Recent Headlines In The News

The technique that the United States and, more seriously, the United Kingdom are considering bringing to the IVF clinic, which creates embryos with three genetic parents, is often “mitochondrial replacement” or “mitochondrial transfer.”

Why that terminology? Well the point of this genetic engineering of children is to “replace” defective mitochondria, little organelles in our cells that produce energy. Mitochondria have their own DNA (mtDNA) and we inherit our mtDNA from our mother exclusively since they are present in her egg when we are conceived. Women with mutations in their mtDNA will pass those on to her children.

So “mitochondrial replacement” or “mitochondrial transfer” seem like appropriate terms to use to describe the three-parent embryo technique. Actually, they are horribly deceptive as Dr. Stuart A. Newman, professor of Cell Biology and Anatomy at New York Medical College, rightly points out in the Huffington Post.

Looking closer at the technique one realizes that “mitochondrial replacement” (MR) doesn’t actually replace mitochondria. What happens is this: an egg from a donor has its nucleus removed leaving healthy mitochondria behind. Then the nucleus from an egg of a woman with mitochondral disease is placed in that donor egg. What results is an egg that has had its NUCLEUS replaced, not its mitochondria. That genetically engineered egg is then fertilized with sperm, and an embryo with the genetic material from three people is then made. Dr. Newman calls it “the first cases of large-scale human genetic engineering” and he is right.

So why call what is a really a nucleus replacement a mitochondrial replacement? Probably because the public is more likely to support the practice. Dr. Newman calls this misnomer “deceptive” because it is like buying a new house and calling it a “refrigerator replacement.”

In other words, just because you can put the engine of one high performance car into another, does not mean that doing so will making a perfectly functioning automobile. It is highly likely things will go wrong. Dr. Paul Knoepfler, associate professor of Cell Biology and Human Anatomy at UC Davis, agrees. And because this is a germ-line modification, anything that does go wrong may be passed onto future generations.

How can we possibly even consider this? Does the safety of the next generation, and every generation after, even register with the proponents of MR? I truly believe we are at a critical point in human history. Will we allow this reckless experimentation on future generations without their consent or will we realize that the health and well-being of future generations trumps parental desires?

If we answer “yes” to the former, we will be opening the Pandora’s Box of human germ-line genetic engineering, and I am positive we will not be able to close that box once its opened.

December 2 - Scary Genetic Engineering: Three-Parent Embryo Technique is More Like Cloning