Loading
What changed between revision 1 and revision 2, compared over the article's markdown source with its frontmatter — so a change to status, evidence or reversibility shows up as the edit it is.
Older · revision 1
Import· initial corpus import, not an edit
Initial import of content/he-jiankui-affair.md — the filesystem corpus, unchanged. Not an edit.
12.9 kB
Revision 1
Revision 2
lines 7–13 → 7–136 unchanged lines not shown
categories: ["genetics", "society"]categories: ["genetics", "society"]tags: ["crispr", "embryos", "heritable editing", "bioethics", "governance", "china"]tags: ["crispr", "embryos", "heritable editing", "bioethics", "governance", "china"]summary: "The 2018 announcement that twin girls had been born from CRISPR-edited embryos in Shenzhen, and the scientific condemnation and criminal prosecution that followed."summary: "The 2018 announcement that twin girls had been born from CRISPR-edited embryos in Shenzhen, and the scientific condemnation and criminal prosecution that followed."updated: "2026-07-27"updated: "2026-10-29"issues: ["The birth of the third child in 2019 is stated without a source.", "The 2003 Chinese ministry guidelines are described but not cited."]issues: ["The birth of the third child in 2019 is stated without a source.", "The 2003 Chinese ministry guidelines are described but not cited."]------ lines 19–25 → 19–255 unchanged lines not shown
{ "label": "Location", "value": "Shenzhen, China" }, { "label": "Location", "value": "Shenzhen, China" }, { "label": "Principal", "value": "He Jiankui" }, { "label": "Principal", "value": "He Jiankui" }, { "label": "Gene targeted", "value": "CCR5" }, { "label": "Gene targeted", "value": "CCR5" }, { "label": "Children born", "value": "Three, 2018–2019" }, { "label": "Children born", "value": "Three, 2018-2019" }, { "label": "Sentence", "value": "Three years, illegal medical practice" }, { "label": "Sentence", "value": "Three years, illegal medical practice" }, { "label": "Released", "value": "April 2022" } { "label": "Released", "value": "April 2022" } ] ]lines 51–57 → 51–5725 unchanged lines not shown
He recruited couples through a Beijing HIV/AIDS advocacy organisation. In each, the prospective father was HIV-positive with suppressed viral load and the mother was HIV-negative. Embryos were created by intracytoplasmic sperm injection with the editing reagents co-injected, cultured, biopsied, and transferred.He recruited couples through a Beijing HIV/AIDS advocacy organisation. In each, the prospective father was HIV-positive with suppressed viral load and the mother was HIV-negative. Embryos were created by intracytoplasmic sperm injection with the editing reagents co-injected, cultured, biopsied, and transferred. The stated rationale was protection against HIV. It does not survive inspection. Sperm washing, a routine procedure, already reduces the risk of paternal transmission to close to zero, so the children were never at meaningful risk of acquiring HIV from their fathers. The edit was aimed at a hypothetical future infection — prophylaxis at best, and closer to the enhancement category discussed under [[human-enhancement]] than to treatment of a disease. Nor was there any condition to screen for: [[embryo-selection]] had nothing to select against, which removed the one situation in which editing is sometimes argued to add capability.The stated rationale was protection against HIV. It does not survive inspection. Sperm washing, a routine procedure, already reduces the risk of paternal transmission to close to zero, so the children were never at meaningful risk of acquiring HIV from their fathers. The edit was aimed at a hypothetical future infection: prophylaxis at best, and closer to the enhancement category discussed under [[human-enhancement]] than to treatment of a disease. Nor was there any condition to screen for: [[embryo-selection]] had nothing to select against, which removed the one situation in which editing is sometimes argued to add capability. He announced the births days before he was scheduled to speak at the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing in Hong Kong. He presented there on 28 November to a packed hall, defended the work, and revealed that a second pregnancy was under way. A third child was born from that pregnancy in 2019.He announced the births days before he was scheduled to speak at the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing in Hong Kong. He presented there on 28 November to a packed hall, defended the work, and revealed that a second pregnancy was under way. A third child was born from that pregnancy in 2019. lines 63–76 → 63–765 unchanged lines not shown
**At least one twin was mosaic.** Different cells carried different edits, so no single genotype describes her. Excerpts from He's unpublished manuscript, released with expert commentary in 2019, showed that the biopsy data he relied on did not support the claims he made from them.[^regalado2019]**At least one twin was mosaic.** Different cells carried different edits, so no single genotype describes her. Excerpts from He's unpublished manuscript, released with expert commentary in 2019, showed that the biopsy data he relied on did not support the claims he made from them.[^regalado2019] **Verification was impossible in principle.** A trophectoderm biopsy samples cells destined for the placenta, and the embryo that is transferred is never itself sequenced — the structural obstacle to safe embryo editing described in [[germline-editing]]. Reported [[crispr-off-target-effects|off-target analysis]] was thin, and later work in human embryos revealed classes of damage at the target site that his methods would not have detected at all.**Verification was impossible in principle.** A trophectoderm biopsy samples cells destined for the placenta, and the embryo that is transferred is never itself sequenced, which is the structural obstacle to safe embryo editing described in [[germline-editing]]. Reported [[crispr-off-target-effects|off-target analysis]] was thin, and later work in human embryos revealed classes of damage at the target site that his methods would not have detected at all. **The consent process misrepresented the study.** Documents described the project in the vocabulary of AIDS vaccine development and ran to more than twenty pages of technical material presented to couples with a strong incentive to accept. Ethics approval was attributed to a Shenzhen hospital that denied any involvement and said the signatures on the document were not authentic.**The consent process misrepresented the study.** Documents described the project in the vocabulary of AIDS vaccine development and ran to more than twenty pages of technical material presented to couples with a strong incentive to accept. Ethics approval was attributed to a Shenzhen hospital that denied any involvement and said the signatures on the document were not authentic. **CCR5 loss is not free.** People without functional CCR5 have elevated susceptibility to West Nile virus and other flavivirus infections. Trading a well-managed risk for a poorly characterised one is a bad exchange even if the edit had worked as intended.**CCR5 loss is not free.** People without functional CCR5 have elevated susceptibility to West Nile virus and other flavivirus infections. Trading a well-managed risk for a poorly characterised one is a bad exchange even if the edit had worked as intended. > [!key] Why the target choice damaged the case further> [!key] Why the target choice damaged the case further> Disabling CCR5 is one of very few edits with an obvious protective rationale, which is exactly why it appealed. That the most defensible available target still produced an indefensible experiment is the affair's most useful lesson about the gap between a plausible idea and a justified intervention.> Disabling CCR5 is one of very few edits with an obvious protective rationale, which is exactly why it appealed. The most defensible available target still produced an indefensible experiment, which is the affair's most useful lesson about the gap between a plausible idea and a justified intervention. ## Reaction## Reaction lines 82–96 → 82–965 unchanged lines not shown
In December 2019 the Nanshan District People's Court in Shenzhen convicted He and two collaborators of illegal medical practice. He received three years' imprisonment and a fine of three million yuan; the others received shorter terms.[^normile2019] The prosecution rested on practising medicine without a licence and forging approval documents, not on any statute about genome editing, because none then existed.In December 2019 the Nanshan District People's Court in Shenzhen convicted He and two collaborators of illegal medical practice. He received three years' imprisonment and a fine of three million yuan; the others received shorter terms.[^normile2019] The prosecution rested on practising medicine without a licence and forging approval documents, not on any statute about genome editing, because none then existed. The verdict therefore turned on paperwork and licensure rather than on what had been done to the embryos, which is why the case is a poor precedent for anything except itself. Legislators noticed the gap: within three years China had written implantation of an edited embryo into its criminal code as an offence in its own right, and the wider rebuilding of Chinese oversight that followed is described in [[governance-of-genome-editing]]. Internationally the episode hardened an argument that was already under way, between those who wanted a defined translational pathway on the grounds that a licensed route is safer than an unpoliced one, and those who read pathway-building as tacit endorsement — the same split that runs through the self-regulation model of the [[asilomar-conference]].The verdict therefore turned on paperwork and licensure rather than on what had been done to the embryos, which is why the case is a poor precedent for anything except itself. Legislators noticed the gap: within three years China had written implantation of an edited embryo into its criminal code as an offence in its own right, and the wider rebuilding of Chinese oversight that followed is described in [[governance-of-genome-editing]]. Internationally the episode hardened an argument that was already under way, between those who wanted a defined translational pathway on the grounds that a licensed route is safer than an unpoliced one, and those who read pathway-building as tacit endorsement. The same split runs through the self-regulation model of the [[asilomar-conference]]. The children's situation remains the least examined part of the story. Their health status is not public. No institution has acknowledged responsibility for the lifelong monitoring that an edited person plainly requires, and any such monitoring conflicts with their privacy and that of their families. They are the only human beings alive with deliberately edited nuclear genomes, a status they did not choose and cannot renounce.The children's situation remains the least examined part of the story. Their health status is not public. No institution has acknowledged responsibility for the lifelong monitoring that an edited person requires, and any such monitoring conflicts with their privacy and that of their families. They are the only human beings alive with deliberately edited nuclear genomes, a status they did not choose and cannot renounce. ## Aftermath## Aftermath He was released in April 2022 and returned to public activity, announcing a series of projects — gene therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, then embryo-editing research aimed at installing an Alzheimer's-protective variant — and cultivating attention on social media. He has published little that has passed peer review since, and his announcements are treated with widespread scepticism. Travel plans and academic invitations have repeatedly been withdrawn under pressure.He was released in April 2022 and returned to public activity, announcing a series of projects (gene therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, then embryo-editing research aimed at installing an Alzheimer's-protective variant) and cultivating attention on social media. He has published little that has passed peer review since, and his announcements are treated with widespread scepticism. Travel plans and academic invitations have repeatedly been withdrawn under pressure. The affair is cited most often as evidence that scientific self-governance failed. A more precise reading is that it never applied. He was outside the academic system's incentives: privately funded, uninterested in publication, indifferent to reputation among peers. The mechanisms that constrain researchers — grants, journals, tenure, institutional review — had no purchase on him, and the mechanisms that eventually did were an ordinary criminal court and a medical licensing statute. That distinction matters increasingly as privately capitalised ventures announce similar ambitions, and it complicates the assumption behind both [[precautionary-principle|precautionary]] and pathway-based approaches that the relevant actors are members of a professional community in the first place.The affair is cited most often as evidence that scientific self-governance failed. A more precise reading is that it never applied. He was outside the academic system's incentives: privately funded, uninterested in publication, indifferent to reputation among peers. The mechanisms that constrain researchers, among them grants, journals, tenure and institutional review, had no purchase on him, and the mechanisms that eventually did were an ordinary criminal court and a medical licensing statute. That distinction matters increasingly as privately capitalised ventures announce similar ambitions, and it complicates the assumption behind both [[precautionary-principle|precautionary]] and pathway-based approaches that the relevant actors are members of a professional community in the first place. ## See also## See also removed, struck through added, underlinedLine numbers count the serialised markdown of each revision, frontmatter included.
104 lines are the same in both revisions, and 63 of them are not shown. Neither revision here is necessarily the current article — read He Jiankui affair for the text this wiki stands behind today.