
London, England, Mar 15, 2019 / 10:03 am (CNA).- A group of 18 scientists and bioethicists from seven countries has called for a global moratorium on the practice of editing human DNA to create genetically modified babies until the international community can develop a “framework” for how to proceed in an ethical manner.
The group of scientists, in a March 13 editorial in the journal Nature, acknowledged that many people of religious belief find “the idea of redesigning the fundamental biology of humans morally troubling,” and that the practice could have serious societal consequences.
This practice of changing “heritable DNA” – found in human sperm, eggs, or embryos – is known as “germline editing.”
“By ‘global moratorium’, we do not mean a permanent ban,” the group of scientists wrote.
“Rather, we call for the establishment of an international framework in which nations, while retaining the right to make their own decisions, voluntarily commit to not approve any use of clinical germline editing unless certain conditions are met.”
The conditions for a nation to meet, the scientists say, should include giving public notice of its intention to engage in germline editing and consulting with other nations about “the wisdom of doing so,” as well as taking a suggested two years to ascertain whether there is “broad societal consensus” about whether germline editing is appropriate.
In addition, a coordinating body to provide information and reports about germline editing should be established, they say, possibly under the purview of the World Health Organization.
The call for a moratorium comes amid ethical questions surrounding a Chinese biophysicist who claims he created the first genetically modified babies late last year.
He Jiankui says his goal was to edit embryos to give them the ability to resist HIV infection by disabling the CCR5 gene, which allows HIV to enter a cell.
He says he used a technology known as CRISPR to edit sections of the human genome, performing the procedure on embryonic humans. The technology, which selectively “snips” and trims areas of the genome and replaces it with strands of desired DNA, has previously been used on adult humans and other species. CRISPR technology has only recently been used to treat deadly diseases in adults, and limited experiments have been performed on animals.
In a letter signed by 120 Chinese scientists, He was condemned for ignoring ethical guidelines. The letter called the gene manipulation a “Pandora’s box,” and said, “The biomedical ethics review for this so-called research exists in name only. Conducting direct human experiments can only be described as crazy.”
At least three of the authors of the Nature article have connections to CRISPR-based gene-editing technologies.
The Nature scientists did not rule out germline editing for research purposes, as long as the study did not involve the transfer of an embryo to woman’s uterus; nor did their call for a ban apply to gene editing in non-reproductive cells in order to treat diseases, because modifications done on those cells can be done with the informed consent of adults providing the cells, and the modifications are not heritable, i.e. they cannot be passed on to offspring.
Around 30 nations worldwide, including the United States, already have laws to directly or indirectly ban the clinical use of germline editing. CRISPR research on embryos is currently banned from receiving federal funding, but can be conducted using private funding. The Food and Drug Administration prohibits gene modification on viable human embryos, which means any genetically modified human embryos must be destroyed, rather than brought to term.
The scientists called for a fixed period – perhaps five years – when no clinical uses of germline editing are allowed worldwide.
“As well as allowing for discussions about the technical, scientific, medical, societal, ethical and moral issues that must be considered before germline editing is permitted, this period would provide time to establish an international framework,” they wrote.
The scientists noted that here is broad scientific consensus that germline editing is not yet safe or effective enough to be considered for clinical use. They also highlighted the distinction between “genetic correction,” which involves working to edit out rare mutations, and “genetic enhancement,” or the attempt to improve human individuals and the species.
The Nature scientists noted that even efforts at genetic correction, when undertaken in order to cure a disease, can have unintended consequences. For example, a common variant of the gene SLC39A8 decreases a person’s risk of developing hypertension and Parkinson’s disease, but increases their risk of developing schizophrenia, Crohn’s disease, and obesity.
This is also true for the genes that He worked with in his research, as altering those genes could make the genetically modified babies more susceptible to certain viral infections.
“Its influence on many other diseases – and its interactions with other genes and with the environment – remains unknown,” the scientists wrote.
“It will be much harder to predict the effects of completely new genetic instructions – let alone how multiple modifications will interact when they co-occur in future generations. Attempting to reshape the species on the basis of our current state of knowledge would be hubris.”
In Dignitas personae, its 2008 instruction on certain bioethical questions, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that while somatic cell gene therapy is in principle morally licit, “because the risks connected to [germ line cell therapy] are considerable and as yet not fully controllable, in the present state of research, it is not morally permissible to act in a way that may cause possible harm to the resulting progeny.”
The instruction also warned against a “eugenic mentality” that aims to improve the gene pool, adding that there could be social stigmas and privileges applied to people with certain genetic qualities, when “such qualities do not constitute what is specifically human.”
CNA spoke to John DiCamillo, an ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, in early 2017. He explained that somatic cell gene editing may be morally legitimate when used for “a directly therapeutic purpose for a particular patient in question, and if we’re sure we’re going to limit whatever changes to this person.” He pointed to gene therapy trials for disorders such as sickle cell disease and cancer that show promise for treating difficult disorders.
Editing sperm, eggs, or early embryos, however, presents serious concerns, he said. Manipulating sperm and ova requires removing them from a person’s body; if conception is achieved with these cells, it is nearly always through in vitro methods. This practice of in vitro fertilization is held by the Church to be ethically unacceptable because it dissociates procreation from the integrally personal context of the conjugal act.
Scientists at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research and education arm of Susan B. Anthony List, reacted to the Nature scientists’ proposal by saying their suggested moratorium does not go far enough.
“This proposal for a temporary moratorium on implanting and gestating gene-edited embryos is disappointingly short-sighted,” said Dr. David Prentice, CLI’s vice president and research director.
“Scientifically unsound and ethically problematic experiments on human embryos, including creating gene-edited embryos in the lab and then destroying them, would still be allowed and even encouraged. We call instead for the full prohibition of gene-editing experiments on embryos or germ cells – not just a speed bump.”
[…]
Um, he should be retired & sent to the Mr mccarick home for mitres gone south…
All of humanity was created by God. As Christians we are called to love God above all things, with all our hearts, with all our souls and with all our minds and TO LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES. I think that includes Muslims.
To truly love someone is to desire and will what is best for them, in this life and the life to come. Is it better for Muslims to stay Muslim, or to hear the Gospel and, by God’s grace, become Catholic?
Many Christian missionaries through the ages, including several early Franciscans who were stoned to death in Morocco, have given their lives for testifying and preaching the Gospel among the followers of the religion of peace. Many more Christians have been killed and enslaved by the triumphant armies of the religion of peace. See this scholarly interview by CWR Fr. Connolly:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/12/16/the-forgotten-history-of-christian-slavery-under-islam/
Of course Miss Rosemary. Neighbor means neighbor. We don’t exclude anyone from that love. God made us all.
Ah yes, but Christ Has Revealed True Love requires desiring Salvation for one’s beloved, so how can one be Loving anyone if they first and foremost do not desire that person’s Salvation?
I agree.
I think Leo has lost his mind establishing a prayer room at the Vatican for islamists. I doubt if Orthodox Christian Church would hear anything of this nonsense.
Indeed. The Orthodox Churches have had Islam rattling their gates for 1400 years. The know exactly what is at risk.
I was hoping he would be different, but it’s becoming more apparent that Pope Leo is a Francis clone.
I look forward to the new welcoming of immigrants by the Vatican.
To borrow and injunction, Pope Leo, tear down those walls.
TPR: instead of asking Uganda to accept our criminal “migrants”, I think we ought to advocate sending all of our illegal aliens to the Vatican. They’ll be delighted to receive them all as they would Christ. One million illegals should fit comfortably inside those wall of Vatican City State
Yes,, Yes Yes I completely agree with you.
Redux you are not making sense.
Here is your recent comment in Chapp’s CWR article on Dilexit.
‘ DiogenesRedux
October 14, 2025 at 1:10 am
ELIAS GALY: Are you advocating the weaponizatuon of the Eucharist to advance a political cause? Because that’s exactly what this was. I hope you’re not virtue signaling. ‘
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/10/10/reflections-on-dilexi-te-the-first-magisterial-document-of-leo-xivs-papacy/
Presumably the Pontifical Commission for the Vatican City State is responsible for overseeing the Vatican’s forward-looking abortion initiatives?
At least Cupich should be able to count on the support of abortion expert and Dark Vatican friend Senator Durbin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWqKPWO5T4o
Bingo. The same analogy came up in discussion the other day with daily communicants. We observe a boy’s club, the faithful abandoned while the lads climb the ladder and proclaim their personal truths as doctrine.
It doesn’t cut the mustard.
Deep State Leo.
The good news Cupich is leaving Chicago. The bad news is that Pope Leo next selection will likely be similar to Cupich.
The news will be news when the appointment is made! Not before. If you must speculate, speculate with Charity.
A “promotion” to the 109-acre Vatican city-state, rather than to a dicastery of the Holy See. And, as in the United States, when some House members are elected to the Senate, this can improve the average IQ of both houses. Waiting now to see who will replace Cardinal Cupich in Chicago…
Groundskeeper at the Leo XIV estate is nothing to sneer about. Besides there’s the camaraderie of two windy men from the Windy City.
A charitable construction of this appointment is that Cupich has been kicked upstairs to a largely ineffectual post at the Vatican. He’ll likely do less damage there than in Chicago.
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you. Most all the American catholic media outlets and pundits have been assuring us Leo wasn’t Francis 2.0 and claiming Leo didn’t side with Cupich in the Derbin award scandal. Not only has Leo not accepted Cupich’s resignation, he’s now given him yet another position, also meaning Cupich is staying on in Chicago for the foreseeable future.
I had such Hope, such joy at Pope Leo’s election. I thought I saw in him a good man, a holy man. But, no I was mistaken. It hurts my heart to see he really is Francis 2.0, as the saying goes. I remind myself that God is in charge so all is unfolding in accordance with his will.
His Will or His permissive will?
God does not Will that we accommodate a blasphemy of The Holy Ghost, due to the hardening of our hearts.
God wills that we are Faithful and Abide In The Word Of God Incarnate.
Every day I am more disappointed in Francis 2.0. Is this a reward for the havoc and cruelty Cupich has wreaked in Chicago? Nothing on China as they advance with their control of the Church; no ultimatums to those committing ACTUAL genocide of Christians in Nigeria; a big increase in the number of bishops in the US denying the TLM and sneering at altar rails, kneeling for communion, etc (why? because they KNOW Leo is Francis Lite, Francis with kinder words and the trick of wearing traditional vestments)…. but Cupich gets this.
If only we could hope and trust that this appointment was in the best interests of God…
And the damage to the Church continues
A meaningless membership shared with 5 other Cardinals, and a President (Sister Petrini!) and two Secretaries-General on top. Perhaps a first feathered step in getting the over-age Cupich out of Chicago and maybe out of the country and into regal Vatican episcopal obscurity?
My thought as well…when somebody high up the food chain causes a major scandal for the CEO, promoting them somewhere where they can do less damage is SOP. Will have to see who is tapped to replace him before commencing hair pulling, but frankly, past reinstituting pomp and circumstance, have yet to see much of any getting back on course for the Church…not yet, anyhow…
Unless I’m missing something, Cupich will be out of Chicago and US!
This is a sad appointment. I am getting more and more disappointed in this pope as he makes appalling decisions such as appointing Cupich. I am not a Trad! I am a common-sense American Catholic who realizes that promoting the ethics of normalizing homosexual acts in the Church, as in okaying homosexual marriage, is part of Cupich’s plan.
One look at the sordid group of prelates appearing on the loggia with Leo, smiling and glad-handing with each other at his election to the papacy, and it was easy to predict the direction this was going to go. Since he is clearly smarter and more politically astute than was the bombastic, ham-fisted Francis, Leo will probably end up doing far more damage to the Church. God help us…
Let’s get one thing straight: The Catholic Church does not exist to serve the hierarchy (bishops, cardinals and popes). The hierarchy exists to serve the People of God…
Pope Leo is getting close to strike three in my books. Rewarding a cardinal for despicable behavior (honoring the Senate’s most strident pro-abortion member), is a recipe for a disastrous papacy. The verdict is still out, but I am not as hopeful as I had been for this pope. It’s troubling, to say the least.
The Cupich pontificate-by-proxy…twelve more years lies ahead.
Oh dear.
Are we seeing bishop Fulton Sheen’s counter church slowly gaining traction ?
Hope not.
Leo, are you suffering from SDS (Sheen Derangement Syndrome)?
Au contraire.
This remarkable Irish prophet warned about the ape counter church.
One world religion with something for everyone at the Vatican nowadays.
Pachamama if you wish, a Muslim prayer mat in a small Vatican mosque, a seat for a Protestant monarch, pride parades on request, care for creation prayers (rather than true worship to the Creator), a Chinese communist prelate for prayers to Xi.
But please no traddies.
Yes, no traddies!
No reminder of the essence of Catholicism when the existential Church is so far removed… Rather like Dorian Grey, Ecumenical New Church has a queer aversion to mirrors.
Traddies are that mirror.
Demotion by Promotion
Quite a few years ago now ChurchMilitant organised a ranking by vote of the American bishops at the time. Blaise Cupich ranked as the worst.