GMbryo

My final research paper is almost complete! I've been analyzing the public understanding of science in relationship to the disposition of supernumerary cryopreserved embryos after fertility treatment (what people will do with their excess embryos after they conceive: dispose, donate to another couple, donate to science or store indefinitely). What I have found is that most people we've talked to don't understand science well. At all. I found this too in an early study, about eight years ago, when I conducted interviews to see how well people understood genetic modification. This makes the new genetically modified embryo report doubly interesting.

The curiosity lies with the almost visceral reaction I have read in response to the work, whereby individuals automatically jump to "designer baby", "super race" and eugenics arguments rather than looking through their rosy lenses to see what this could mean medically. The reported genetic modification of the embryo by a team of scientists from Cornell University entailed the addition of just one gene, "intended merely to let scientists better study embryo development; the embryo itself was already damaged beyond repair. They weren't going to implant it in a woman; they wouldn't use the technique on an embryo destined for implantation; and they certainly wouldn't start mucking around with any other genes" reports Brandon Keim of Wired. I find it interesting that we tend to dismiss that this is a technology which will potentially be used to correct for genetic abnormalities like hemophilia, cystic fibrosis and even cancer in favor of discussions of very advanced science (fiction-type) scenarios. While acknowledging the risks, oversight seems the key to keeping research from running down the scifi alleyway.

Stay tuned to see where this leads Great Britain's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill which is having its second round in Parliament this week. The bill, if passed, will make it legal to create GM embryos in Britain.