Chinese scientist, when the twin children had changed the baby's DNA, when passing through conventional scientific means, said that his work was proud, and another woman enrolled in a trial was said to be pregnant with a baby when a baby was pregnant.
The scientist, He Jiankui, spoke hundreds of colleagues and journalists on Wednesday at the Human Summit Upgrade Summit at the Hong Kong University.
The details of the first birth of Judgment, that is, used the use of a gene-editing technology called Crispr-Cas9, sent to the scientific name. He did not say to publish the results.
In a presentation, He, Associate Professor of Southern University of Science and Technology, in Shenzhen, described how Crispr-Cas9 was used to change a gene called CCR5, a number of embryos produced through IVF for HIV-positive parents.
The change is a natural mutation that is found in the small percentage of people who make the virus resistant. Both girls, Nana and Lulu, were born with genetic changes, she said.
The investigator offered a 40-minute Q & A forum for scientists to ask a colleague who was caught in discussions.
Nobel Laureates David Baltimore, an organizing meeting, a biologist emeritus at the California Institute of Technology, is a work that is irresponsible. "I believe that the scientific communities have self-evaluated because of the lack of transparency," Baltimore said.
David Liu, a Biologist at the Cambridge University's High School, questioned how to change DNA by changing girls. Children were not at risk of contracting HIV at birth, and there were many ways to prevent the infection from the liver. "What was the particular need for medical doctors to meet?" Li asked.
He said in defense: "I think, not only in this case, but also millions of children, that protection is needed because there is no HIV virus, I feel proud in this case."
Matthew Porteus, a pediatrician professor at Stanford University, said: "It's a risk of becoming a Pariah." Scientists have been studying their research plans for many years before working together to give their opinion. "Unless engage in the scientific process, it will be worse and worse," added Porteus.
In summary, the slides were presented to scientists who presented their concerns, could cause harm to the subjects, and endangered the genetic research.
The scientist said, however, that many HIV-infected children in China were forced to prevent HIV from inheriting one parent. Eight couples disagreed with the study, although they rejected it. In each, the father was HIV positive while the woman washed the virus.
He told the audience about thirty eggs and embraced two embryo women. One baby only published a copy of the CCR5 gene, which did not have enough liver resistance. The health of two children would be controlled over the next 18 years.
Starting the editing of genes three years ago, he was partially paid, when he consulted, he said, with the help of a few of his plans.
In the United Kingdom and in other countries, it is illegal to create genetically modified babies, and scientists have achieved a broad consensus in the field, avoiding it. Genome editing is not safe, and genetic changes (beneficial or unwanted are not harmful) can affect children and children and future generations.
"It is impossible to interfere irresponsibly, not forever and dangerously for the moment," said Kathy Niakan, a scientist at the Francis Crick Institute in London, at the summit. "The lack of supervision or disturbance of the clinical plans was made before human experiments began and the whole lack of transparency throughout the process began.
"I did not get the questions about admission processes that I found to be very ill-treated and avoided the response to patient recruitment and authorization. The group did not seem to have adequate training in appropriate admissions.
On Tuesday, Chinese officials and their university in Shenzhen examined the work.
Difficulty is a dumb response because the audience asks for more questions. Did you know that technology enough to ensure that children were healthy or hired for deadly viruses? I know it was enough.
"How do you see the responsibility of your children?" Eben Kirksey, associate professor of anthropology, asked at Deakin University, Victoria, Australia. He responded that he was given care of children's health, but offered no details.
There is not a lot of information frustrated by many people. "This is a red line," a conference told the participants. "Why did you decide to cross it and make that secret?"
Robin Lovell-Badge, geneticist at Francis Crick Institute in London, was wrong. "I clearly mistakenly resolved: I am very critical to call this scientific progress, because it has been mixed".
Lovell-Badge said that babies believed that they changed the DNA, but the scientist had to prove it. The only way to convince the world would be an independent, qualified and laboratory that parents and two children's DNA have tested to show that the genes were edited. "The thing I can see is not false, but the evidence I have seen is not yet enough," he added.