He intentionally dodged ethical review and the law, the consent forms he had the parents’ sign obfuscated the nature of the treatment, the experimental treatment offered no benefit over the currently used treatment to prevent HIV transmission from the father (sperm washing), the parents likely only agreed because the law prevented them from otherwise having biological children (IVF isn’t available to HIV+ patients in China), the high risk of modifying non-target genes was well known, and he knew that the gene he introduced is believed to be linked to neurological differences.
- 0 Posts
- 7 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: March 22nd, 2024
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
…are we sure he’s not doing any more human germ line gene editing without ethical approval or patient consent?
The upper row is from the EU’s Directive 67/548/EEC which has since been replaced with the international GHS (oddly enough a UN standard instead of ISO). The lower ones are in fact the DOT symbols from the US rather than the very similar GHS transport symbols (including the UN numbers). No idea where this figure showing EU-specific hazards for containers and US-specific hazards for transport together would’ve come from.
A dogwhistle for “the Jews”
Elon enters the FBI’s inner sanctum and must solve the Vat’s riddles three in order to prove he’s not a gay communist
what would you look like without a jaw?