The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
Abstract
Background: Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-associated (CRISPR-Cas) technology may allow for efficient and highly targeted gene editing in single-cell embryos. This possibility brings human germline editing into the focus of ethical and legal debates again. Main body: Against this background, we explore essential ethical and legal questions of interventions into the human germline by means of CRISPR-Cas: How should issues of risk and uncertainty be handled? What responsibilities arise regarding future generations? Under which conditions can germline editing measures be therapeutically legitimized? For this purpose, we refer to a scenario anticipating potential further development in CRISPR-Cas technology implying improved accuracy and exclusion of germline transmission to future generations. We show that, if certain concepts regarding germline editing are clarified, under such conditions a categorical prohibition of one-generation germline editing of single-cell embryos appears not to be ethically or legally justifiable. Conclusion: These findings are important prerequisites for the international debate on the ethical and legal justification of germline interventions in the human embryo as well as for the harmonization of international legal standards.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“There currently exists a natural mutation rate that is and must be tolerated in reproduction as molecular biology cannot circumvent the occurrence of mutations entirely (Schleidgen et al. 2020).”
From Initial heritable genome editing: mapping a responsible pathway from basic research to the clinic (2023) · cites this paper as Schleidgen et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity
Jinek, M., Chylinski, K., Fonfara, I., Hauer, M., Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1225829 · Cited by 17,116
Multiplex Genome Engineering Using CRISPR/Cas Systems
Cong, L., Ran, F. A., Cox, D., Lin, S., Barretto, R., Habib, N., Hsu, P. D., Wu, X., Jiang, W., Marraffini, L. A., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1231143 · Cited by 15,339
The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9
Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1258096 · Cited by 7,062
Parfit, D. (1986) · Stanford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/019824908x.001.0001 · Cited by 5,860
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes
Liang, P., Xu, Y., Zhang, X., Ding, C., Huang, R., Zhang, Z., Lv, J., Xie, X., Chen, Y., Li, Y., et al. (2015) · Protein & Cell · doi:10.1007/s13238-015-0153-5 · Cited by 1,135
Friedmann, T., & Roblin, R. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.175.4025.949 · Cited by 815
(2005) · Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research · doi:10.1080/15017410500246111 · Cited by 754
WRONGFUL LIFE, PROCREATIVE RESPONSIBILITY, AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HARM
Shiffrin, S. V. (1999) · Legal Theory · doi:10.1017/s1352325299052015 · Cited by 574
Structure of Cre recombinase complexed with DNA in a site-specific recombination synapse
Guo, F., Gopaul, D. N., & Van Duyne, G. D. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/37925 · Cited by 573
The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law Volume 1: Harm to Others
Feinberg, J. (1987) · doi:10.1093/0195046641.001.0001 · Cited by 569
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities. 2015. Human genome surgery. Towards a responsible evaluation of a new technology. http://www.gentechnologiebericht.de/bilder/BBAW_Human-Genome-Surgery_PDF-A1b-1.pdf. Accessed 18 Dec 2019.
- EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Official Journal of the European Union, C 326, 26.10.2012.
Cited by
Initial heritable genome editing: mapping a responsible pathway from basic research to the clinic
Ranisch, R., Trettenbach, K., & Arnason, G. (2023) · Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-022-10115-x · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Schleidgen, S., Dederer, H.-G., Sgodda, S., Cravcisin, S., Lüneburg, L., Cantz, T., & Heinemann, T.
- Venue
- BMC Medical Ethics
- Published
- 2020-09-11
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1472-6939
- PMC
- PMC7488432
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 43
- Language
- en
- Licence
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (tdm)
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (vor)
- Funders
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01GP1616A-C)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12910-020-00487-1
- The paper
- Schleidgen, S., Dederer, H.-G., Sgodda, S., Cravcisin, S., Lüneburg, L., Cantz, T., & Heinemann, T. (2020). Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy. BMC Medical Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00487-1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
