ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026
From Prohibition to Prudent Opening : Exploring the Legalization of Human Germline Gene Editing for Correcting Genetic Diseases.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid advancement of human germline gene editing (HGGE) technology has brought opportunities for gene therapy in patients with rare diseases. However, due to risks related to technical safety, ethics, and societal concerns, some countries have explicitly prohibited the application of germline gene editing. In reality, the use of HGGE for correcting genetic diseases contributes to safeguarding the fundamental rights of patients with rare genetic disorders and their offspring. The off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology are controllable, and preliminary clinical successes have been achieved, with a low probability of substantial harm. Moreover, the expected number of actual applications is minimal, meaning it will not significantly alter the human gene pool in the short term. When applied reasonably, HGGE for correcting genetic diseases does not pose the aforementioned ethical or social risks. Its application is ethically justified, and by implementing matching safety safeguards and regulatory frameworks, the legalization of HGGE for genetic disease correction can be achieved, thereby balancing technological innovation with human rights protection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41824173What 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.