Search

Recently, Australia became the second jurisdiction worldwide to legalize the use of mitochondrial donation technology. The Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve's Law) Bill 2021 allows individuals with a family history of mitochondrial disease to access assisted reproductive techniques that prevent the inheritance of mitochondrial disease. Using inductive content analysis, we assessed submissions sent to the Senate Committee as part of a programme of scientific inquiry and public consultation that informed drafting of the Bill. These submissions discussed a range of bioethical and legal considerations of central importance to the political debate. Significantly, submissions from those with a first-hand experience of mitochondrial disease, including clinicians and those with a family history of mitochondrial disease, were in strong support of this legislation. Those in support of the Bill commended the two-staged approach and rigorous licencing requirements as part of the Bill's implementation strategy. Submissions which outlined arguments against the legislation either opposed the use of these techniques in general or opposed aspects of the implementation strategy in Australia. These findings offer a window into the ethical arguments and perspectives that matter most to those Australians who took part in the Senate inquiry into mitochondrial donation. The insights garnered from these submissions may be used to help refine policy and guidelines as the field progresses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There seems to be a consensus that enucleated oocyte donation (EOD) should only be used to reduce the risk of having a child with mitochondrial disorders. However, this paper argues that in the initial phase in which we are at the moment, EOD should first be used to remedy infertility caused by poor oocyte quality or poor embryonic development. That learning period will allow researchers to improve their technical skills and the knowledge of the best procedure before starting on high-risk cases. Mitochondrial carryover of pathologic mtDNA is the main cause of concern for the offspring. That risk does not exist in infertility cases. The application of EOD to treat infertility should at present be performed in a clinical research setting to obtain more evidence about efficacy and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitochondrial disorders manifest enormous genetic and clinical heterogeneity - they can appear at any age, present with various phenotypes affecting any organ, and display any mode of inheritance. What mitochondrial diseases do have in common, is impairment of respiratory chain activity, which is responsible for more than 90 % of energy production within cells. While diagnostics of mitochondrial disorders has been accelerated by introducing Next-Generation Sequencing techniques in recent years, the treatment options are still very limited. For many patients only a supportive or symptomatic therapy is available at the moment. However, decades of basic and preclinical research have uncovered potential target points and numerous compounds or interventions are now subjects of clinical trials. In this review, we focus on current and emerging therapeutic approaches towards the treatment of mitochondrial disorders. We focus on small compounds, metabolic interference, such as endurance training or ketogenic diet and also on genomic approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitochondria are present in all human cells and vary in number from a few tens to many thousands. As they generate the majority of a cell's energy supply which power every part of our body, and hence, their number varies in different cells as per the energy requirement of the cell. Mitochondria have their own separate DNA, which carries total 13 genes. All of these 13 genes are involved in energy production. For normal functioning of cells, the mitochondria need to be healthy. Unhealthy mitochondria can cause severe medical disorders known as mitochondrial disease. In case of mitochondrial disease, the most commonly affected organs are the heart, kidney, skeletal muscle, and brain. The diseases related to defects in these organs are quite prevalent in the society. Majority of these mitochondrial diseases are caused by genetic defects (mutations) in the mitochondrial DNA. Unlike nuclear genes, mitochondrial DNA is inherited only from our mother. Mothers can carry abnormal mitochondria and be at risk of passing on the serious disease to their children, even if they themselves show only mild or no symptoms. Due to the complex nature of these diseases, their diagnosis and therapy are very difficult. Hence, till now, only the different methods for management of these diseases are known. However, after understanding the complexity related to the cure of these diseases, alternative methods have been developed to minimize/stop the transfer of mitochondrial diseases from mother to offspring. This latest technique is called mitochondrial replacement or "donation." In the present review, we are discussing the methodological details and issues related to the technique of mitochondrial donation. Our study is also a step toward raising awareness about mitochondrial diseases and advocating for the legalization of mitochondrial donation, a revolutionary in vitro fertilization technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In October 2015 the UK enacted legislation to permit the clinical use of two cutting edge germline-altering, IVF-based embryonic techniques: pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer (PNT and MST). The aim is to use these techniques to prevent the maternal transmission of serious mitochondrial diseases. Major claims have been made about the quality of the debates that preceded this legislation and the significance of those debates for UK decision-making on other biotechnologies, as well as for other countries considering similar legislation. In this article we conduct a systematic analysis of those UK debates and suggest that claims about their quality are over-stated. We identify, and analyse in detail, ten areas where greater clarity, depth and nuance would have produced sharper understandings of the contributions, limitations and wider social impacts of these mitochondrial interventions. We explore the implications of these additional considerations for (i) the protection of all parties involved, should the techniques transfer to clinical applications; (ii) the legitimacy of focussing on short-term gains for individuals over public health considerations, and (iii) the maintenance and improvement of public trust in medical biotechnologies. We conclude that a more measured evaluation of the content and quality of the UK debates is important and timely: such a critique provides a clearer understanding of the possible, but specific, contributions of these interventions, both in the UK and elsewhere; also, these additional insights can now inform the emerging processes of implementation, regulation and practice of mitochondrial interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRT) are intended to avoid the transmission of mitochondrial diseases from mother to child. MRT represent a potentially powerful new biomedical technology with ethical, policy, economic and social implications. Among other ethical questions raised are concerns about the possible effects on the identity of children born from MRT, their families, and the providers or donors of mitochondria. It has been suggested that MRT can influence identity (i) directly, through altering the genetic makeup and physical characteristics of the child, or (ii) indirectly through changing the child's experience of disease, and by generating novel intrafamilial relationships that shape the sense of self. In this article I consider the plausibility and ethical implications of these proposed identity effects, but I focus instead on a third way in which identity may be affected, through the mediating influence of the wider social world on MRT effects on identity. By taking a narrative approach, and examining the nature and availability of identity narratives, I conclude that while neither direct genetic nor indirect experiential effects can be excluded, social responses to MRT are more likely to have a significant and potentially damaging influence on the generation of MRT children's narratives of identity. This conclusion carries some implications for the collective moral responsibility we hold to ensure that MRT, if implemented, are practised in ethically justifiable ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jürgen Habermas is regarded as a central bioconservative commentator in the debate on the ethics of human prenatal genetic manipulations. While his main work on this topic, The Future of Human Nature, has been widely examined in regard to his position on prenatal genetic enhancement, his arguments regarding prenatal genetic therapeutic interventions have for the most part been overlooked. In this work I do two things. First, I present the three necessary conditions that Habermas establishes for a prenatal genetic manipulation to be regarded as morally permissible. Second, I examine if mitochondrial replacement techniques meet these necessary conditions. I investigate, specifically, the moral permissibility of employing pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer. I conclude that, according to a Habermasian perspective on prenatal genetic manipulation, maternal spindle transfer (without using a preselected sperm and egg) and pronuclear transfer are morally impermissible. Maternal spindle transfer is, in principle, morally permissible, but only when we have beforehand preselected a sperm and an egg for our reproductive purpose. These findings are relevant for bioconservatives, both for those who hold a Habermasian stance and for those who hold something akin to a Habermasian stance, because they answer the question: what should bioconservatives do regarding mitochondrial replacement techniques? In fact, the answer to this question does not only normatively prescribe what bioconservatives should do in terms of their personal morality, but it also points towards what kind of legislation regulating mitochondrial replacement techniques they should aim at. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs), known in the popular media as 'three-parent' or 'three-person' IVFs, have the potential to enable women with mitochondrial diseases to have children who are genetically related to them but without such diseases. In the debate regarding whether MRTs should be made available, an issue that has garnered considerable attention is whether MRTs affect the characteristics of an existing individual or whether they result in the creation of a new individual, given that MRTs involve the genetic manipulation of the germline. In other words, do MRTs affect the qualitative identity or the numerical identity of the resulting child? For instance, a group of panelists on behalf of the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has claimed that MRTs affect only the qualitative identity of the resulting child, while the Working Group of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCOB) has argued that MRTs would create a numerically distinct individual. In this article, I shall argue that MRTs do create a new and numerically distinct individual. Since my explanation is different from the NCOB's explanation, I shall also offer reasons why my explanation is preferable to the NCOB's explanation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In February 2015 the UK became the first country to legalise high-profile mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs), which involve the creation of offspring using genetic material from three individuals. The aim of these new cell reconstruction techniques is to prevent the transmission of maternally inherited mitochondrial disorders to biological offspring. During the UK debates, MRTs were often positioned as a straightforward and unique solution for the 'eradication' of mitochondrial disorders, enabling hundreds of women to have a healthy, biologically-related child. However, many questions regarding future applications and potential users remain. Drawing on a current qualitative study on reproductive choices in the context of mitochondrial disorders, this article illustrates how the potential limitations of MRTs have been obscured in public debates by contrasting the claims made about the future beneficiaries with insights from families affected by mitochondrial disorders and medical experts. The analysis illuminates the complex choices with which families and individuals affected by mitochondrial disorders are faced, which have thus far remained invisible. An argument is presented for improved information for the public as well as an intensification of critical empirical research around the complex and specific needs of future beneficiaries of new reproductive biotechnologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The classification of techniques used in mitochondrial donation, including their role as purported germ-line gene therapies, is far from clear. These techniques exhibit characteristics typical of a variety of classifications that have been used in both scientific and bioethics scholarship. This raises two connected questions, which we address in this paper: (i) how should we classify mitochondrial donation techniques?; and (ii) what ethical implications surround such a classification? First, we outline how methods of genetic intervention, such as germ-line gene therapy, are typically defined or classified. We then consider whether techniques of mitochondrial donation fit into these, whether they might do so with some refinement of these categories, or whether they require some other approach to classification. To answer the second question, we discuss the relationship between classification and several key ethical issues arising from mitochondrial donation. We conclude that the properties characteristic of mitochondrial inheritance mean that most mitochondrial donation techniques belong to a new sub-class of genetic modification, which we call 'conditionally inheritable genomic modification' (CIGM). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2015, the UK became the first country permitting the clinical application of mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRT). Here, we explore how MRT have led to diverging international policy. In response, we recommend focused regulatory efforts coupled with United Nations (UN) leadership to build international consensus on the future of MRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The British Parliament has recently approved regulations to allow techniques ‘to prevent the transmission of serious mitochondrial disease from a mother to her child’. The regulations term these techniques ‘mitochondrial donation’, but in the popular media, the issue has been discussed under the heading of ‘three parent’ babies or ‘three parent’ embryos. This paper examines the language of the debate, with particular reference to one of the techniques approved. It concludes that the terminology of ‘mitochondrial donation’ is scientifically inaccurate and ethically misleading, while the popular media description of ‘three parent’ embryos is broadly accurate, at least for one technique. This latter phrase also has the great merit, from an ethical perspective, of drawing attention to the ‘other woman’, the egg donor. She takes risks with her health in order to provide the egg which supplies the body of the embryo. Without her, this embryo simply would not exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction or background: The UK is at the forefront of mitochondrial science and is currently the only country in the world to legalize germ-line technologies involving mitochondrial donation. However, concerns have been raised about genetic modification and the 'slippery slope' to designer babies. Sources of data: This review uses academic articles, newspaper reports and public documents. Areas of agreement: Mitochondrial donation offers women with mitochondrial disease an opportunity to have healthy, genetically related children. Areas of controversy: Key areas of disagreement include safety, the creation of three-parent babies, impact on identity, implications for society, definitions of genetic modification and reproductive choice. Growing points: The UK government legalized the techniques in March 2015. Scientific and medical communities across the world followed the developments with interest. Areas timely for developing research: It is expected that the first cohort of 'three parent' babies will be born in the UK in 2016. Their health and progress will be closely monitored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the amendments to the 2008 Human Fertilization and Embrology Act in the U.S. Topics covered include the focus of the changes on allowing mitochondrial donation, the importance of the changes to address the issue of mitochondrial disease in some babies and the controversy raised by the issue.

The author reflects on the in-vitro fertilisation technique that uses donation of mitochondria for the prevention of mitochondrial disease.