, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 483–488 | Cite as

Chinese biotech versus international ethics? Accounting for the China–America CRISPR ethical divide

  • Lijing Jiang
  • Hallam Stevens

Divided Responses

In March 2015, molecular biologists concerned about the use of the new gene-editing technology called Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) met in Napa, California to consider ethical issues raised by the new technique. Because the CRISPR-Cas9 system targets DNA at very specific sites with high efficiency, the technique offers a powerful way to cut and paste genes. Using CRISPR to modify non-human animal embryos has been shown to be an effective way to alter the genome of whole organisms without needing to rely on embryonic stem cells or homologous recombination. The possibility of applying such organism-wide gene editing to humans has renewed concerns about the consequences of ‘designing’ humans.

The final statement of the Napa meeting, at which all of the participants were American, “strongly discourage[d] … any attempts at germline genome modification for clinical application in humans, while societal, environmental, and ethical...


  1. Baltimore, D. et al (2015) A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification. Science 348 (6230): 36–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen, Z. (1999) Shengwu jishu qiancheng wuliang [The unlimited prospects of biotechnology]. Zhishi jingji [Knowledge Economy] (6): 22–26.Google Scholar
  3. Cheng, L. (2006) Ethics: China already has clear stem-cell guidelines. Nature 440 (7087): 992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Committee on Science, Technology, and Law at the National Academies (2015) NAS and NAM initiative on human gene editing. 24 June,, accessed 29 June 2015.
  5. Hu, M. (2015) Gai de liao jiyin rao bu guo lunli zhongguo kexuejia xiugai renlei peitai jiyin re zhengyi [Genes are editable, ethics cannot be bypassed: Genetic editing in human embryos by Chinese scientists incurred controversy]. China Science Daily 6 June: 4.Google Scholar
  6. Liang, P. et al (2015) CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein & Cell 6 (5): 363–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jiang, L. (2015) IVF the Chinese way: Zhang Lizhu and post-mao human in vitro fertilization research. East Asian Science, Technology and Society 9 (1): 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Regalado, A. (2015) Engineering the perfect baby. MIT Technology Review 5 March.Google Scholar
  9. Sarewitz, D. (2015) CRISPR: Science can’t solve it. Nature 522 (7557): 413–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Schneider, L. (2003) Biology and Revolution in Twentieth-Century China. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Shapiro, J. (2001) Mao’s War Against Nature: Politics and the Environment in Revolutionary China. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Stein, R. (2015) Critics lash out at Chinese scientists who edited DNA in human embryos. NPR, 23 April,, accessed 28 June 2015.
  13. Sun, X. (2015) Zhongguo kexuejia xiugai renlei peitai jiyin yin zhengyi [Human embryonic genome editing by Chinese scientists raised controversy]. 23 April,, accessed 27 April 2015.
  14. Tatlow, D.K. (2015) A scientific ethical divide between China and West. New York Times 29 June: D3.Google Scholar
  15. UK Government (2015) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015 (coming into force on 29 October 2015). The National Archives,, accessed 16 June 2015.
  16. Wahlberg, A. et al (2013) From global bioethics to ethical governance of biomedical research. Social Science & Medicine 98: 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wang, S. (2015) Xiugai renlei peitai jiyin yanjiu re zhengyi: dang kexue yu lunli zhuang zai yiqi [Human embryonic genome editing raised controversy: When science clashes with ethics]. China Science Daily 29 April: 1.Google Scholar
  18. Zeng, Y. and Xie, T. (2015) Shougai renlei peitai jiyin 80hou tiancai chuzi Jiangmen [The genius of 80s generation who first edited genome in human embryos comes from Jiangmen]. South Metropolitan Daily 29 April: JB04.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The London School of Economics and Political Science 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lijing Jiang
    • 1
  • Hallam Stevens
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological UniversitySingapore

Personalised recommendations