• Nienke de Graeff, Karin R Jongsma, Josephine Johnston, Sarah Hartley, and Annelien L Bredenoord.
• 1 Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center, University Medical Center Utrecht/Utrecht University , PO Box 85500, Utrecht, GA 3508 , The Netherlands.
• Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 2019 May 13; 374 (1772): 20180106.

AbstractIn recent years, new genome editing technologies have emerged that can edit the genome of non-human animals with progressively increasing efficiency. Despite ongoing academic debate about the ethical implications of these technologies, no comprehensive overview of this debate exists. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a systematic review of the reasons reported in the academic literature for and against the development and use of genome editing technologies in animals. Most included articles were written by academics from the biomedical or animal sciences. The reported reasons related to seven themes: human health, efficiency, risks and uncertainty, animal welfare, animal dignity, environmental considerations and public acceptability. Our findings illuminate several key considerations about the academic debate, including a low disciplinary diversity in the contributing academics, a scarcity of systematic comparisons of potential consequences of using these technologies, an underrepresentation of animal interests, and a disjunction between the public and academic debate on this topic. As such, this article can be considered a call for a broad range of academics to get increasingly involved in the discussion about genome editing, to incorporate animal interests and systematic comparisons, and to further discuss the aims and methods of public involvement. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'The ecology and evolution of prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas adaptive immune systems'.

8 keywords...

hide…