Forum 6

Forum 6

by Deleted user -
Number of replies: 3

The idea of “editing” babies seems like a sci-fi miracle that would never be replicated in real life. Jiankui HE, the scientist who edited a set of twin’s genomes to be immune to HIV, was probably not blind to the idea that was he was doing is not ethical. HE probably continued with his experiment in hope of praise and further scientific advancements outweighing the ethical concerns of how the experiment was performed. When the information first surfaced, the media praised HE for his new, innovative experiment. HE also claimed he had carried out the experiment to protect the twins from HIV later in life and felt the fact that people volunteered to participate in the research counted as their consent.

As far as “punishment” for HE, the Chinese and international committees regulating the ethical nature of experiments and finding disproved HE’s research, thus legitimizing all his other research. I do not think anything should have been done to HE physically, because “an eye for an eye” is not a legitimate way to punish scientific research. Since the incident, China’s ethical governance system has become more developed and no longer relies on self-regulating techniques, but still lacks integrity in regulation.

HE’s experiment compares to past experiments in the nature of its ethical concerns. Some characteristics of non-ethical research include, “questionable scientific value, unreasonable risk-benefit ratio, illegitimate ethics review, invalid informed consent, and regulatory misconduct.” Other experiments, such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment specifically, exhibit all these qualities. HE’s experiment differs from previous experiments in the fact that the participants where altered even before birth and even conception.

Unethical scientific and medical research, such as HE’s experiment, results in distrust from the general public towards the scientific community. This distrust ultimately results in the general public not following recommendations from the scientific community, even if the topic of recommendations has nothing to do with unethical experiments. An example would be the lack of trust from the general public towards the scientific community in global pandemics such as COVID-19.


Li, J. (2019). Experiments that led to the first gene-edited babies: the ethical failings and the urgent need for better governance. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 20(1): 32-38. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6331330

Normile, D. (2018). CRISPR bombshell: Chinese researcher claims to have created gene-edited twins. Science mag. Retrieved from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/crispr-bombshell-chinese-researcher-claims-have-created-gene-edited-twins


401 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Forum 6

by Deleted user -
Hi Annie!
I really enjoyed reading your forum post about this. I don’t know if you remember, but Dr. Styers talked about this in our Cell and Molec class freshman year almost when this happened! (Can you believe that we were in college and almost done with our first semester when this happened?) I agree with you that there are some ethical concerns to this, and it definitely could result in distrust from the public. It is crazy to me that we have this technology to edit genes on people and make them resistant/immune to HIV. I think that this study helped bring some light to ethical concerns and ways to regulate those better.

115 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Forum 6

by Deleted user -
Hello Annie, I find your forum post really interesting with a lot of good points and insight on the topic. I like your point about HE’s punishment how it shouldn’t be so literal and he shouldn’t get physically abused for what he did. He was able to legitimize his research and the fact it actually was shown to work should be grounds for him to not be punished as much as the laws state. I agree with your point on how it can cause doubt in the public and how people can have a hard time believing what the scientific community is saying because if someone can hid that from the world then there’s no telling what else they are keeping from us.

123 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Forum 6

by Deleted user -
Hey! i really agree with you when it comes to his reasoning for continuing even though it was unethical. I think that he just wanted to the recognition for this accomplishment and he used China's lacks rules to do it. This seems like he wanted the professional and international fame that comes with doing something so controversial. I also think that China needs to continue to expand its scientific regulating techniques. The rest of the world should also take a look at their own laws and see if they are leaving people vulnerable to being coerced into gene editing when it is not researched enough.

105 words