Use the following text as a background for the next activity:
In November 2018, the world was confronted with a startling announcement from Chinese scientist He Jiankui: two twin girls, nicknamed Lulu and Nana, had been born from embryos he had genetically modified. This was a landmark moment, as they were the first human beings ever born with intentionally altered genes that they could pass on to their children, a process known as germline editing. The revelation was made not through standard scientific channels, but through media interviews, bypassing the rigorous scrutiny of peer review.
He Jiankui's stated goal for this unprecedented experiment was to grant the girls immunity to HIV, as the fathers in the study were HIV-positive. Since you're familiar with how CRISPR works, you know it can be used to target specific genes. He's team aimed it at the CCR5 gene, which builds a protein that acts like a doorway for most strains of HIV to enter and infect immune cells. By disabling this gene, he hoped to artificially replicate the natural HIV resistance found in a small percentage of the human population.
However, despite this seemingly noble goal, the announcement sparked immediate and widespread outrage from the international scientific and ethics communities for several critical reasons. First and foremost, the experiment was not medically necessary. Proven, safe, and far simpler methods already exist to prevent HIV transmission from a father to his child during conception, meaning the girls were never at significant risk. This made the decision to use a high-risk, experimental procedure an unjustifiable gamble. Furthermore, the experiment broke fundamental rules of ethical science; it was conducted in secret, violated international guidelines, and was based on falsified approval documents.
Compounding these ethical breaches, the science itself was found to be flawed and incomplete. Analysis of He's own data revealed that the gene editing was not successful as planned. The edits were inconsistent in at least one twin, leaving her with a mixture of edited and unedited cells—a state called mosaicism—which likely means she is not even immune to HIV. The procedure also carried the significant risk of "off-target" edits, which are unintended changes to other parts of their DNA that could lead to serious health problems, like cancer, later in life.
The consequences of these failures are profound. For Lulu and Nana, the children at the center of this, they are living with permanent and heritable changes to their DNA, with long-term health effects that are completely unknown. In fact, by disabling their CCR5 gene, the experiment may have made them more vulnerable to other common viruses like influenza and West Nile virus. For the scientist, He Jiankui, the global condemnation was followed by official action from the Chinese government, which sentenced him to three years in prison for illegal medical practice.
Perhaps the most lasting consequence is how the case forced a difficult global conversation. It pushed urgent questions into the spotlight that society is still grappling with: Where do we draw the line between treating disease and human "enhancement"? Should we ever make permanent changes to the human gene pool? And how can we create effective global regulations to prevent such rogue science from happening again?
Design a infograph with the help of BioRender in groups of four.
Develop the infograph addapted to an age group:
Children (8-12)Young Adults (18-25)Adults (30+)
