ArticleJournal of Zhejiang University. Science. B
Experiments that led to the first gene-edited babies: the ethical failings and the urgent need for better governance.
Article in Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Ethics of Human Embryo Editing via CRISPR-Cas9 Technology: A Systematic Review of Ethical Arguments, Reasons, and Concerns.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2025Pooled it
- Genetically Modified and Gene-Edited Organisms-Objectives, Public Perception and Applications.Biology · 2026Review
- Navigating the ethical world of clinical researchers in China: challenges and pathways for improvement.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Review
- Biosafety considerations triggered by genome-editing technologies.Biosafety and health · 2025Review
- Ethics in scientific research: a lens into its importance, history, and future.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Curing "GFP-itis" in Bacteria with Base Editors: Development of a Genome Editing Science Program Implemented with High School Biology Students.The CRISPR journal · 2023Article
- Curing "GFP-itis" in Bacteria with Base Editors: Development of a Genome Editing Science Program Implemented with High School Biology Students.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Inhibition of HIV-1 replication using the CRISPR/cas9-no NLS system as a prophylactic strategy.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Governance of Heritable Human Gene Editing World-Wide and Beyond.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Ethical and practical considerations for cell and gene therapy toward an HIV cure: findings from a qualitative in-depth interview study in the United States.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- The Public Perception of the #GeneEditedBabies Event Across Multiple Social Media Platforms: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Observational
- Comparison of public discussions of gene editing on social media between the United States and China.PloS one · 2022Article
- Governing biotechnology to provide safety and security and address ethical, legal, and social implications.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Human Germline Gene Editing from Maslahah Perspective: The Case of the World's First Gene Edited Babies.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- Article
- CRISPR: a journey of gene-editing based medicine.Genes & genomics · 2020Review
- The genome editing revolution: review.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2020Review
- Genome editing with the CRISPR-Cas system: an art, ethics and global regulatory perspective.Plant biotechnology journal · 2020Review
- Ethical and scientific issues of gene-edited twin by clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats Cas9 technologyJournal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid developments of science and technology in China over recent decades, particularly in biomedical research, have brought forward serious challenges regarding ethical governance. Recently, Jian-kui HE, a Chinese scientist, claimed to have "created" the first gene-edited babies, designed to be naturally immune to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The news immediately triggered widespread criticism, denouncement, and debate over the scientific and ethical legitimacy of HE's genetic experiments. China's guidelines and regulations have banned germline genome editing on human embryos for clinical use because of scientific and ethical concerns, in accordance with the international consensus. HE's human experimentation has not only violated these Chinese regulations, but also breached other ethical and regulatory norms. These include questionable scientific value, unreasonable risk-benefit ratio, illegitimate ethics review, invalid informed consent, and regulatory misconduct. This series of ethical failings of HE and his team reveal the institutional failure of the current ethics governance system which largely depends on scientist's self-regulation. The incident highlights the need for urgent improvement of ethics governance at all levels, the enforcement of technical and ethical guidelines, and the establishment of laws relating to such bioethical issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.