Press/Media: Expert Opinion
| Title | Expert reaction to House of Lords parliamentary vote on mitochondrial donation |
|---|---|
| Degree of recognition | International |
| Media name/outlet | Science Media Center |
| Primary Media type | Web |
| Country/Territory | United Kingdom |
| Date | 24/02/15 |
| Description | Dr David J Clancy, Lecturer researching genetics and biology of ageing, Lancaster University, said: “This is a very difficult area indeed. I think that the science is sufficiently clear that, if the procedure proceeds on any sort of scale, at some point a human will be created with mismatched mitochondrial and nuclear genomes such that their life is shortened by it. Incidentally, it will be more likely to be male. Much of the science behind this comes from the fruit fly Drosophila and it was brought to the HFEA who, wrongly in my view, mostly dismissed it as being not generally applicable to humans. ‘….. in 2013 the panel maintained the view that there is no evidence for any mismatch between the nucleus and any mtDNA haplogroup, at least within a species.’ ‘The panel also suggested that more extensive studies on Drosophila from outbred genetic backgrounds may be beneficial in determining the relevance of the fly model to humans, given that the latter are generally both outbred and where interbreeding is common.’ “Unfortunately the panel was unaware of existing evidence, of exactly the sort they recommended be undertaken, in a paper they had been referred to and cited in their report, which showed large negative effects on lifespan of nuclear-mitochondrial mismatches ( this was some of my own work). “However the panel did recommend that ‘consideration is given to mtDNA haplogroup matching when selecting donors, although the panel considers that the risks of not doing so will be very low, and that there may be practical factors preventing it.’ They did not elaborate on how this might be done. “It is a difficult area because, without any attempts at genome matching, the likelihood of producing a genetically unfit individual using this reproductive technology must be traded off against the benefits to the carriers of mitochondrial diseases in being able to produce children who bear half of their chromosomes. It could be argued that donor IVF runs a similar risk of genetic incompatibilities, but that is not a good argument. If we are OK with the risk-benefit equation, that’s fine, but while the benefits are clear and fairly simple, the risks should be properly apprehended. It is unclear to me whether they are. “A ‘best effort’ might require that the donor mitochondria have the same genotype as that of the father. In that way we might have some expectation that the donor mtDNA be somewhat compatible with at least half of the child’s genome.” |
| Persons | David Clancy |