this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
520 points (93.8% liked)

Science Memes

14387 readers
3048 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 116 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

He was found guilty of medical malpractice after gene editing babies by treating their embryos with CRISPR/Cas9. He claims that he was trying to make them resistant to HIV, and that medical ethics are preventing cures from being discovered, but his critics say that we know CRISPR is too unreliable to use on a genome the size of a human's, and is more likely to introduce dangerous mutations than apply the intended change, hence why no one else has done this before.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_Jiankui

[–] VolumetricShitCompressor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So why is he allowed to work in this field again? Seems wild

[–] KoalaUnknown@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

His assistants weren't though

[–] Dicska@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Making them resistant to HIV. How does he test it whether they actually are...?

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago

Sequence them; he was bashing in a gene that we already know conveys HIV resistance (but not complete immunity), the ∆32 mutation. If sequencing shows that the babies have the mutation, and also don't have any other negative mutations as a result of the experiment, then it was successful.

That 'and also' is the hard one to be sure about.

[–] Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

My understanding is that they were embryos from HIV infected parents, so they had very little chance of avoiding infection during birth. His argument is that their chances of survival were already so low, there's little harm that could be done if the treatment wasn't effective.

[–] ryedaft@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

I feel the need to point out that almost no babies get HIV from their mother as long as the mother is being successfully treated with anti retroviral medication.

[–] Dicska@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Thanks, I wasn't aware of the circumstances. It puts stuff in a different perspective.

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

The linked Wikipedia article says only their fathers were HIV-positive, and typically that wouldn't lead to a parent infecting their child unless they decided to share needles etc.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"I need a human baby" is a very difficult sentence to start a conversation with. I don't blame him for avoiding that awkward proposal.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Better to ask forgiveness than permission!

[–] Oneser@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

The ethics board does not approve the message.

[–] edinbruh@feddit.it 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Ok, but, does it really not work, or like, it's just that you would have to run it in a batch and kill the bad cells, which could be unethical on human embryos?

Like, could we grow legs on a lungfish (which Google says has a larger genome than humans) using CRISPR-cas9 if we did not care about botched embryos?

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

You'd need to test every cell in the embryo to be sure none of them had off-target mutations, and DNA sequencing doesn't leave the cell alive, so you can't prove it worked without killing the embryo. He tested some of the cells and discarded embryos where those cells were damaged, but there's no way to know if the untested cells in the embryos were fine, and given what we know about the reliability, it's more likely that there are problems than not.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

yea he was the chinese dude, doing unsanctioned/unethical sciences, which probably dint work nor his paper would be published anyways.