Jantina de Vries & Françoise Baylis | July 12, 2021
In July 2021, after more than two years of study and consultation, the World Health Organization’s Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing released two reports: a framework for governance and recommendations on human genome editing.
Sheetal Soni & Françoise Baylis | June 7, 2021
Five years ago, independent research teams in the U.S. and the U.K. succeeded in cultivating human embryos in the laboratory for 12-to-13 days – longer than ever before. They could have continued their research but didn’t. They stopped because of the broad international consensus that such research should not be permitted beyond 14 days.
Françoise Baylis | May 27, 2021
The 14-day rule, also known as the 14-day limit, “became a standard part of embryo-research oversight through the convergence of deliberations of various national committees over decades.” Until now, the ISSCR guidelines have been in lockstep with laws, regulations and guidelines endorsing the 14-day limit. No more.
Françoise Baylis | January 5, 2020
A month ago, there were countless commentaries on the one-year anniversary of the news that Chinese researcher He Jiankui had created the world’s first genome-edited twins. […] From my perspective, these comments miss the mark insofar as they fail to acknowledge that the birth of three genome-edited babies is not just the work of three scientists.
Françoise Baylis | December 10, 2019
Since the dramatic announcement of the world’s first genome-edited babies using CRISPR technology, there have been no more such announcements. This is due, in no small part, to discreet actions taken by the People’s Republic of China, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Russian Federation.
Un an après les premiers bébés CRISPR, des normes plus strictes sont en place pour éviter les dérives
Françoise Baylis | December 10, 2019
Depuis l’annonce de la naissance des premiers bébés dont le génome a été modifié grâce à la technologie CRIPSR, il n’y a plus eu de telles annonces. Cela est attribuable en bonne partie aux mesures discrètes prises par la République populaire de Chine, l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) et la Fédération de Russie.
Natalie Kofler, Françoise Baylis, Graham Dellaire & Landon Getz | October 1, 2019
Every year, around one million people die of mosquito-borne diseases. This is why mosquitoes are considered one of the deadliest living creatures on the planet — not because they are lethal themselves, but because many of the viruses and parasites they transmit are.
Françoise Baylis | April 3, 2019
It is a truism that good ethics begins with good facts. Here are some of the facts about the ethics and politics of heritable human genome editing from 2015 to 2019.
Françoise Baylis & Marcy Darnovsky | January 17, 2019
Despite the appearance of agreement, scientists are not of the same mind about the ethics and governance of human germline editing. These divergences have significant implications for research practice and policy concerning heritable human genome editing.
Françoise Baylis, Graham Dellaire & Landon Getz | December 10, 2018
Sam Sternberg, a CRISPR/Cas9 researcher at Columbia University, spoke for many when he said “I’ve long suspected that scientists, somewhere, would rush to claim the ‘prize’ of being first to apply CRISPR clinically to edit the DNA of human embryos, and use those embryos to establish pregnancies, but still, I’m shocked to find out it’s allegedly happened this quickly.”
Françoise Baylis, Graham Dellaire & Landon Getz | November 27, 2018
The scientific community has expressed widespread condemnation of He’s decision to initiate a pregnancy using genetically modified embryos — as “dangerous, “irresponsible” and “crazy.” What if mistakes are made? How can we be sure this powerful technology will benefit humankind? Are we ready for the consequences of genetically engineering our own evolution?
Françoise Baylis | November 26, 2018
Françoise Baylis responds to the recently announced birth of the world’s first genome edited babies and raises concerns about the scientific practice and ethical accountability.
Françoise Baylis | October 24, 2017
A 20th anniversary celebration of the Oviedo Convention begins today, October 24, in Strasbourg, France. In anticipation of this conference, many have been clamouring for changes to Article 13 of the Convention, which prohibits deliberately changing the genes that are passed on to children and future generations (human germline modification).
Françoise Baylis & Alana Cattapan | October 2, 2017
Françoise Baylis and Alana Cattapan defend the current prohibition in Canada on making genetic alterations that can be passed on to future generations.
Françoise Baylis | October 1, 2017
In September, Kathy Niakan at the Francis Crick Institute in London and her colleagues reported they had used CRISPR on human embryos to better understand human development.
Françoise Baylis | August 1, 2017
Shoukhrat Mitalipov, a reproductive biologist at Oregon Health and Science University, is nothing if not a pioneer. Now, in 2017, his team has reported safely and effectively modifying human embryos with the MYBPC3 mutation (which causes myocardial disease) using the gene editing technique CRISPR.
Françoise Baylis | February 17, 2017
Françoise Baylis wonders how it is that in 14 months (from December 2015 to February 2017), the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. National Academy of Medicine have moved human germline genome editing out of the category ‘irresponsible’ and into the category ‘permissible.’