Scientists to balance innovation and safety in gene editing

Bài liên quan

Viet Nam explores legal framework for gene editing in agriculture

At the Forum “Gene Editing in Agriculture - A Strategic Technology Linked to Legal Frameworks," Associate Professor Dr. Pham Doan Lan, Deputy Director of the National Institute of Animal Science, stated that creating a living organism through gene-editing technology usually takes much longer than in plants, as the process involves complex reproductive and cloning technologies.

According to him, there are two main approaches to producing gene-edited animals. The first involves direct editing of embryos, in which scientists use the CRISPR-Cas9 tool to cut, insert, or modify genes at the early embryonic stage. The edited embryo is then implanted into the uterus of a female animal to develop into a complete organism carrying the desired genetic traits.

The second approach is to edit genes in somatic cells and then apply cloning techniques. In this process, the nucleus of an edited cell (usually a skin or connective tissue cell) is transferred into an enucleated egg, which is then developed into an embryo and implanted into a surrogate animal. Both methods require advanced technical capacity, high costs, and strict biosafety control.

However, gene-edited animals have always been a subject of ethical debate. Dr. Lan emphasized that the livestock sector should only select genetic traits for editing that do not compromise animal welfare, such as enhancing disease resistance, improving reproductive performance, or reducing emissions. The choice of methods must also ensure safety, comply with the legal framework, and prevent unintended harm or undesirable genetic changes in livestock.

In practice, many countries such as the United States, China, and Australia have adopted a more open approach to research on animal gene editing. Nevertheless, the common principle remains strict oversight and assessment throughout the gestation stage to ensure that offspring do not possess abnormal genetic traits or disrupt ecological balance.

In Viet Nam, Associate Professor Dr. Pham Doan Lan believes that the legal framework should be more open, allowing scientists greater opportunities to conduct gene-editing research for disease resistance and medical purposes, rather than being constrained by outdated regulations.

“If we maintain the current funding level under a 3-5-year cycle, it will be very difficult to produce final products with the desired traits,” he said, emphasizing that reforming financial mechanisms and promoting long-term research are essential conditions for Viet Nam to keep pace with leading countries in gene technology.

Sharing the same view, Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh Thuy, former Director of the Department of Science, Technology and Environment under the former Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, affirmed that in the context of rapid advances in gene-editing technology, the current legal framework needs to be updated to reflect new realities.

According to Ms. Thuy, legal reform is an inevitable trend that many advanced countries have already undertaken. Each time the regulatory system is revised, it is essential to maintain an open mindset and ensure thorough consultation with all relevant stakeholders, from regulatory agencies and scientists to businesses, organizations, and affected communities. She noted that the Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Agency, the lead agency tasked with finalizing the new regulations, is under significant pressure to complete the documents amid rapidly evolving technologies and the growing demand for timely yet precise governance.

“The core objective of the legal framework is to strike a balance among three key factors: promoting innovation, ensuring biosafety, and conserving biodiversity, while harmonizing with international commitments. To achieve this, the legal system must be transparent, coherent, and consistent - starting with clear and accurate definitions of ‘Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)’ and ‘Gene Editing (GE),’” Dr Nguyen Thi Thanh Thuy emphasized.

On that basis, it is necessary to clearly define the responsibilities of all relevant parties, regulatory bodies, scientists, and businesses, to avoid placing all risks on one side. At the same time, Vietnam needs to develop reliable methods and technologies for risk assessment, along with a team of qualified experts capable of evaluating technical dossiers and providing policy advice.

Regarding the way forward, Dr Thuy suggested that Vietnam should shift toward a product-based management approach rather than focusing solely on technological processes, while also establishing transparent mechanisms for monitoring and traceability.