On the heels of the recent news of the first gene-edited babies born in China, many questions arose regarding the safety and ethics of gene editing tools such as CRISPR, as well as questions regarding the role and responsibilities of the vendors supplying the technologies. The questions raised include whether a vendor is responsible for the actions of a buyer, how a seller can ensure how a buyer will utilize the technology, what technologies require better vetting and where the onus for ethnical behavior lies.

Merck KGaA became a significant vendor for CRISPR and other gene editing tools in 2015 when it acquired Sigma-Aldrich (see IBO 11/30/15). According to the company, Merck is developing methods to verify the authenticity of its buyers and it does not condone heritable human genome editing of any kind, due to the lack of understanding of off-target effects.

The consent document that was signed by the parents of the Chinese babies listed Thermo Fisher Scientific and Sythego as suppliers of the Cas9 and guide RNA, respectively, used in the experiment; however, neither company has confirmed that their technologies were used, and each stated they are working on promoting the ethical use of gene editing.

Other companies state that they have systems to evaluate potential customers, including the nonprofit Addgene, which investigates applications to establish that the genes they supply will be used for a legitimate research project. Experts in the field believe that it is imperative that gene editing tool companies need a “know-your-customer” screening process.

Source: Chemical & Engineering News