocate resources to promote scientific research into HHGE. These results are aligned with the policy principles for regulating HHGE in South Africa suggested by Thaldar et al. They call for urgent revision of South African ethics guidelines that currently prohibit research on HHGE, and for dedicated HHGE legal regulations that provide a clear and comprehensive legal pathway for researchers who intend to conduct HHGE research and clinical trials.

Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals

Challenging the Boundaries Between Treatment, Prevention, and Enhancement in Human Genome Editing

Recent Developments in the Regulation of Heritable Human Genome Editing

Genome Editing Dilemma: Navigating Dual-Use Potential and Charting the Path Forward

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

Focusing on Human Rights: a framework for CRISPR germline genome editing ethics and regulation

Human Germline Genome Editing

Adopt a Moratorium on Heritable Genome Editing

Enabling responsible public genomics

The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

Debating Ethical Issues in Genome Editing Technology

Heritable human genome editing: correction, selection and treatment

Gene editing: the risks and benefits of modifying human DNA

A deliberative public engagement study on heritable human genome editing among South Africans: Study results

Governance of Gene-edited Plants: Insights from the History of Biotechnology Oversight and Policy Process Theory

Human Genome Editing is Not Unethical, Says Nuffield Council

A society-wide conversation is needed about germline genome editing using CRISPR

An analysis of different concepts of "identity" in the heritable genome editing debate

Germline genome editing of human IVF embryos should not be subject to overly stringent restrictions

Integrating Public Participation, Transparency and Accountability Into Governance of Marketing Authorisation for Genome Editing Products

Governing gene editing in agriculture and food in the United States