Suchergebnisse

With the discovery of the CRISPR/Cas9 method in 2012, the global research on gene drives - the deliberate release of genetically modified animals and plants into the environment - increased spectacularly, as the new methods are seen in particular as means to extinct vector-transmitted diseases such as malaria or dengue fever, or support agricultural production. The contribution examines the legality of gene drive releases within the EU and describes the efforts to find some international consensus on gene drive releases. As genetically modified animals, such as mosquitoes, which are released elsewhere, might also reach and spread in Europe, the EU has an interest to actively participate in the international discussions and bring in its experience with GMO legislation.

Das Spotlight von Alma Kolleck und Arnold Sauter stellt die Diskussion um Gene Drives im Vergleich zur Gentechnikkontroverse der letzten Jahrzehnte dar. Gene Drives (wörtlich übersetzt: Genantriebe) seien eine vergleichsweise neue Technologie, mit der durch Erhöhung der Vererbungswahrscheinlichkeit zumindest in der Theorie ganze Populationen von sich sexuell fortpflanzenden Tieren und Pflanzen verändert werden könnten. Da sie bislang nur im Labor getestet werden, sei ihre tatsächliche Wirkung noch unklar. Die Einschätzungen hinsichtlich ihrer möglichen positiven wie negativen Folgen seien vermutlich übersteigert, unterschieden sich dramatisch und führten zu verhärteten Fronten zwischen Befürworter*innen und Gegner*innen der Technologie. Damit weist der Diskurs, Alma Kolleck und Arnold Sauter zufolge, Merkmale vergangener Debatten um Gentechnologien auf, wie etwa eine Technologiefixierung statt einer Problemlösungsorientierung. Darüberhinausgehende neue Aspekte basierten auf der größeren Brisanz von Risikomanagement und -governance, da Gen-Drive-Organismen sich in Wildpopulationen autonom vermehren sollen. Dies gehe mit neuen Herausforderungen für die demokratische Mitsprache der Menschen in betroffenen Gebieten sowie für grenzübergreifende Absprachen einher.

AbstractGene drive technology is a nascent biotechnology with the potential to purposefully alter or eliminate a species. There have been broad calls for engagement to inform gene drive governance. Over the past seven years, the gene drive community has been developing risk assessment guidelines to determine what form future gene drive risk assessments take, including whether and how they involve engagement. To explore who is developing these guidelines and how engagement in risk assessment is being prescribed, we conduct a document analysis of gene drive risk assessment guideline documents from 2014 to 2020. We found that a narrow set of organizations have developed 10 key guideline documents and that with only one exception the documents prescribe a narrow, vague, or completely absent role for engagement in gene drive risk assessment. Without substantively prescribed engagement in guidelines, the relevance, rigor, and trustworthiness of gene drive risk assessment and governance will suffer.

With the advent of CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat)-based gene drive, present genetic research in schistosomiasis vector control envisages the breeding and release of transgenic schistosome-resistant (TSR) snail vectors to curb the spread of the disease. Although this approach is still in its infancy, studies focussing on production of genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes (including gene-drive mosquitoes) are well advanced and set the pace for other transgenic vector research. Unfortunately, as with other GM mosquitoes, open field release of gene-drive mosquitoes is currently challenged in part by some concerns such as gene drive failure and increased transmission potential for other mosquito-borne diseases among others, which might have adverse effects on human well-being. Therefore, not only should we learn from the GM mosquito protocols, frameworks and guidelines but also appraise the applicability of its current hurdles to other transgenic vector systems, such as the TSR snail approach. Placing these issues in a coherent comparative perspective, I argue that although the use of TSR snails may face similar technical, democratic and diplomatic challenges, some of the concerns over gene-drive mosquitoes may not apply to gene-drive snails, proposing a theory that community consent will be no harder and possibly easier to obtain for TSR snails than the experience with GM mosquitoes. In the future, these observations may help public health practitioners and policy makers in effective communication with communities on issues regarding the use of TSR snails to interrupt schistosomiasis transmission, especially in sub-Saharan Africa.

We must ensure that trials are scientifically, politically, and socially robust, publicly accountable, and widely transparent

Abstract
Gene drive is a new form of biotechnology designed to bias the inheritance of selected traits in animal or plant species that reproduce sexually and have relatively short reproductive cycles. Unlike traditional breeding techniques and other forms of biotechnology, gene drive is designed to spread in wild populations. As such, the prospect of its application raises ecological and socioeconomic concerns that the current system of biotechnology regulation in the USA is ill-equipped to address. Foremost among the proposals for reform is the need for deliberative participation in decision-making by stakeholders representing a broader range of interests and analytical perspectives. As appealing as they are in the abstract, these recommendations overlook both practical and political challenges to democratic governance in administration that have received little attention.

Gene drives may be capable of addressing ecological problems by altering entire populations of wild organisms, but their use has remained largely theoretical due to technical constraints. Here we consider the potential for RNA-guided gene drives based on the CRISPR nuclease Cas9 to serve as a general method for spreading altered traits through wild populations over many generations. We detail likely capabilities, discuss limitations, and provide novel precautionary strategies to control the spread of gene drives and reverse genomic changes. The ability to edit populations of sexual species would offer substantial benefits to humanity and the environment. For example, RNA-guided gene drives could potentially prevent the spread of disease, support agriculture by reversing pesticide and herbicide resistance in insects and weeds, and control damaging invasive species. However, the possibility of unwanted ecological effects and near-certainty of spread across political borders demand careful assessment of each potential application. We call for thoughtful, inclusive, and well-informed public discussions to explore the responsible use of this currently theoretical technology.