611 W. Union Street
Benson, AZ 85602
(520) 586-0800

Health Choice Integrated Care crisis Line
1-877-756-4090

NurseWise 24-Hour Crisis Line
1-866-495-6735

NAZCARE Warm Line
1-888-404-5530



SEABHS
611 W. Union Street
Benson, AZ 85602
(520) 586-0800

NurseWise 24-Hr Crisis Line
1-866-495-6735

NAZCARE Warm Line
1-888-404-5530


powered by centersite dot net

Getting Started
Here are some forms to get started. These can be printed and brought with you so that you can pre-fill out some known info ahead of time. More...


Health Sciences
Resources
Basic InformationLatest News
Genes Start Mutating Soon After Life Begins, Study FindsMore Men Than Women With Parkinson's Have Caregivers'Fountain of Youth' Gene Discovered in Secluded Amish CommunityLRRK2 Variants Linked to Lower Age at Onset of Parkinson'sKnowing Too Much About Your Genes Might Be RiskyOverlapping Surgery Appears Safe in Neurosurgical ProceduresDo I Know Ewe?Daytime Wounds May Heal Faster Than Nighttime OnesHuman vs. Animal Brainpower: More Alike Than You Might ThinkResilient Brain Connections May Help Against Alzheimer'sConcerns Surround Use of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic TestingWhen It Comes to Obesity, Genes Just Partly to BlameDoes Time of Neurosurgery Matter?Smoking Alters Genetic Relationship with Parkinson'sHealth Tip: Considering Genetic TestingDiabetes Ups Risk of MACE in Acute Coronary SyndromesScientists Spot Genes Behind Skin ColorScientists Support Genome Editing to Prevent DiseaseBrain Disconnects Spotted in Parkinson's Patients With Visual HallucinationsCoffee Doesn't Help Parkinson's Motor DisordersCan Babies Help Heart Patients?Scientists Spot Marker for CTE in Living Football PlayersNerve Stimulation Pulls Patient From 15-Year Vegetative StateWhy Your Nose May Be Key to Parkinson's RiskEvolution Not Over for HumansBrain Scans Offer Clues to Why Some Teens Pile on PoundsNew Clues to Why Yawns Are ContagiousNew Hope From Old Drugs in Fight Against Parkinson'sFirst Gene Therapy Approved in U.S.Awake for Aneurysm Brain Surgery, Better Results?Does Autism Risk Reside in Cells' Energy Engines?More Evidence Contact Sports Can Affect the BrainVirtual House Calls for Speedy, Effective Parkinson's CareSeven Imaging Biomarkers Tied to Cognition in Male FightersDiabetes Drug Shows Promise Against Parkinson'sCombined MRI Might Help Predict Brain Damage in BoxersMedical Reality Catches Up to Science FictionNoninvasive Brain Test May Pinpoint Type of DementiaIn Mice, Brain Cells Discovered That Might Control AgingScans May Show Consciousness in 'Comatose' PatientsBoxers, MMA Fighters May Face Long-Term Harm to Brain: StudyFDA Panel OKs What May Soon Be First Gene Therapy Approved in U.S.Early Parkinson's May Prompt Vision ProblemsWhole-Genome Sequencing of Uncertain Clinical UtilityCould Shift Work Damage Your DNA?Gene Sequencing May Reveal Risks for Rare DiseasesRogue Genes May Cause Some ALS CasesSticky Brain 'Plaques' Implicated in Alzheimer's AgainEven Your Bones Can Get Fat, Mouse Study SuggestsDoes a Low-Fat Dairy Habit Boost Parkinson's Risk?
Questions and AnswersLinksBook Reviews
Related Topics

Medical Disorders
Mental Disorders
Mental Health Professions

Scientists Support Genome Editing to Prevent Disease


HealthDay News
Updated: Oct 4th 2017

new article illustration

WEDNESDAY, Oct. 4, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- Many basic scientists and clinical researchers support somatic genome editing in adults for prevention of serious disease but not for human enhancement; they also believe the public should be consulted before any clinical application of germline gene editing proceeds, according to survey results published online Oct. 3 in Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics.

Kiran Musunuru, M.D., Ph.D., M.P.H., from the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and colleagues surveyed about 300 attendees at an American Heart Association conference to examine their opinions on somatic and germline gene editing (GGE). Most of the respondents were basic scientists (74 percent) or clinical researchers (12 percent), with few clinical practitioners (6 percent).

The researchers found that 80 percent of respondents supported somatic genome editing in adults to prevent serious diseases. Sixty-nine percent would opt to receive a safe, one-shot genome-editing therapy that would permanently reduce coronary heart disease risk. However, 83 percent were opposed to use of somatic genome editing to acquire desired traits. With respect to human GGE, 68 percent supported in vitro research that would not culminate in pregnancy, and most supported public funding of such research. Sixty-one percent supported use of GGE by parents if there were no other means to have a healthy biological child; opinions were evenly split about the acceptability of using GGE for reducing the risk of a child having a serious medical condition. Seventy-two percent opposed GGE if the general public was not asked for their opinions of the issue.

"The results were revealing and highlight the need to broadly engage the public and solicit the opinions of various constituencies before proceeding with clinical germline genome editing," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)