{"id":2281,"date":"2021-07-09T19:03:54","date_gmt":"2021-07-09T19:03:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/?p=2281"},"modified":"2021-07-09T19:08:00","modified_gmt":"2021-07-09T19:08:00","slug":"4-ethics-breaking-biological-experiments-touted-by-chinese-scientists-as-world-firsts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/?p=2281","title":{"rendered":"4 ETHICS-BREAKING BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTS TOUTED BY CHINESE SCIENTISTS AS \u2018WORLD FIRSTS\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
Knowledge Increased<\/div>\n
\u201cAnd the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have\n\n
imagined Strongs 2161: <\/font> zamam, zaw-mam\u00b4; a primitive root; to plan, usually in a bad sense:\u2014consider, devise, imagine, plot, purpose, think (evil).<\/span><\/div> to do.\n\n \u2014 Genesis 11:6<\/blockquote><\/div>\n\n
\u201cAnd he had power to give life unto the\n
image Stronges 1504: <\/font> eikon, i-kone\u00b4; from 1503; a likeness, i.e. (literally) statue, profile, or (figuratively) representation, resemblance: \u2014 image.<\/span><\/div>\u00a0\u00a0of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed\"\n\n \u2014 Revelation 13:15<\/blockquote><\/strong><\/div>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Article Source: Epoch Times<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/b><\/div>\n

Throughout the world, scientific research and experiments involving ethical issues must first pass the scrutiny of ethics committees. In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has conducted many experiments in biomedical and genetic engineering that break human ethical boundaries.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

China began\u00a0implementing the\u00a0Ethical\u00a0Review\u00a0of\u00a0Biomedical\u00a0Research\u00a0Involving\u00a0Humans\u00a0on Dec. 1, 2016. However,\u00a0122 Chinese\u00a0scientists\u00a0who co-signed an open letter in 2018 to oppose gene-edited babies criticized China\u2019s biomedical ethics review as a \u201csham.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the United States, as ethical and moral regulations on animal research have become stricter, budgets and funding have tended to decrease in recent years, making China the most attractive place for such experiments. For example, in 2014, the U.S. government imposed a\u00a0funding pause of gain of function\u00a0research involving influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronaviruses, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronaviruses. In 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0that it would\u00a0stop conducting or funding studies on mammals by\u00a02035.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 2011, the CCP made it a national development goal to create primate disease models through cloning and other biotechnologies. According to the 2020 China Biomedical Industry Development\u00a0Report\u00a0published by Chinese Venture, \u201cthe overall biopharmaceutical market in China increased from $28.7 billion to $49.6 billion from 2016 to 2019, at a CAGR (Compound annual growth rate) of 20 percent. It is expected to reach $130.2 billion in 2025.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Below are four experiments conducted by Chinese scientists that Chinese state media touted as \u201cworld firsts.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Experiment 1: A Rat Model of Male Pregnancy<\/strong><\/h2>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

On June 9, researchers from China\u2019s Naval Medical University published a preprint\u00a0paper\u00a0on \u201ca rat model of male pregnancy\u201d on the non-peer-reviewed site BioRxiv.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

The paper describes a specific method for getting a male rat pregnant at the expense of three female rats.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. First, a castrated male rat was sutured back to back with a female rat to create a female microenvironment for the male rat, forming a heterosexual parabiotic pair.<\/strong><\/li>\n
  2. The uterus of another female rat was transplanted into the conjoined male rat.<\/strong><\/li>\n
  3. Finally, blastocyst-stage embryos developed in the third female rat were transplanted into the grafted uterus of the male parabiont and the native uterus of the female parabiont.<\/strong><\/li>\n
  4. After 21.5 days, 27 of the 280 male embryos were normally developed, and 10 well-developed pups were delivered by cesarean section. At least 46 male rats and 138 female rats were used in the experiment.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Chinese web portal Sina reported the story under the\u00a0headline\u00a0\u201cAre men still far away from giving birth?\u201d, saying that \u201cChinese scientists have performed a miracle\u201d and \u201cbroken the universal law of nature since the beginning of the time.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    However, the experiment has been questioned and criticized by some experts.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Emily McIvor, a senior science policy advisor for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), described the experiment as \u201cvile.\u201d\u00a0 She said that animals should not be treated as \u201cdisposable objects.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u201cAnimals deserve to be respected and left in peace, not bred in laboratories, experimented on, and treated as disposable objects,\u201d she said to Mail Online.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u201cSurgically joining two sensitive rats\u2014who endured mutilation and weeks of prolonged suffering\u2014is unethical and in the realm of Frankenscience,\u201d she added.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    She also said she believes that \u201cthese shocking experiments are driven solely by curiosity and do nothing to further our understanding of the human reproductive system.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Experiment 2: Human-Monkey Chimeric Embryos<\/strong><\/h2>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    On April 15, a research team from\u00a0Kunming University of Science and Technology in Yunnan, China, and the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences\u00a0in the United States published a\u00a0paper on the Cell website, announcing that they had successfully grown the world\u2019s first human-monkey chimeric embryos, i.e., embryos with both humans- and monkey-derived cells.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Scientists injected human stem cells into the monkey embryos hoping that the organs grown in the monkeys could be transplanted into humans. This has led to widespread ethical controversy.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Dr. Anna Smajdor, lecturer and researcher in biomedical ethics at the University of East Anglia\u2019s Norwich Medical School, told the\u00a0BBC<\/a>\u00a0the study posed \u201csignificant ethical and legal challenges.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u201cThe scientists behind this research state that these chimeric embryos offer new opportunities because \u2018we are unable to conduct certain types of experiments in humans.\u2019 But whether these embryos are human or not is open to question,\u201d she said to BBC.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics and co-director of the Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, told the BBC the research \u201copens Pandora\u2019s box to human-nonhuman chimeras.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    However, the project\u2019s Chinese leader, academician Ji Weizhi of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,\u00a0said that human-monkey chimeric embryos<\/a>\u00a0just created an environment in which human stem cells are developed, reproductive chimerism does not inherently occur, and that it is \u201cdefinitely not a human-monkey hybrid,\u201d so it does not have ethical issues.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In 2019, the State Key Laboratory of Stem Cell and Reproductive Biology in Beijing created the first \u201cpig-monkey hybrid<\/a>\u201d by adding monkey cells to pig embryos.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    The two hybrids died after only two weeks, and the research was criticized by\u00a0scientists from\u00a0around the world\u00a0as morally and ethically shocking.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Experiment 3: Gene-Edited Babies<\/strong><\/h2>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In December 2018, Chinese scientist He Jiankui\u00a0announced\u00a0at a major academic conference in\u00a0Hong Kong\u00a0the birth of twin gene-edited baby girls who were \u201cimmune to AIDS.\u201d He claimed it was the first case in the world.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    He said his team used CRISPR technology to \u201cedit out\u201d the CCR5 gene in embryos so that the babies might have a natural ability to fight AIDS in the future.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    The case sparked\u00a0widespread condemnation\u00a0from the global scientific community, with experts concerned that altering the genome of an embryo could cause unexpected harm, not only to the individual being modified but also to future generations who pass on these same changes.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Krishanu Saha, a bioengineer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, a member of a group investigating the safety of the technology, told the BBC, \u201cSo let\u2019s say we are injecting a genome editor into the brain to target neurons in the hippocampus, \u201d she adds, \u201chow do we make sure that those genome editors do not travel into the reproductive organs and end up hitting a sperm or egg? Then that individual could potentially pass the edit on to their children.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    An international committee of scientific institutions investigating the issue\u00a0released a report\u00a0on Sept. 3, 2020, saying that once the genome of a human embryo is edited, it should not be used for reproduction until there is solid evidence that genomic changes in the sperm survivor can lead to reliable results and do not cause unintended changes. No genome editing technology has been able to meet this standard.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Even in China, 122 scientists signed an\u00a0open letter\u00a0warning of the risks of such experiments and criticizing the authorities\u2019 \u201cethical biomedical review as a sham.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    The Chinese authorities opened an investigation shortly after the news was announced, saying that there were problems with the ethical review documents involved in the study.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    CCP mouthpiece\u00a0People\u2019s Daily\u00a0also changed its tone after\u00a0praising the research as \u201ca historic breakthrough\u201d and published an article titled \u201cTechnological Development Cannot Leave Ethics Behind.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    On Dec. 30, 2019, a Chinese court ruled in a\u00a0secret trial\u00a0that He Jiankui will spend three years in prison and pay a $430,000 fine for \u201cillegally carrying out the human embryo gene-editing experiments.\u201d Two others involved were also sentenced.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Experiment 4: Gain-of-Function Experiments on Coronaviruses<\/strong><\/h2>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u201cBat Woman\u201d Shi Zhengli, a scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, sparked an ethical and moral debate by conducting a gain-of-function (GOF) experiment in the course of her research on the\u00a0CCP virus, which causes COVID-19.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In 2015, Shi, together with her collaborators, published a\u00a0paper\u00a0in the journal Nature Medicine on the genetic modification of a\u00a0SARS-like virus (SARS-CoV) bat coronavirus to infect humans with greater infectivity.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    This GOF study, in which the virus was genetically modified to make it more lethal or transmissible, amounted to the creation of a new strain of the virus that was expected to cause an outbreak in humans, the so-called \u201cpotential pandemic pathogen (PPP).\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    After the publication of the article, many scientists worldwide questioned the potential dangers and ethical issues of the experiment.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Because the risk of widespread or even global spread of virulent pathogens that could result from GOF\/PPP research far outweighs the research benefits, such research has raised widespread ethical concerns. It has been deemed inconsistent with the\u00a0Nuremberg Code\u2018s requirement for broad ethical principles of \u201cfruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods,\u201d and proportionality of risk to humanitarian benefit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In 2014, the\u00a0U.S. government suspended funding\u00a0for GOF research involving influenza, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) coronavirus, and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) coronavirus.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In August 2020, Michael J. Imperiale,\u00a0professor in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at the University of Michigan, and Arturo Casadevall, professor and chair of the Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health,\u00a0co-authored an article saying that \u201cwe are not concerned with the notion of gain-of-function experiments writ large \u2026 Rather, we are specifically talking about experiments involving pandemic pathogens.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    They added, \u201cOne should not be performing GOF experiments simply to \u2018see what would happen\u2019 without strong evidence that it could happen naturally. In other words, just because an experiment can be done does not mean that it should be done.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    In an email to the\u00a0New York Times\u00a0on June 15, Shi argued that her experiment was different from GOF because her goal was not to make the virus more dangerous but to understand how it spreads across species.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Dr. Sean Lin, former lab director of the viral disease branch of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, told The Epoch Times Chinese-language edition that the cross-species experiment itself would create new viruses that are not found in nature, making them not only more virulent or infectious, but also helping the virus mutate and leading to cross-species mutations.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u00a0<\/p>\n

    <\/strong><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli (L) is seen inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan, capital of China’s Hubei province on Feb. 23, 2017. The P4 epidemiological laboratory was built in co-operation with French bio-industrial firm Institut Merieux and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. (Johannes Eisele\/AFP via Getty Images)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2284,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"pmpro_default_level":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[25,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2281","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-knowledge-increased","category-uncategorized","pmpro-has-access"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2281","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2281"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2281\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2287,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2281\/revisions\/2287"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2284"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2281"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2281"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.inthedays.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2281"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}