What are the current national and international legal regulations around gene drives and gene…
Tim Boucher
3

Differences between gene editing & gene drives

Via Greenpeace (PDF) (April 2016):


TED Talk: Jennifer Kahn (Feb. 2016):


Nova:

[…]

[…]


San Diego Tribune: 23 Sept. 2016

“You first test the gene drive systems in the laboratory, then in confined cage trials in a larger laboratory setting, then you move on to a field setting, which is also going to be confined, and then potentially a small island which is isolated to test the efficiency of the different systems … and eventually move on to a city setting.”

What could possibly go wrong?


NY Times: 18 June 2016

“Coming up with an international regulatory framework is especially crucial, members of the committee said, given that gene drives will not recognize national or political boundaries. For now, the United States Food and Drug Administration has authority over animals that have been engineered with foreign DNA under a rule that regards them as a type of drug. But the report suggests that other agencies, like the Fish and Wildlife Service or the Bureau of Land Management, might be seen to have a stake in the ecological concerns at the heart of gene drive experiments.”

[…]

“But environmental watchdog groups argue that the report should have recommended that research be halted. Jim Thomas, the program director of the ETC Group in Montreal, said the panel gave short shrift to how to prevent commercial and military interests from misusing the technology, which he said should be placed under the control of the United Nations.
And Kevin Esvelt, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology evolutionary biologist who has also pioneered the technology, said the report failed to adequately flag its key risk. “They assume you can safely run a contained field trial,” he said. “But anytime you release an organism with a gene drive system into the wild you must assume there is a significant chance that it will spread — globally — and factor that in.”