Some scientists and ethicists imagine that He deserves a likelihood to prove that He is capable of manufacturing scientifically and ethically sound work. “His case is public enough that the world will judge his credibility,” says Sheila Jasanoff, professor of science and technology at Harvard University. “I feel anything he says might be taken with a good amount of skepticism.” But he sees no moral grounds to bar He from publishing future papers if his research passes the peer-review process.
Others are concerned about His plans. “I would not want this guy anywhere near any clinical trial or in a context where therapies are developed and administered to patients,” says Kiran Musunuru, a cardiologist and gene-editing expert on the University of Pennsylvania who authored Crispr generationa book on the history of gene editing and Chinese children.
“He secretly conducted illegal and grossly unethical experiments, and now he desires to take it back as if nothing happened,” says Hank Greely, a law professor at Stanford University and creator of the book Crisp People, which explores the science and ethics of editing human genes. “I do not think science should accept him back, no less than not without just a little more time and a few indication that he understands, accepts, and admits he screwed up.” For now, Greely believes that scientific journals should refuse to publish He’s papers, and organizations outside of China should deny him research grants, but he is not sure how long the ban should last.
He has not apologized publicly for his experiments with Crispr to immunize children against HIV through the use of Crispr to create a mutation in a gene called CCR5. This feature occurs naturally in some people of European descent and blocks the HIV virus from entering cells. But His data showed that kid’s cells exhibited mosaicism— which suggests the editing was not uniform. It isn’t known if children have any health effects related to editing.
At the 2018 genome editing conference in Hong Kong defended his worksaying, “In this particular instance, I feel really proud.” When asked by WIRED how he reacts to criticism of his work as highly unethical and whether he still holds the identical opinion as in 2018, he replied: March.
He was referring to an invite from Eben Kirksey, an Oxford University anthropologist who wrote a book about Chinese Crispr children called The mutant projectand invited him to the Spring Speech. The details and format of the event haven’t been finalized.
Scholars are divided over whether he needs to be allowed to attend and speak at scientific events outside of China. It was in May invited to a gathering behind closed doors hosted by the Global Observatory for Genome Editing, a gaggle founded in 2020 by Jasanoff and other scientists to foster international dialogue on gene editing and society. “We desired to know more in regards to the circumstances that led to his decision to do what he did,” says Jasanoff. “We weren’t thinking about playing any role in his rehabilitation efforts and sought to structure our trial in a way that might not be interpreted as giving him a platform.”
