He Jiankui defends 'world's first gene-edited babies'

[EEEEEEP]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-46368731

A scientist at a Chinese University, has rocked the world by editing the genes of embryos. As per the video below:

- Couple started pregnancy via IVF
- Proteins and "additional" instructions were sent in for a genetic surgery
- THe door for HIV was closed
- Genes were sequenced for the twins were checked and worked "safely"
- No gene was changed except for the one that was related to how HIV enters cells
..
In other words (as one commenter has put it)..
(1) genetic modification to cure AIDS were applied to two yet-to-be born human babies
(2) the potential and nature of any side-effects is unknown.
(3) the babies did not have the disease
(4) alternative treatments already exist


What was his goals?
- To eradicate the world of heritable diseases by deleting or changing troublesome coding in embryos
- To give future babies a chance at surviving

Why are people scared?
- It can ruin the individuals genes (via unintended changes in structures  in the DNA structure)
- Future generations can be affected by these changes
...
Do you think that this is a disservice to science? Is this the case that the area of science very new and  ethics has not caught up?

[Erutepa]

I definently think that this is a area of western science which is being constrained by arguably outdated ethics. Meanwhile the much more relaxed ethics in (mainly) China allow this kind of research.
As for how good this is for science, I cannot know, since I have not a clue how researched this trial is. That being said, it doesn't seem too radical a modification and is targeted towards aliviating disease, rather than feeding some more 'dubious ' designer baby thing. This leads me to lean more towards support of this, given it is adequately researched.
It might very well end up being a failure for which China is subjected to head shaking, or a success for which Western country's ethics are loosened. Of course it may also end mildly and not result in much at all.
But this is just my brain thoughts written quickly on my phone in a short lapse of reception, and by all means disagree.

[EEEEEEP]

I definently think that this is a area of western science which is being constrained by arguably outdated ethics. Meanwhile the much more relaxed ethics in (mainly) China allow this kind of research.
As for how good this is for science, I cannot know, since I have not a clue how researched this trial is. That being said, it doesn't seem too radical a modification and is targeted towards aliviating disease, rather than feeding some more 'dubious ' designer baby thing. This leads me to lean more towards support of this, given it is adequately researched.
It might very well end up being a failure for which China is subjected to head shaking, or a success for which Western country's ethics are loosened. Of course it may also end mildly and not result in much at all.
But this is just my brain thoughts written quickly on my phone in a short lapse of reception, and by all means disagree.

Ethics in China aren't relaxed for this kind of thing.

It is outlawed in China, and he will most likely be under investigation. The university did not know about his research.
.https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/nov/29/work-on-gene-edited-babies-blatant-violation-of-the-law-says-china

[Erutepa]

Ethics in China aren't relaxed for this kind of thing.

It is outlawed in China, and he will most likely be under investigation. The university did not know about his research.
.https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/nov/29/work-on-gene-edited-babies-blatant-violation-of-the-law-says-china

Consider my biased views corrected.
In this case, given this extra context, I am not sure where I stand on this. Due to the 'secret' conduction of the experiment, it in of itself doesn't offer much to the scientific literature or feild. However, that being said, it may catalyse the works of others
Thanks for the correction and I will be interested to see how this concludes

[vox nihili]

I'm going to ignore the ethical debate about whether or not it's acceptable to edit embryos, mainly because the debate is super challenging and I'm not really sure yet what I think about whether or not it's ok. Suffice to say though that the potential for serious ramifications of such gene editing is very real and we probably are flying blind a little bit insofar as this is concerned.

What really serves as a red flag in this is the way that this is done. The reason science has become such an important force in the world is because it concerns itself with a particular process of discerning information. This is what makes science science. The rigorous process of experimentation, of careful documentation and, critically, doing all of this by a strict set of ethical principles is what distinguishes science from other pursuits of knowledge and what makes it so reliable. This guy is just a ridiculous cowboy who's trying to make a shiny toy. His experiments do very little to advance our understanding of gene editing; they're just a stunt to try to demonstrate that it's possible (which we already knew but forbade due to concerns with ethics). Given these experiments don't really give us new information, the potential ethical implications need to be weighed against this, making these particularly concerning.