On Nov. 28, 2018, a Chinese scientist walked onto a Hong Kong stage to defend the birth of the world's first gene-edited babies
Scientific revolutions usually arrive in peer-reviewed journals. This one arrived in the news first. By Nov. 28, 2018, reports had already claimed that a researcher in Shenzhen had edited the DNA of human embryos and that two girls had been born from them. That afternoon, the man behind the claim had to explain himself to a roomful of his peers.
The Hong Kong Stage
The venue was the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing at the University of Hong Kong, where He Jiankui, then an associate professor at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, was scheduled to speak. He told the audience that he had used the CRISPR tool to alter a gene called CCR5 in embryos, with the aim of making children resistant to HIV infection. He said the work had produced twin girls, known publicly by the pseudonyms Lulu and Nana, and that a second pregnancy might also be underway. The claim had not been published or independently verified. His university said he had been on unpaid leave since February 2018 and that it had not known about the project. Many scientists in the room had spent years debating whether such an experiment should ever be attempted. They were now hearing that someone had already done it, and that the news had broken before any journal had a chance to weigh in.
The reaction was swift. The summit's organizing committee said the next day that the work was irresponsible and failed to conform to international norms, and criticized the lack of transparency around it. Researchers pointed out that the embryos were healthy and that proven ways to protect children from HIV already existed. Chinese authorities opened an investigation, and in December 2019 a court in Shenzhen sentenced He to three years in prison and fined him three million yuan. The technology he used had been celebrated for its precision, but the episode showed that the harder problem was never the cutting. It was deciding, in advance and in public, who gets to hold the scissors.
![[#~image_alt_1~#]](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fd3klpa3rfwubzz.cloudfront.net%2Fmedia%2FAPI%20Uploads%2FTDH%2F53b0dc270ec3b6d6029f3b6de72563f9_6089acdb09.jpg&w=1920&q=75)















