|
|
Giving Tuesday is right around the corner. Is Center for Genetics and Society in your plans this year? Your donation supports the only independent nonprofit organization in the US bringing public attention to social justice concerns arising from human genome editing, abuse in the fertility industry, DNA profiling in law enforcement, and other genetic technologies poised to shape our world. Mark your calendar for December 3!
|
|
|
|
Climate Crisis, Designer Babies, Our Common Future
CGS, along with the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society and the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, hosted a discussion on October 18 between scholar john a. powell and climate change activist Bill McKibben. Participants described the evening as “inspirational,” “thought-provoking,” and “just what is needed at this point in time.” If you missed it, don’t worry: You can now watch the video on demand.
|
|
|
|
Anya: What Does It Mean to Be Human?
CGS Executive Director Marcy Darnovsky participated in an October 29 screening and panel discussion of the new “science + fiction” film Anya. Darnovsky, along with filmmaker Carylanna Taylor and colleagues from UC San Francisco and the Innovative Genomics Institute, explored the puzzles and ethical quandaries the movie poses.
|
|
|
|
Getting Serious about Social Implications
On November 6 in Washington, D.C., Marcy Darnovsky presented at a daylong meeting on “Ethical, Societal, and Policy Issues in Germline Gene Editing” convened by the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy. Her presentation, “Heritable Genome Editing: Getting Serious About Social Implications” was part of a panel on “Viewpoints on the Path Forward.”
|
|
|
|
Why Has Abuse in the IVF Industry Gone Ignored?
Pamela Mahoney Tsigdinos, Biopolitical Times | 10.15.2019
In a first-of-its-kind workshop, scholars, patients, and medical professionals came together to discuss the many forms of abuse patients suffer at the hands of the rapidly-expanding reproductive technology industry—and why it’s so difficult to hold “big fertility” accountable.
|
|
|
|
Another $5.5 Billion for the California Stem Cell Agency?
Pete Shanks, Biopolitical Times | 11.04.2019
As the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine gears up to ask taxpayers for billions of additional public dollars, critics point out that agency advocates have pinned their case on the dubiously rosy prospect of medical breakthroughs and cures, much as they did in 2004.
|
|
|
|
Controversial ‘3-Parent Baby’ Fertility Technique Fails to Deliver for Older Women
Emily Mullin, Medium One Zero | 10.15.2019
Some fertility experts have pushed so-called mitochondrial replacement as a fertility booster for women over 37, but a new study offers no evidence to support this claim. CGS’ Marcy Darnovsky notes that the mission creep surrounding ‘3-parent baby’ techniques is a sign of what’s in store if heritable gene editing is permitted.
|
|
|
|
How Big Is the Fertility Services Sector?
Alison Motluk, Hey Reprotech! | 10.15.2019
Investors are paying close attention to the global fertility services market, which carries an estimated value of up to $25 billion annually. These numbers are only expected to go up.
|
Why an IVF Bill Is the Next Fault Line for the French Republic
Camille Robcis, The Washington Post | 10.14.2019
The French National Assembly will soon vote on a bill that extends access to assisted reproductive technologies to single women and lesbian couples. The proposed change has sparked fierce debate among policymakers and the public.
|
Sperm Donor Sues Because His Medical School Misused His Sperm
Ellen Trachman, Above The Law | 10.09.2019
An Oregon doctor is suing Oregon Health and Science University for misusing sperm he donated while attending medical school. Despite promises that no more than five children would be created using his material, he has discovered 17 offspring so far, many of whom unknowingly live and attend school in the same communities.
|
|
Controversial ‘Gay Gene’ App Provokes Fears of a Genetic Wild West
Amy Maxmen, Nature | 10.29.2019
The new “How Gay Are You?” app warns users that it does not “predict same-sex attraction,” but it does “place them along a gradient of same-sex attraction” based on their uploaded genetic data. Scientists and genetic counselors say that the app and other unregulated tools like it can cause anxiety, unnecessary medical expenses, stigmatization and worse.
|
|
| HUMAN GENETIC MODIFICATION |
|
|
New ‘Prime’ Genome Editor Could Surpass CRISPR
Jon Cohen, Science | 10.21.2019
A refined version of CRISPR, referred to as “prime editing,” appears to target genomes more precisely than CRISPR, a development that could open the door to expanded medical use in humans.
|
|
|
|
|
Using CRISPR to Edit Eggs, Sperm, or Embryos Does Not Save Lives
Tina Rulli, STAT | 10.15.2019
Supporters of CRISPR for heritable gene editing often insist it should only be used in cases of serious medical need. But does any application of this technology qualify as a medical need? Creating a person without a particular genetic disease who would otherwise not exist should not be considered the same thing as treating or curing existing diseases.
|
|
Ethical Research — The Long and Bumpy Road from Shirked to Shared
Sarah Franklin, Nature | 10.29.2019
It wasn’t always the case, but the ethics of research is now everybody’s business. Expert knowledge and reliable data are essential but never enough. Bioethics must rely less on specialized expertise and more on diversity and inclusivity to create humane and trustworthy governance of emerging technologies.
|
How Science Has Shifted Our Sense of Identity
Nathaniel Comfort, Nature | 10.08.2019
Scientism is the ideology that science is the only valid way to understand the world and solve social problems. In many cases, fetishizing science has limited our understanding of humanity, revealing less about who we are and more about what we’re willing to believe.
|
|
|
State Stem Cell Agency Hails Sales Tax Revenue, Job Growth as It Nears End of Life
Erin Allday, San Francisco Chronicle | 10.09.2019
Just ahead of filing paperwork for a $5.5 billion ballot measure in 2020, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine released a self-funded economic impact study that reported favorably on its contributions to the state’s economy. Many readers, however, note that the economic gains CIRM claims credit for would likely have happened anyway.
|
|
|
