Regulation and Policy
Risk assessments, regulation of gene drive, and thought leadership on gene drive policy
Conditions for Investment in Genetic Biocontrol of Pest Vertebrates in Australia
20264L. Carter, A. Mankad, S. Campbell, W. Ruscoe, K. P. Oh, P. R. Brown, M. Byrne, M. Tizard and T. Strive, Frontiers in Agronomy, 3. 2022-01-31 08:46:53.
Managing pest vertebrate species in Australia is a significant challenge for government, industry, research sectors and land-managers. Innovative tools such as genetic biocontrol offers decision-makers a potentially effective means of reducing the impact of pest species incursions. To determine the conditions for investment in genetic biocontrol, we applied qualitative engagement methodologies to identify and integrate existing knowledge of pest species research and management in Australia. Two facilitated workshops were held to determine key topics related to genetic biocontrol technologies for selected pest species. The topics explored during workshop discussions included: identifying existing knowledge gaps; risk perceptions; social and ethical considerations and; industry and business considerations. The workshops' aim was to assess the potential, the priorities and the risk parameters among expert stakeholders and decision-makers for using genetic biocontrol approaches to reduce the impacts of key pest species in Australia. This paper reports on the design, process and outcomes of each workshop to inform the creation of a decision framework. Stakeholders were cautiously optimistic of pursuing continued research and development for vertebrate pest management in Australia. However, employing an appropriate, transparent process for incorporating diverse stakeholder perspectives on genetic biocontrol technologies is essential to ensure their development and use remains supported. This outcome will require meaningful investment in both social science investigations and well-considered engagement processes concurrent with biotechnology development globally.
Gene Drives in the U.K., U.S., and Australian Press (2015–2019): How a New Focus on Responsibility Is Shaping Science Communication
20217A. Stelmach, B. Nerlich and S. Hartley, Science Communication, 10755470211072245. 2022-01-25 16:28:49.
Gene drive is a controversial biotechnology for pest control. Despite a commitment from gene drive researchers to responsibility and the key role of the media in debates about science and technology, little research has been conducted on media reporting of gene drive. We employ metaphor and discourse analysis to explore how responsibility is reflected in the coverage of this technology in the U.S., U.K., and Australian press. The findings reveal a rhetorical strategy of trust-building by evoking the moral attributes of gene drive researchers. We discuss the implications of these findings for the communication of new technologies.
IMPACTOS AMBIENTAIS DA TÉCNICA DE GENE DRIVE PARA O CONTROLE DE EPIDEMIAS: ALCANCES E LIMITES DO PRINCÍPIO DA PRECAUÇÃO
23875N. R. Furtado, PERI Revista de Filosofia, 13. 2022-01-19 09:24:19.
The paper discusses the application of the precautionary principle in the management of environmental risks arising from the use of gene drives to control epidemics. Gene drives consist of a technique for creating genetically modified organisms, which are released into an ecosystem with the aim of spreading certain genetic elements and prevailing over native organisms. Among the possible uses of this technique are the control of epidemics. Despite its benefits, assessing the impact of gene drives on the environment proves to be a challenge. In the field of biotechnology, the socalled precautionary principle was formulated as a strategy to ground decisions whose consequences are uncertain. However, its application raises discussions about the ability to prevent damage from new technologies. Its critics argue that the precautionary mentality could lead to inaction, obstructing scientific development. Thus, this article highlights the contributions of such principle to guide the use of gene drives, while reflecting on its limits, confronting it with an alternative risk management model: the proactionary principle.
Insect Allies – Assessment of a Viral Approach to Plant Genome Editing
20036K. Pfeifer, J. L. Frieß and B. Giese, Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2022-01-12 09:38:06.
The DARPA program Insect Allies has already sparked scientific debate concerning technology assessment-related issues, among which the most prevalent is that of dual use potential. As apart from the issues concerning peaceful applications, the technology also provides the blueprint for a potential bioweapon as further evidenced by a recent publication. However, the combination of a virus-induced genetic modification of crop plants in the field using genetically modified insect vectors poses an increased risk potential in comparison to the hitherto existing use of genetically modified organisms. The technology's high depth of intervention enables a number of sources for hazard and a by trend high exposure, but it is also encumbered with notable deficits in knowledge. These issues call for a thorough technology assessment. This article aims to provide an initial characterization from a technology assessment perspective, focusing on potential sources of risk for this novel invasive environmental biotechnology at an early stage of research and development. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.© 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).
iGEM and Gene Drives: A Case Study for Governance
20040P. Millett, T. Alexanian, M. J. Palmer, S. W. Evans, T. Kuiken and K. Oye, Health Security, 2022-01-11 09:49:06.
Gene drives have already challenged governance systems. In this case study, we explore the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition's experiences in gene drive-related research and lessons in developing, revising, and implementing a governance system. iGEM's experiences and lessons are distilled into 6 key insights for future gene drive policy development in the United States: (1) gene drives deserve special attention because of their potential for widescale impact and remaining uncertainty about how to evaluate intergenerational and transboundary risks; (2) an adaptive risk management approach is logical for gene drives because of the rapidly changing technical environment; (3) review by individual technical experts is limited and may fail to incorporate other forms of expertise and, therefore, must be complemented with a range of alternative governance methods; (4) current laboratory biosafety and biosecurity review processes may not capture gene drive research or its components in practice even if they are covered theoretically; (5) risk management for research and development must incorporate discussions of values and broader implications of the work; and (6) a regular technology horizon scanning capacity is needed for the early identification of advances that could pose governance system challenges.
The Need for a Tiered Registry for US Gene Drive Governance
20003K. L. Warmbrod, A. L. Kobokovich, R. West, G. K. Gronvall and M. Montague, Health Security, 2022-01-10 10:08:26.
A great deal of attention has been focused on the potential risks of gene drives, the kinds of biosafety protections they may require, and how they may be reversed; however, less attention has been paid to the systems that would be useful to have in place in the future, when multiple gene drives may be fielded in multiple species, environments, and countries.4-7 The need for coordinated governance of these technologies will become more pressing as gene drive technologies advance and more drives are created to address other vector-borne diseases like the West Nile virus, agricultural pest management, or invasive species. Gene drives carry different inherent risks compared with other genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Existing governance mechanisms for traditional GMOs are insufficient for oversight of gene drives, which require different systems to assess their usefulness and safety. To address the needs for enhanced oversight, we propose a tiered registry system, similar to the clinical trials databases, which can provide government officials, researchers, biotechnology companies, and the public with useful information about ongoing gene drive research or previously released gene drives. Such a resource would enable scientists to confirm that new gene drives would not interfere with existing drives, provide the public with the information needed to make informed decisions concerning consent for release of gene drives, provide researchers with technical information needed to prevent collisions of independent projects modifying the same organism, and provide regulators with information critical for effective oversight. We propose that the US government should implement such a registry for gene drives in the United States, which does not have a robust gene drive regulatory system in place and is not party to the international treaty most relevant for international gene drive regulation, the Convention on Biological Diversity.8 In this commentary, we describe current efforts to safely regulate gene drive and similar genetic technologies worldwide and how the United States could build a tiered registry database that is specifically designed to regulate such technologies throughout a drive's life cycle.
An Introduction to Containment Recommendations for Gene Drive Mosquitoes and the Laboratory Rearing of Genetically Engineered Mosquitoes in Africa
20044S. Higgs, Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases, 2022-01-06 10:04:57.
The prospect of using genetically engineered arthropods to reduce the incidence of vector-borne diseases either indirectly by suppressing vector populations or directly by replacing wild-type vector species with less competent ones has long been discussed; however, only in the past few years has this become feasible. The advent of CRISPR/Cas9-based gene drive and its application to mosquitoes have been a critical factor in bringing the dream to reality, but with opportunity also comes responsibility. Safe and secure handling of genetically engineered arthropods under laboratory/insectary conditions was considered in the original and revised ACGs, and under field conditions by Benedict et al. (2008). Although not discussed in these ACGs, hence the need for this addendum, Benedict et al. (2018) discussed containment and management of gene drive arthropods as distinct from genetically modified mosquitoes under laboratory conditions. A prerequisite for the application of engineered mosquitoes for mosquito-borne disease control is the rearing of these mosquitoes in countries where releases will ultimately occur. In 2018, three companion articles were published in VBZ that discussed this very issue (Mumford et al. 2018, Quinlan et al. 2018a, 2018b), with James et al. (2020) discussing efficacy and safety criteria for advancing gene drive-modified mosquitoes to field testing. In this issue of VBZ, we publish two highly relevant articles that coincidentally, although submitted independently, are complementary.
Preparing an Insectary in Burkina Faso to Support Research in Genetic Technologies for Malaria Control
20042C. Guissou, M. M. Quinlan, R. Sanou, R. K. Ouédraogo, M. Namountougou and A. Diabaté, Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases, 2022-01-06 09:53:59.
The Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé (IRSS) of Burkina Faso, West Africa, was the first African institution to import transgenic mosquitoes for research purposes. A shift from the culture of mosquito research to regulated biotechnology research and considerable management capacity is needed to set up and run the first insectary for transgenic insects in a country that applied and adapted the existing biosafety framework, first developed for genetically modified (GM) crops, to this new area of research. The additional demands arise from the separate regulatory framework for biotechnology, referencing the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, and the novelty of the research strain, making public understanding and acceptance early in the research pathway important. The IRSS team carried out extensive preparations following recommendations for containment of GM arthropods and invested efforts in local community engagement and training with scientific colleagues throughout the region. Record keeping beyond routine practice was established to maintain evidence related to regulatory requirements and risk assumptions. The National Biosafety Agency of Burkina Faso, Agence Nationale de Biosécurité (ANB), granted the permits for import of the self-limiting transgenic mosquito strain, which took place in November 2016, and for conducting studies in the IRSS facility in Bobo-Dioulasso. Compliance with permit terms and conditions of the permits and study protocols continued until the conclusion of studies, when the transgenic colonies were terminated. All this required close coordination between management and the insectary teams, as well as others. This article outlines the experiences of the IRSS to support others undertaking such studies. The IRSS is contributing to the ongoing development of genetic technologies for malaria control, as a partner of Target Malaria (https://targetmalaria.org). The ultimate objective of the innovation is to reduce malaria transmission by using GM mosquitoes of the same species released to reduce the disease-vectoring native populations of Anopheles gambiae s.l.
Information Sharing in Senegal on the Gene Drive Technology as a potential Complementary Tool for Malaria Vector Control
19902AUDA-NEPAD, AUDA-NEPAD, 2022-01-04 08:23:49.
AUDA-NEPAD in partnership with the National Biosafety Authority (Autorité Nationale de Biosécurité (ANB) in Senegal organized an Information sharing meeting on the gene drive technology as a complementary tool for malaria vector control, from 22-23 December 2021, in Somone, Senegal. The key objective of the meeting was to discuss the opportunities offered by gene drive technology for malaria control, based on the current state of art of knowledge and experiences from countries that are testing this approach. Sixty people, including key stakeholders from relevant institutions in Senegal and experts from Burkina Faso and Mali took part in the meeting. In his opening remarks, Mr. Ousseynou Kassé, Executive Director of ANB thanked AUDA-NEPAD for the support provided in the organization of this meeting. He also thanked the experts from Burkina Faso and Mali who came to share their experiences on the subject. “We started the discussions on the Gene Drive approach some years ago at the COP-MOP meeting held in Mexico and we continued it in the past years in the sub-region. Recently we were in Accra twice to discuss the same topic ahead of the next COP-MOP meeting”, he said. Mr. Yero Dé, Chairperson of the Orientation Council of ANB, highlighted that the meeting seeks to improve stakeholders’ understanding of the gene drive technology as a novel malaria control approach. “We need to consider adopting this new approach through an open discussion on how this technology could be used in the health sector and in particular in malaria control and elimination. Malaria mortality rate is very high in most of our countries and the efforts deployed so far to control the disease face important challenges, including the resistance of the vector to the current treatments”, he further stated.
Stakeholder Views on Engagement, Trust, Performance, and Risk Considerations About Use of Gene Drive Technology in Agricultural Pest Management
19900C. L. Goldsmith, K. E. Kang, E. Heitman, Z. N. Adelman, L. W. Buchman, D. Kerns, X. Liu, R. F. Medina and A. Vedlitz, Health Security, 2021-12-31 08:17:50.
Gene drive is an experimental technique that may make it possible to alter the genetic traits of whole populations of a species through the genetic modification of a relatively small number of individuals. This technology is sufficiently new that literature on the understanding and views of stakeholders and the public regarding the use of gene drive organisms in agricultural pest management is just beginning to emerge. Our team conducted a 2-pronged engagement process with Texas gene drive agricultural stakeholders to ascertain their values, beliefs, and preferences about the efficacy, safety, and risk management considerations of gene drive technology as a potential tool for agricultural pest management. We found that a majority of stakeholders support gene drive research and its potential use for managing agricultural pests. Our work with stakeholders confirms both their willingness to be engaged and the importance they place on stakeholder and public engagement regarding these issues, as well as the need to address these issues before use of gene drive as a pest management mechanism will be accepted and trusted.
Facilitating the Conversation: Gene Drive Classification
19766J. Overcash and A. Golnar, Health Security, 2021-12-29 13:09:10.
Gene drives are an emerging technology with tremendous potential to impact public health, agriculture, and conservation. While gene drives can be described simply as selfish genetic elements (natural or engineered) that are inherited at non-Mendelian rates, upon closer inspection, engineered gene drive technology is a complex class of biotechnology that uses a diverse number of genetic features to bias rates of inheritance. As a complex technology, gene drives can be difficult to comprehend, not only for the public and stakeholders, but also to risk assessors, risk managers, and decisionmakers not familiar with gene drive literature. To address this difficulty, we describe a gene drive classification system based on 5 functional characteristics. These characteristics include a gene drive's objective, mechanism, release threshold, range, and persistence. The aggregate of the gene drive's characteristics can be described as the gene drive's architecture. Establishing a classification system to define different gene drive technologies should make them more comprehensible to the public and provide a framework to guide regulatory evaluation and decisionmaking.
Integrated Management of Malaria Vectors in Africa
19971R. Mbabazi, K. Maredia, B. B. El-Sayed, A. K. Babumba, M. Savadogo and O. Akinbo, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:36:56.
Malaria disease is a major public health burden in Africa. The control of malaria vectors is a critical component for prevention, management, and eradication of malaria disease. This chapter presents information on the current status of malaria vector control in Africa with emphasis on integrated vector management (IVM) programs. The chapter highlights innovative and emerging technologies such as sterile insect technique, gene drive, Wolbachia-based biological control, and other technologies for malaria vector control in Africa which can be integrated into IVM programs. The chapter also provides global resources on malaria vector management programs.
Laboratory Biosafety in Handling Genetically Modified Mosquitoes
19963J. Charles, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:19:52.
One of the novel approaches in controlling vector-borne diseases is to release genetically modified mosquitoes in nature. Trial studies are done in different phases by the researches, both in the laboratory and in the fields. Before a GM mosquito is validated to be ready for field release, the same has to rigorously go through several phase studies, and Phase I being the laboratory is the most significant to set the future of the GM mosquito for future investigations. Though the risk of handling GM mosquitoes in laboratory is low, nevertheless there is a prescribed list of DOs and DON’Ts, and the laboratory workers are needed to strictly follow the SOPs or basic principles of biosafety like handling administrative controls, using biosafety equipment, wearing personal protective equipment, etc. The laboratory also should have a proper design as per the risk assessment. Accordingly, the biosafety laboratories (BSL) are classified into four types: type 1, 2, 3 and 4. The risks are assessed as per the factors in the host, vector and donor sequences and the environmental factors and their activities in such environments. As GMMs are of low risk, BSL 1 and 2 are enough for their manipulation, but occasionally BSL 3 may be needed. There may be chances of spillage on the working surfaces during manipulation of the genes which can be remedied by the spill management protocols. Biological wastes may be generated in all areas of manipulation. These can be properly treated by either chemical disinfection or autoclaving and disposed of by incineration. These wastes should be segregated in colour-coded bags before disposal. There may be some risks while transporting GMMs to distant places. They should be packed securely in triple-layer pack and sent for disposal following IATA and other road rules. For each process of the manipulation of gene, a separate standard operating procedure (SOP) should be maintained which has to be updated whenever any change in the procedure is made.
Safety Assessment of Novel Genetic Technologies for Vector Control: National and International Perspectives
19961V. Ahuja, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:15:26.
Novel genetic technologies provide an alternative approach for control of vectors particularly those carrying deadly pathogens. Genetic control technologies aim to either suppress target populations or modify the vector by introducing a heritable factor that reduces or blocks their ability to transmit the diseases. These technologies are thus referred to as population suppression or population modification approaches. Both these approaches offer significant advantages for vector control; however, there are associated biosafety concerns related to possible ecosystem interactions. Therefore, extensive testing on a case-by-case basis is required before these can be used as a public health intervention. This paper provides details of the international initiatives towards development of guidelines and status of regulations in India.
Measuring Public Attitudes to Releases of Transgenic Mosquitoes for Disease Control, with Special Reference to Dengue and Malaria
19958L. A. De Las Llagas and M. S. T. Gunigundo, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:10:05.
Since the advent of DDT in public health and agriculture, science leaped forward with revolutionary technology such as gene drive or editing, thus making it possible to develop alternative approaches to address vector-borne diseases. However, their utilization and sustenance in public life are dependent on public attitude, i.e., societal awareness and social acceptance. In the face of strong skepticism against genetically modified organisms in both developed and developing countries, public acceptance is therefore a requirement (Boete and Beisel 2013, and Bohannon 2002, as cited in De Souza et al. Understanding the requirements and factors necessary for the acceptance of genetically modified mosquitoes as a potential malaria control tool in Ghana: a questionnaire survey, AsPac J Biol Biotechnol 21(3):76–88, 2013).
Experiences and Outcomes from a Worldwide Training Programme on Genetically Modified Vectors (GMVs) Related Biosafety for Human Health and the Environment
19956B. K. Tyagi, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:04:33.
Partial to virtual lack of any impact on control of vectors of human diseases, especially mosquitoes, warranted urgent search for new alternate technologies which will be safe, economical and environment-friendly, on one hand, and integrate with other tools and methodologies of the integrated vector management (IVM), on the other. Past few decades have witnessed surge of many effective and sustainable genetically and biotechnologically developed de novo technologies which tend to control mosquito vectors by working either to suppress (transgenesis) or replace (paratransgenesis), besides an array of other physiological interventions, on the vector populations. Several technologies such as, for example, Release of insect carrying Dominant Lethal (RIDL) gene system, Wolbachia (an endocellular symbiotic bacterium naturally present in many arthropods) induced cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) resulting in unviable egg production and transforming dengue vectors (Aedes spp.) and malaria vectors (e.g., Anopheles stephensi) into resistant to respective pathogens, i.e., viruses and Plasmodium, have offered promise in controlling vector-borne diseases. Notwithstanding unchallengeable significance, these technologies have also raised many questions from both societies and governments of many countries. To alleviate their scepticism and other queries, many international organizations conducted meetings to generate consensus for guidelines, but even this helped marginally to pacify global interrogations. It was, therefore, considered opportune by the Tropical Disease Research (TDR)/WHO to set up a series of multi-regional training workshops in Africa (Bamako, Mali), Asia (Madurai, India) and Latin America (Medellin, Colombia) between 2008 and 2011 (WHO 2015). About 150 trainees were drawn from as diverse disciplines/walks of life as science, health departments, academics, social, legal, non-governmental organization. The outcome, inculcated from the experiences expressed by the trainees themselves post-workshops, has been very encouraging as they all found the training courses highly beneficial to comprehend genetically modified vectors/mosquitoes (GMV/GMM) related biosafety to the human and the environment and thus become a potential ambassador in their areas or countries to strongly communicate and advocate about the lasting benefits of the various genetically evolved technologies in the control of mosquitoes responsible for transmission of dengue and malaria, in particular.
Arthropods of Medical Importance: Need for Genetic and Other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, with Emphasis on Eco-biosocial and Environmental Considerations.
19923B. K. Tyagi, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 09:22:08.
Among the world’s known vector groups, viz. arthropods, snails and rodents, the most important vectors originate from arthropods, the jointed legs. Arthropods are doubtlessly regarded as the most dominant creatures on the Earth due largely to their remarkable structural and behavioural diversity, besides humongous species preponderance. Of course, some of these arthropods are serious pests and/or vectors of human and animal diseases—deadly, debilitating and economy destructing. According to an estimate, arthropod species make approximately 80% of the global biological diversity. Born some 350–400 million years ago, they have of course achieved, to the utter envy of all other animal forms, a formidable genetic diversity and robustness so much so that they have virtually captivated pivotal human attention for centuries. They serve as a spectacular model of bioprospecting or laboratory experiments mostly because they are found in abundance, breed prodigiously and are exceptionally easier to culture or cultivate. For the aforesaid reasons, arthropods are also the easy target for genetic manipulations such as the transgenesis (using the release of insect carrying dominant lethal (RIDL) gene system or gene drive-based genome editing, e.g. CRISPR/Cas9, to suppress or replace the vector population) or paratransgenesis (e.g. deploying endosymbiont Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility for replacing natural vector population). In particular, the advent of CRISPR technology has excited the potential to engineer new game-changing technologies and innovative systems that can be used to control wild populations of mosquitoes. Two developments of particular interest are a self-limiting system termed precision-guided sterile insect technique (pgSIT) and a homing-based gene drive (HGD). The unique features of these systems can make them valuable tools to control vector mosquitoes in the future. All these biotechnological advancements in vector control are designed to fit well in the multi-methodical integrated vector management (IVM) strategy.
Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies
19912B. K. Tyagi, SpringerLink, 2021-12-21 08:48:19.
This book comprehensively covers the latest development in developing and deploying the genetically modified vectors, particularly Anopheles and Aedes mosquitoes responsible for transmitting malaria parasites and dengue viruses, the most deadly and/or debilitating among all the vector-borne diseases. It is considered timely and commensurate to bring about a book dealing with the various ecological, biological and social as well as regulatory aspects for the deployment of genetically modified vectors in special context with the biosafety of humans, his associates, and the environment. Written by an array of specialists and experts in various subjects of genetically modified organisms, this book centrally addresses the (i) basic principles of the genetic manipulation of vectors and they are potential impact on human and the environment, (ii) ecological, biological, ethical, legal and social implications of the use of genetically modified vectors, (iii) identification of potential hazards; assessment and management of risks for human and environment; risk/benefit analysis, (iv) principles and practices for the assessment and management of biosecurity and biosafety in laboratories (and in the field), (v) guiding principles for creation and management of institutional or national biosafety review boards and ethics review committees, and (vi) development and application of a biosafety regulatory framework and its related legal principles at national levels for securing the development and use of vector control methods based on genetic modification strategies.
Malaria vector control tools in emergency settings: What do experts think? Results from a DELPHI survey
19785C. Boete, S. Burza, E. Lasry, S. Moriana and W. Robertson, Conflict and Health, 15:11. 2021-12-20 14:16:22.
Background The use and implementation of novel tools for malaria control such as long lasting impregnated bednets (LLINs) and Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) over the last decade has contributed to a substantial reduction in malaria burden globally. However numerous challenges exist particularly in relation to vector control in emergency settings. This study seeks to explore expert opinion on the utility of existing tools within the emergency context setting and to better understand the attitude towards emerging and innovative tools (including Genetically Modified Mosquitoes) to augment current approaches. Methods 80 experts in the field of malaria and vector control were invited to participate in a two-round Delphi survey. They were selected through a combination of literature (academic and policy publications) review and snowball sampling reflecting a range of relevant backgrounds including vector control experts, malaria programme managers and emergency response specialists. The survey was conducted online through a questionnaire including the possibility for free text entry, and concentrated on the following topics: Utility and sustainability of current vector control tools, both in and outside emergency settings Feasibility, utility and challenges of emerging vector control tools, both in and outside emergency settings Current and unmet research priorities in malaria vector control and in malaria control in general. Results 37 experts completed the first round and 31 completed the second round of the survey. There was a stronger consensus about the increased utility of LLIN compared to IRS in all settings, while insecticide-treated covers and blankets ranked very high only in emergency settings. When considering the combination of tools, the ones deemed most interesting always involved LLINs and IRS regardless of the setting, and the acceptability and the efficacy at reducing transmission are essential characteristics. Regarding perceptions of tools currently under development, consensus was towards improvement of existing tools rather than investing in novel approaches and the majority of respondents expressed distrust for genetic approaches. Conclusion Malaria vector control experts expressed more confidence for tools whose efficacy is backed up by epidemiological evidence, hence a preference for the improvement rather than the combination of existing tools. Moreover, while several novel tools are under development, the majority of innovative approaches did not receive support, particularly in emergency settings. Stakeholders involved in the development of novel tools should involve earlier and raise awareness of the potential effectiveness amongst a wider range of experts within the malaria community to increase acceptability and improve early adoption once the evidence base is established.
Gene Editing in the Wild: Shaping Decisions through Broad Public Deliberation
19701M. K. Gusmano, G. E. Kaebnick, K. J. Maschke, C. P. Neuhaus and B. C. Wills, The Hastings Center Report, 51. 2021-12-14 19:46:28.
The essays in this special report grew out of a project funded by the National Science Foundation (with NSF award number 1827935). Gregory E. Kaebnick and Michael K. Gusmano were co-principal investigators on the project, and Karen J. Maschke and Carolyn P. Neuhaus were coinvestigators. Ben Curran Wills was project manager and research assistant. Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment—that is, in the “wild.” Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild.
Contact Us
Alex Sullivan
Foundation for the
National Institutes of Health
geneconvenevi@fnih.org