Gene vandalism: Gene editing gone awry

• Author:
• Author name

  Quantumrun Foresight
• March 2, 2023

Insight summary

Gene vandalism, also known as gene pollution or off-target effects, is a potential side effect of genome editing that has garnered significant attention. This abnormality occurs when the editing process unintentionally modifies other genes, leading to unexpected and potentially harmful changes in an organism.

Gene vandalism context

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) are part of the bacteria defense system responsible for destroying foreign DNA. Researchers honed it to be used to edit DNA to improve food supplies and wildlife preservation. More importantly, gene editing can potentially be a promising method for treating human diseases. This technique has been successful in animal testing and is being explored in clinical trials for several human diseases, including β-thalassemia and sickle cell anemia. These trials involve taking hematopoietic stem cells, which produce red blood cells, from patients, editing them in the laboratory to correct mutations, and reintroducing the modified cells back into the same patients. The hope is that by repairing the stem cells, the cells they produce will be healthy, leading to a cure for the disease.

However, unplanned genetic alterations discovered that using the tool could cause distortions like deletion or movement of DNA segments far off the target site, creating the potential for multiple diseases. The off-target rates can be estimated to lie between one to five percent. The odds are considerable, especially when using CRISPR in gene therapy targeting billions of cells. Some researchers argue that the dangers have been exaggerated as no animal has been known to develop cancer after being genetically edited with CRISPR. Moreover, the tool has been deployed successfully in multiple experiments, so a conclusive scientific narrative has not been established yet.

Disruptive impact 

Startups working on CRISPR cures can face backlash for dismissing abnormalities and not reporting on potential dangers beforehand. As potential risks increase, more efforts to research the likely effects of using CRISPR can be expected. The possibility of having cells turn cancerous may halt ongoing progress in certain areas if more papers on gene vandalism come to light. Additionally, the demand for more robust safety protocols and longer timelines when designing gene-editing tools may intensify. 

Another potential consequence of gene vandalism is the emergence of so-called “super pests.” In 2019, a study published in the journal Nature revealed that attempts to genetically modify mosquitoes to reduce the transmission of yellow fever, dengue, chikungunya, and Zika fevers inadvertently led to the emergence of a strain of mosquito with increased genetic diversity and the ability to survive in the presence of the modification. This phenomenon raises the possibility that attempts to control pests through gene editing could backfire, leading to the emergence of more resilient and harder-to-control strains.

Gene vandalism also has the potential to disrupt ecosystems and biodiversity. For example, releasing genetically modified organisms into the environment could lead to the accidental transfer of modified genes to wild populations, potentially altering the natural genetic makeup of species. This development could have unintended consequences for the balance of ecosystems and the survival of certain species.

Implications of gene vandalism

Wider implications of gene vandalism may include:

• Increasing unintended health consequences for individuals who have undergone gene editing, leading to more lawsuits and stringent regulations.
• The potential for gene editing to be used for questionable purposes, such as creating designer babies or enhancing human abilities.Increased research on gene editing tools, including ways to make them more accurate.
• Modified species that can manifest behavioral changes, leading to disruptions in the global ecosystem.
• Genetically modified crops that may have long-term consequences for human and animal health.

Questions to consider

• What are your initial thoughts or concerns about gene vandalism?
• Do you think researchers and policymakers are adequately addressing the potential risks of gene vandalism?