The results of the first gene-editing experiment conducted on a human embryo in the United States were published on Wednesday, and their implications cant be overstated. A research team was able to erase the gene mutation responsible for a condition causing sudden heart failure from a one-cell human embryo.

Researchers at Oregon Health & Science University, lead by Shoukhrat Mitalipov, used a tool called the Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, or CRISPR a DNA cutting and splicing machine that scientists can program to target a specific sequence of our DNA. Think of it as a precise carnival claw machine.

The ability to target and edit deadly gene mutations from a human embryo means diseases could be cured before a pregnancy even starts. Like Jonas Salks miracle cure for polio, perhaps embryonic gene editing could be the new vaccination.

But when the scientific journalNaturereleased the highly anticipated report, it once again raised concern about designer babies a fear that initially began after scientists successfully transplanted mitochondrial DNA, resulting in a so-called three-parent baby. According to some headlines, scientists were on the verge of making designer babies.

After all, if science can target a gene mutation for eradication, parents selecting hair and eye color and tweaking for increased intelligence cant be far off.But while the news is indeed huge, Aldous Huxleys dystopian Brave New World isnt as close as it might feel.

CRISPR, while incredible, has yet to be perfected to yield real-life results for humans. And its less likely to lead to designer-baby kits than to be used to target known genetic disorders. In fact, the editing of a human embryo isnt even the most exciting application of CRISPR released this summer.

So how will CRISPRs capabilities affect our lives? The answer lies in the political and technical impediments it faces.

How CRISPR could fight disease

Using CRISPR to experiment successfully on a human embryo is an important scientific advancement, but in the near term the technology is more likely to be used to treat or potentially eradicate genetic diseases in children and adults. One of the diseases currently in CRISPRs crosshairs is Huntingtons disease: a fatal genetic disease that destroys nerve cells in the brain of the sufferer, leading to mental and physical deterioration.

In June a report was released showing CRISPR had targeted and reversed the occurrence of Huntingtons disease in mice. While this doesnt sound as exciting as editing the genes of a human embryo, the success of this experiment is a tangible, practical bombshell.

In the world of clinical trials, testing on an animal subject is the step before clinical trials on humans. Although researchers are a few years out from being able to conduct CRISPR trials for Huntingtons disease, other advances with the technology are moving apace.

The summer 2017 edition of Genome magazine reported that a possible therapy using CRISPR technology and targeting a rare immune disorder, granulomatous disease, or CGD, could be used on humans in the next year. Researchers successfully corrected the genetic mutation causing CGD by using some of the patients own blood-forming stem cells.

Again, mice played a pivotal role: The edited cells were injected into the mice, then as programmed by CRISPR, worked their way into the bone marrow, where neutrophils (the missing defense mechanism in CGD patients) began being produced. Corrected cells programmed to produce normal neutrophils can theoretically be reintroduced into human sufferers with the same results.

But genetic variation in the disparate human population means one CRISPR code doesnt fit all. As each disease needs its specially designed tool, each person may need additional genetic testing to see if the tool even works for their unique DNA code.

Proposed federal budget cuts might stop CRISPR before it even starts

The National Institutes of Health, nested within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has a tight rein on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell line research, or hES. President Bill Clinton signed a law restricting research on human embryos that resulted in embryosdestruction. George W. Bush, fueled by his evangelical base, further restricted testing to fewer hES lines.

In 2009, President Barack Obama overturned the Bush-era law and expanded the number of lines that once again could be scientifically studied and importantly, funded through the NIH. The Trump administrations record of rejecting scientific consensus, courting the religious right and slashing the federal budget doesnt bode well for accelerating hES research, let alone for CRISPR technology.

The successful editing of a human embryo is a breakthrough worthy of celebration,but with proper funding and continued research,equally stunning advancements with CRISPR could help many more people as the technology takes aim at a widening range of genetic diseases.

Go here to see the original:
CRISPR Helped 'Edit' A Human Embryo But That's Not All It Can Do - HuffPost

Comments are closed.