Human Genome Editing: Formation of International Principles of Legal Regulation

This paper analyzes the 2018 Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report on genetic engineering and human genome editing. The direction of the formation of international legal principles for regulating these relations is presented. There are two fundamental principles presented in the report: welfare when using genetic engineering (and based on the rights and interests of a particular person, society and humanity as a whole) and the use of editing the human genome, which will not lead to exacerbation of inequality and marginalization in society. The author studies the possibilities of genetic engineering at the present stage of the development of science and technology, in particular, somatic editing and editing the germline of the human genome. The need for legal regulation is ascertained. The author presents substantiations for the formation of an international dialogue in the field of information exchange on scientific discoveries in this field, which will allow us to formulate the main direction of legal thought and the mechanisms of legal regulation.

1. Golikova: Rossiya katastroficheski teryaet naselenie // Rossijskaya gazeta. — 02.07.2019.

2. Pestrikova A. A. Pravovoe regulirovanie predimplantacionnoj i prenatal’noj diagnostiki v SShA // Nauka v sovremennom mire. — 2016. — № 1. — S. 58—63.

3. Chang C. Q., Yesupriya A., Rowell J. L., et al. A systematic review of cancer GWAS and candidate gene metaanalyses reveals limited overlap but similar effect sizes // Eur J Hum Genet. — 2014;22:402—8.

4. Garcia-Closas M., Rothman N., Figueroa J. D., et al. Common genetic polymorphisms modify the effect of smoking on absolute risk of bladder cancer // Cancer Res. — 2013;73:2211—20.

5. Genome editing and human reproduction: social and ethical issues // URL: http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/genome-editing-human-reproduction.

6. Gyngell C., Bowman-Smart H., Savulescu J. Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report // URL: https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/early/2019/01/24/medethics-2018-105084.full.pdf.

7. Latham R. M., von Stumm S. Mothers want extraversion over conscientiousness or intelligence for their children // Pers Individ Dif. — 2017;119:262—5.

8. Leal J., Luengo-Fernández R., Gray A., et al. Economic burden of cardiovascular diseases in the enlarged European Union // Eur Heart J. — 2006;27:1610—9.

9. Mega J. L., Stitziel N. O., Smith J. G., et al. Genetic risk, coronary heart disease events, and the clinical benefit of statin therapy: an analysis of primary and secondary prevention trials // Lancet. — 2015;385:2264—71.

10. Peden J. F., Farrall M. Thirty-five common variants for coronary artery disease: the fruits of much collaborative labour // Hum Mol Genet. — 2011;20:R198—205.

11. Wheeler E., Barroso I. Genome-wide association studies and type 2 diabetes // Brief Funct Genomics. — 2011;10:52—60.

12. Yovich J. L., Casper R., Chapman M., Tesarik J., Anderson R. A., Silva S. Regulating ART: time for a re-think in the light of increasing efficacy, safety and efficiency // URL: https://www.rbmojournal.com/article/S1472-6483(19)30048-3/fulltext.