The role of scientific self-regulation for the control of genome editing in the human germline: The lessons from the Asilomar and the Napa meetings show how self-regulation and public deliberation can lead to regulation of new biotechnologies

Daniel Gregorowius; Nikola Biller-Andorno; Anna Deplazes-Zemp

doi:10.15252/embr.201643054

The role of scientific self-regulation for the control of genome editing in the human germline: The lessons from the Asilomar and the Napa meetings show how self-regulation and public deliberation can lead to regulation of new biotechnologies

EMBO Rep. 2017 Mar;18(3):355-358. doi: 10.15252/embr.201643054. Epub 2017 Feb 20.

Authors

Daniel Gregorowius¹, Nikola Biller-Andorno¹, Anna Deplazes-Zemp¹

Affiliation

¹ Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland.

Abstract

The Asilomar meeting on recombinant DNA technology and the Napa meeting on genome editing of the human germline are examples of self‐regulation by the scientific community. What can we learn from these cases to improve self‐regulation so as to ensure public trust and inform regulation of new technologies?

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

CRISPR-Cas Systems
Consensus*
Gene Editing / ethics*
Genetic Engineering / ethics*
Genome, Human*
Germ Cells / cytology
Germ Cells / metabolism
Humans
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Public Relations
Social Control, Informal / methods*