ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020
The Ethics of Gene Editing from an Islamic Perspective: A Focus on the Recent Gene Editing of the Chinese Twins.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond Earth: Recent Advancements in Microgravity Biomedical and Genetic Research in Saudi Arabia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Theological and Ethical Perspectives on Gene Editing and the Sanctity of Life: Rare Genetic Diseases in the Philippines as a Model.Journal of religion and health · 2025Review
- Gene Editing: Developments, Ethical Considerations, and Future Directions.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2025Article
- An Ethical Roadmap for Prioritizing Medical Resources Within Muslim Societies During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of religion and health · 2021Article
- Human Germline Gene Editing from Maslahah Perspective: The Case of the World's First Gene Edited Babies.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2021Article
- CRISPR-Cas9 and He Jiankui's Case: an Islamic Bioethics Review usingAsian bioethics review · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In light of the development of "CRISPR" technology, new promising advances in therapeutic and preventive approaches have become a reality. However, with it came many ethical challenges. The most recent worldwide condemnation of the first use of CRISPR to genetically modify a human embryo is the latest example of ethically questionable use of this new and emerging field. Monotheistic religions are very conservative about such changes to the human genome and can be considered an interference with God's creation. Moreover, these changes could cause perpetual changes to future generations. The Muslim scholars establish their decisions by addressing five foundations of Islamic law i.e. "maqāṣid al sharı̄`a"; the purposes of the law. These are dın̄ (religion), nafs (life), nasl (progeny), `aql (intellect) and māl (wealth). To achieve this, the five principles should all be met before approval of an experiment like the Chinese embryo modifications; Qaṣd (intention) which is achieved in this case as it aims to protect the embryo from HIV. Yaqın̄ (certainty) and Ḍarar (injury) were not satisfied as they require strong scientific certainty of the procedures, and evidence of safety. Ḍarūra (necessity) by which the alternatives being compared; in this case more established and proven safe alternatives to protect the HIV transmission from the father are available, so this principle is not met. The final principle is `Urf (custom), by which the social context of using any contemporary technology should be taken in consideration, and clearly this was not achieved. Collectively, germline changes are rejected from an Islamic perspective until the five principles are fulfilled. In the Chinese Twins gene editing case, there was clearly no justification or support for it according to the Muslim Jurisprudence laws. These laws and approaches can serve as an ethical checklist for such controversial research, especially in early stages of the research.
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.