The Bewilderness

The GM Generation

David Goldstein of Duke University has predicted the mass use of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) by many more families. This will be funnelled by three trends: our increasing knowledge of the genetic predisposition to particular maladies, the decreasing cost of such procedures and the regulatory framework within which such measures are carried out.

Dr Goldstein, however, expects its scope to widen significantly over the next ten years, as science starts to unlock more of the genetic factors that contribute to common conditions such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes, autism, schizophrenia and epilepsy.

It had been thought that much of the genetic influence over these diseases lay in common DNA variations with reasonably small effects, which would not be amenable to embryo screening. Recent research, however, has suggested that rarer variants with much larger effects on risk are actually more important. New technology for reading DNA will soon allow scientists to find many more of these variants with large effects, and also to screen for them in embryos.

There will be far more designer babies in 2020 than there are now, with strong consequences for cultural acceptance of the 'yuck factor'. Once a development is widespread, there is a demand for further potentialities, perhaps even enhancement.

New technique may double IVF success

All technologies advance. A good example is a new technique employed during in vitro fertilisation (IVF) to check chromosomal abnormalities in female eggs. This increases the success rate by filtering out 'bad' eggs and reducing the probability of failure or miscarriage. The technique, real time polar body array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH), has been used on one woman and a child will hopefully be born this Spring. Good news all round.

Designer baby in the news

This was a regulatory rather than a scientific breakthrough. Using preimplantation-genetic diagnosis, the parents were able to choose an embryo that did not carry the BRCA gene, with an 80% chance of ensuing breast cancer. Whilst this does not cure or enhance the life of the gentically afflicted, this furthers the power of parents to use whatever medical technologies are available in safety and without too much oversight from the state.

Concerns about designer babies appear a shibboleth at this juncture.

HFEA entertains uncertain waters in PGD

The HFEA shifted towards a more lenient view of parental power recently, by allowing pre-implantation genetic diagnosis to select embryos where there is a strong chance of developing cancer. This is a welcome move towards a liberal view of these matters, yet still maintains regulatory powers over what ought to be private decisions. The HFEA is forced to move as the grain of popular opinion is more willing to accept such choices and restrictions question the purpose of such morally transparent decisions.

But breast cancer is different because it does not inevitably affect a child from birth and may or may not develop later in life. There is also a chance it can be cured, if caught early enough.

Permission to carry out PGD for breast cancer had to be obtained from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority by the London clinic which performed the procedure.

The body, which licenses IVF clinics and embryo research, gave the go ahead after holding a public consultation.

Fertility expert Paul Serhal, who led the PGD team, said: "We have now entered a new era of being able to help people who have cancer genes. Not only can we liberate people from the guilt of passing a cancer gene onto their child, we can cut off transmission of the gene once and for all. These are families who have been plagued by this genetic curse for generations. With a wave of a magic wand the job is done, and this is fantastic."