CRISPR-Cas9: A revolution technology that will change our lives / Ethical and regulatory issues
If it is ever reliable and safe and accurate enough to be counted on scientifically, in the case of humans for therapies or to avoid the transmission of a disease, CRISPR-Cas9 is a revolutionary and very promising technology.
Bartha Maria Knoppers
Director, Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University 
Chairholder, Canada Research Chair in Law and Medicine 
Chair, Ethics Working Party, International Stem Cell Forum
Member, Steering Committee, Global Alliance for Genomics and Health
Despite its complicated name, the CRISPR-Cas9 technology is relatively simple and very effective at modifying the DNA of different cell types.
The technology is made up of two components: the CRISPR component recognizes a very specific portion of the genome and the Cas9 component is a protein that cuts DNA, like a molecular knife.
When the two components are put together in a cell, it’s possible to very accurately cut a genome.
When its genome is cut, a cell will quickly use its natural repair system to try to mend itself.
But it’s possible to force the cell to repair the cut by providing a specific piece of DNA that would correct a mutation, create one or even add a new gene.
The beauty of the system is that the CRISPR component can easily be modified to target any part of the genome.
The simplest analogy is to compare the CRISPR-Cas9 system to the find/replace function in word processing software.
CRISPR-Cas9 searches and donor DNA replaces or corrects.
CRISPR is not mentioned in any law. What is mentioned is the modification of the germ line. There is never a reference to a specific technology because it may be known as CRIPSR-Cas10 tomorrow. So the laws don’t specify a particular technology. They specify a situation that impacts human genetics.
Canada took a position in 2004 in the Assisted Human Reproduction Act by saying yes to basic research, saying yes to embryo research but only on extra embryos and prohibiting techniques and technologies that impact the germ line. So that means that everything that could one day prevent disease transmission in future generations is prohibited.
A study was conducted in 16 countries on prenatal diagnosis, pre-implantation diagnosis, embryo research, gene therapy and even germ line therapy to see if we could demonstrate that there was already a consensus on the topic. Three categories emerged. There are more permissive countries, there are conditions and not full freedom—like in China and other Asian nations, other countries that have set out regulations and controls with conditions and approval processes, and there are countries with complete bans.
It’s important to remember that CRISPR-Cas9 is not limited to humans. It can now be done on plants and animals—and we’re doing it—and just as much monitoring and discussions are required.
In my opinion, since I determined, following the analysis published in Science, that there was no gap in the legislation or in the ethical discussion, I believe that we need to begin with a broad discussion, which, yes, we should have had a long time ago. Intervening? Not necessarily. Regulating? Monitoring? Yes.
