Home Overview Press Room Blog Publications For Students about us
Search

About Other Countries' Policies & Human Biotechnology


The United Kingdom

Countries differ widely in the types of human biotechnologies they regulate, the jurisdiction of authority, the nature of enforcement, and other particulars. One requirement for effective policy is a government agency responsible for licensing and monitoring research and commercial facilities that work with human embryos. Frequently cited models are Canada's Assisted Human Reproduction Act and the United Kingdom’s Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA).

Many countries have considered prohibiting the most troubling applications: human reproductive cloning and inheritable genetic modification. To date, they are illegal in nearly 50 countries. Similar legislation is pending in other nations.



Do We Need an International Body to Regulate Genetic Engineering?by Kristen V. BrownGizmodoJanuary 18th, 2017Science reaches across borders, which poses challenging questions for us to decide what the future should look like--locally and globally.
Controversial IVF technique produces a baby girl -- and for some, that's a problemby Susan ScuttiCNNJanuary 18th, 2017Stakes are rising as genetic modifications produced in a girl baby could be passed onto her future children. The risks remain unknown.
Designer babies: an ethical horror waiting to happen?by Philip BallThe Guardian January 8th, 2017A perfectly feasible 10-20% improvement in health via PGD, added to the comparable advantage that wealth already brings, could lead to a widening of the health gap between rich and poor, both within a society and between nations.
Philippine police arrest surrogate mothers-to-be in human trafficking crackdownby Lindsay MurdochSydney Morning HeraldJanuary 4th, 2017International surrogacy agents operate across multiple borders, flying surrogates, eggs, doctors and parents to whichever country is the most porous for their business.
2016 Fear vs Hope: Gene Editing— Terrible turning point?by Pete ShanksDeccan ChronicleJanuary 1st, 2017As the tools for gene editing rapidly advance, we approach our best chance to prevent the rise of a modern, uncontrolled and dangerously ill-considered techno-eugenics.
Unexpected Risks Found In Replacing DNA To Prevent Inherited Disordersby Jill NeimarkNPRJanuary 1st, 2017Scientists are increasingly concerned that "3-person IVF" techniques may allow flawed mitochondria to resurface and threaten a child's health.
China’s $9 billion effort to beat the U.S. in genetic testing[cites CGS's Marcy Darnovsky]by Ylan Q. MuiWashington PostDecember 30th, 2016Chinese investors — both private and government-supported — are backing American start-ups and funding promising new companies at home.
‘Gene drive’ moratorium shot down at UN biodiversity meetingby Ewen CallawayNatureDecember 21st, 2016Environmental activists’ appeals for a freeze on gene-drive field trials, and on some lab research, are likely to resurface in the future.
Four Steps Forward, One Leap Back on Global Governance of Synthetic Biologyby ETC GroupETC GroupDecember 19th, 2016196 countries meeting at the UN Convention on Biodiversity grappled with how synthetic biology and other risky technologies threaten biodiversity, local economies, and the rights of farmers and Indigenous Peoples.
Bioterrorism And Gene Editing: Can Crispr Tool Be Used As Biological Weapon In War?by Himanshu GoenkaIB TimesDecember 14th, 2016Given its broad distribution, low cost, and accelerated pace of development, deliberate or unintentional misuse of gene editing might have far-reaching economic and national security implications.
Displaying 1-10 of 834  
Next >> 
Last Page » 
« Show Complete List » 


ESPAÑOL | PORTUGUÊS | Русский

home | overview | blog | publications| about us | donate | newsletter | press room | privacy policy

CGS • 1122 University Ave, Suite 100, Berkeley, CA 94702 • • (p) 1.510.665.7760 • (F) 1.510.665.8760