{"title":"社论:主题问题:理解基因编辑的技术和社会景观","authors":"R. Dimond, Jamie Lewis, Gareth Thomas","doi":"10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This 2021 themed issue is an acknowledgement of the emergence and significance of gene editing technology, which has already been described as contributing to a new era in human history, that is, as a revolution, a game-changer, and a disruptive technology. Gene editing has proved to be an inexpensive, expeditious, and effective technique that can target and edit (by deleting, adding, or otherwise modifying) genetic material. As such, it has broad applicability in the clinical, agricultural, and industrial arenas, while it has also proven popular in less formal settings such as for “biohacking” techniques (DIY biology). Our focus in this themed issue is the relevance of gene editing for human health. Somatic gene editing has already proved successful and is contributing to the development of therapeutic benefits for some types of childhood blindness, spinal muscular atrophy, and sickle cell disease (Ledford, 2020). Reproductive (germline) gene editing is more controversial, and there has been increasing concern about the rapid pace of development. Concerns about risk include the introduction of unintended genetic changes (known as “off target” effects), which would be irrevocable and irreversible, meaning that there are significant “known unknowns” about the long-term health implications for the child. New Genetics and Society has a long history in documenting the emergence of new technologies and the ensuing debates (see, for example, Parry (2003), Haddow et al. (2010) and Sleeboom-Faulkner et al. (2011), to name a few). Many authors continue to debate the risks and benefits of gene editing, following a familiar path of assessing new technologies in terms of their safety, ethics, and public opinion (Martin et al. 2020, So et al. 2021). The UK, in particular, employs a closely regulated yet liberal approach to supporting new reproductive technologies and, in February 2016, Kathy Niakan (Francis Crick, UK) became the New Genetics and Society, 2021 Vol. 40, No. 4, 361–366, https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032","PeriodicalId":54724,"journal":{"name":"New Genetics and Society","volume":"23 1","pages":"361 - 366"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial: themed issue: understanding the technical and social landscape of gene editing\",\"authors\":\"R. Dimond, Jamie Lewis, Gareth Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This 2021 themed issue is an acknowledgement of the emergence and significance of gene editing technology, which has already been described as contributing to a new era in human history, that is, as a revolution, a game-changer, and a disruptive technology. Gene editing has proved to be an inexpensive, expeditious, and effective technique that can target and edit (by deleting, adding, or otherwise modifying) genetic material. As such, it has broad applicability in the clinical, agricultural, and industrial arenas, while it has also proven popular in less formal settings such as for “biohacking” techniques (DIY biology). Our focus in this themed issue is the relevance of gene editing for human health. Somatic gene editing has already proved successful and is contributing to the development of therapeutic benefits for some types of childhood blindness, spinal muscular atrophy, and sickle cell disease (Ledford, 2020). Reproductive (germline) gene editing is more controversial, and there has been increasing concern about the rapid pace of development. Concerns about risk include the introduction of unintended genetic changes (known as “off target” effects), which would be irrevocable and irreversible, meaning that there are significant “known unknowns” about the long-term health implications for the child. New Genetics and Society has a long history in documenting the emergence of new technologies and the ensuing debates (see, for example, Parry (2003), Haddow et al. (2010) and Sleeboom-Faulkner et al. (2011), to name a few). Many authors continue to debate the risks and benefits of gene editing, following a familiar path of assessing new technologies in terms of their safety, ethics, and public opinion (Martin et al. 2020, So et al. 2021). The UK, in particular, employs a closely regulated yet liberal approach to supporting new reproductive technologies and, in February 2016, Kathy Niakan (Francis Crick, UK) became the New Genetics and Society, 2021 Vol. 40, No. 4, 361–366, https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032\",\"PeriodicalId\":54724,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Genetics and Society\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"361 - 366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Genetics and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Genetics and Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
这期2021年主题特刊是对基因编辑技术的出现和重要性的认可,基因编辑技术已经被描述为人类历史上一个新时代的贡献,即一场革命,一项改变游戏规则的技术,一项颠覆性技术。基因编辑已被证明是一种廉价、快速和有效的技术,可以针对和编辑(通过删除、添加或以其他方式修改)遗传物质。因此,它在临床,农业和工业领域具有广泛的适用性,同时它也被证明在不太正式的环境中很受欢迎,例如“生物黑客”技术(DIY生物学)。我们在这个主题问题上的重点是基因编辑与人类健康的相关性。体细胞基因编辑已经被证明是成功的,并有助于开发某些类型的儿童失明、脊髓性肌萎缩症和镰状细胞病的治疗益处(Ledford, 2020)。生殖(种系)基因编辑更具争议性,人们对其快速发展的担忧日益增加。对风险的担忧包括引入意想不到的基因变化(称为“脱靶”效应),这将是不可撤销和不可逆转的,这意味着对儿童的长期健康影响存在重大的“已知未知”。《新遗传学与社会》在记录新技术的出现和随之而来的争论方面有着悠久的历史(例如,参见Parry(2003)、Haddow等人(2010)和sleboom - faulkner等人(2011)等)。许多作者继续讨论基因编辑的风险和益处,遵循熟悉的从安全性、伦理和公众舆论方面评估新技术的路径(Martin et al. 2020, So et al. 2021)。特别是英国,采用严格监管但自由的方法来支持新的生殖技术,2016年2月,Kathy Niakan (Francis Crick,英国)成为《新遗传学与社会》,2021年第40卷,第4期,361-366,https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032
Editorial: themed issue: understanding the technical and social landscape of gene editing
This 2021 themed issue is an acknowledgement of the emergence and significance of gene editing technology, which has already been described as contributing to a new era in human history, that is, as a revolution, a game-changer, and a disruptive technology. Gene editing has proved to be an inexpensive, expeditious, and effective technique that can target and edit (by deleting, adding, or otherwise modifying) genetic material. As such, it has broad applicability in the clinical, agricultural, and industrial arenas, while it has also proven popular in less formal settings such as for “biohacking” techniques (DIY biology). Our focus in this themed issue is the relevance of gene editing for human health. Somatic gene editing has already proved successful and is contributing to the development of therapeutic benefits for some types of childhood blindness, spinal muscular atrophy, and sickle cell disease (Ledford, 2020). Reproductive (germline) gene editing is more controversial, and there has been increasing concern about the rapid pace of development. Concerns about risk include the introduction of unintended genetic changes (known as “off target” effects), which would be irrevocable and irreversible, meaning that there are significant “known unknowns” about the long-term health implications for the child. New Genetics and Society has a long history in documenting the emergence of new technologies and the ensuing debates (see, for example, Parry (2003), Haddow et al. (2010) and Sleeboom-Faulkner et al. (2011), to name a few). Many authors continue to debate the risks and benefits of gene editing, following a familiar path of assessing new technologies in terms of their safety, ethics, and public opinion (Martin et al. 2020, So et al. 2021). The UK, in particular, employs a closely regulated yet liberal approach to supporting new reproductive technologies and, in February 2016, Kathy Niakan (Francis Crick, UK) became the New Genetics and Society, 2021 Vol. 40, No. 4, 361–366, https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2021.2004032
期刊介绍:
New Genetics and Society: Critical Studies of Contemporary Biosciences is a world-leading journal which:
-Provides a focus for interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary, leading-edge social science research on the new genetics and related biosciences;
-Publishes theoretical and empirical contributions reflecting its multi-faceted development;
-Provides an international platform for critical reflection and debate;
-Is an invaluable research resource for the many related professions, including health, medicine and the law, wishing to keep abreast of fast changing developments in contemporary biosciences.
New Genetics and Society publishes papers on the social aspects of the new genetics (widely defined), including gene editing, genomics, proteomics, epigenetics and systems biology; and the rapidly developing biosciences such as biomedical and reproductive therapies and technologies, xenotransplantation, stem cell research and neuroscience. Our focus is on developing a better understanding of the social, legal, ethical and policy aspects, including their local and global management and organisation.