The UK Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill, having passed all the Parliamentary stages, is expected to get royal assent and pass into law either this week or next week. The date is yet to be announced. The bill deregulates whole classes of GMOs in England that are claimed to be able to arise naturally. While the technology is hyped as being able to revolutionise agriculture, an analysis by Beyond GM shows that although several gene-edited crops and a few animals have been approved for commercialisation over the last decade, particularly in the US and Japan, few have made it to market and most have been abandoned, often without a single clear explanation as to why. GMWatch comment on Bill and analysis by Beyond GM

 

 

It's still far too premature to try to use powerful new technologies to edit genes that can be passed down from generation to generation, according to the organisers of the Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing that concluded Wednesday in London. Techniques that have made it easier to manipulate DNA still produce too many mistakes for scientists to be confident any children born from edited embryos would be healthy, according to the summit's organisers. Moreover, a broad societal debate about the implications for humanity would be necessary before moving forward, the summit organisers said. "Heritable human genome editing remains unacceptable at this time," the committee said in the summit's closing statement. "Heritable human genome editing should not be used unless, at a minimum, it meets reasonable standards for safety and efficacy, is legally sanctioned, and has been developed and tested under a system of rigorous oversight that is subject to responsible governance. At this time, these conditions have not been met." NPR

 

 

Critics of the Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing (see above) were disappointed with it, saying it gave short shift to the ethical debate around heritable human genome editing. The anti-eugenics group Stop Designer Babies tweeted in response to the conference organisers, "Can [you] all confirm that conversation around HHGE [heritable human genome editing] is about WHETHER it should be used, and that you'll accept the possible conclusion that it should NOT?" The summit organisers' closing statement, published by the Royal Society of the UK, does indeed say, "Public discussions and policy debates continue and are important for resolving whether this technology should be used." But it's still not clear whether a "no" from the public would be honoured. Comment by GMWatch on Royal Society press release and Twitter response by Stop Designer Babies

 

We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible by readers’ donations. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!