2016年接近尾聲，是時(shí)候梳理過去一年生命科學(xué)和醫(yī)療領(lǐng)域的大事了。藥品定價(jià)方面的爭(zhēng)議和大規(guī)模調(diào)查非法勾結(jié)攪得大型藥企震動(dòng)頻頻。保險(xiǎn)公司和醫(yī)院還在努力面對(duì)唐納德·特朗普上臺(tái)的事實(shí)，研究新政府對(duì)病人和行醫(yī)底線的影響。哦對(duì)了，還有一些專門科研成果即將進(jìn)入市場(chǎng)，包括CRISPR基因編輯技術(shù)首次應(yīng)用于人類臨床試驗(yàn)。

雖然醫(yī)藥領(lǐng)域受政治動(dòng)蕩，還有不少看似合理的丑聞?dòng)绊?，但未來?shù)年甚至數(shù)十年里還得靠生物醫(yī)藥領(lǐng)域的革新引領(lǐng)醫(yī)藥行業(yè)前進(jìn)，延長(zhǎng)人類壽命。政府也得與時(shí)俱進(jìn)，接受科學(xué)家已經(jīng)可以修改基因并重新整合基礎(chǔ)生物學(xué)的現(xiàn)實(shí)。

上周四英國(guó)政府就做了榜樣，正式批準(zhǔn)婦產(chǎn)醫(yī)院測(cè)試有三方父父母的嬰兒。但規(guī)定此法只能在極端情況下使用，主要為了治療線粒體紊亂。

“今天這一歷史性的決定意味著，如果嬰兒可能罹患致命的線粒體相關(guān)疾病，父母可以選擇該療法孕育健康且有血緣的后代，”英國(guó)人類受精與胚胎管理局主席薩利·切希爾在一份聲明中表示?！皩?duì)面臨疾病風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的家庭來說，這項(xiàng)規(guī)定會(huì)完全改變他們的生活。”

這項(xiàng)技術(shù)并非新事，也不是英國(guó)突然決定接受。過去兩年該項(xiàng)技術(shù)逐漸成型，英國(guó)政府的批準(zhǔn)只是監(jiān)管流程的最后一步。

當(dāng)然，這項(xiàng)舉動(dòng)也引發(fā)了爭(zhēng)議。生化學(xué)家和一些請(qǐng)?jiān)笀F(tuán)一直在警告，該技術(shù)可能導(dǎo)致滑坡謬誤，對(duì)后代產(chǎn)生難以預(yù)計(jì)的后果。而且可能使未來像電影《變種異煞》中一樣變成“設(shè)計(jì)嬰兒”的世界。美國(guó)甚至有議員認(rèn)為應(yīng)該頒布法令禁止研究“為了加入某項(xiàng)可遺傳的基因特性而人為制造或修改人類胚胎”。但現(xiàn)實(shí)是，不管我們是否準(zhǔn)備好，未來已在眼前。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

?

譯者：Pessy

審校：夏林

As 2016 draws to a close, there’s plenty to look back on in the world of the life sciences and health care. Controversies over drug pricing and wide-scale investigations into illegal collusion rocked the world of big pharma; insurers and hospitals are grappling with the reality of a Donald Trump administration, and what it might mean for their patients and bottom lines; and, oh, there was also some pretty special science inching closer to the marketplace, including the advent of the first CRISPR gene-editing clinical trials in humans.

For all the political anxieties and legitimate scandals to hit the sector, it’s that kind of biopharma innovation that will continue to change the face of medical care and human life itself in the years and decades to come. And governments will have to catch up with a brave new world wherein we can modify genes and re-engineer basic biology.

The U.K. took just such a step on Thursday, officially sanctioning fertility clinics to become licensed practitioners of creating three-parent babies. The method can only be used in very specific circumstances in order to fight devastating mitochondrial disorders.

“Today’s historic decision means that parents at very high risk of having a child with a life-threatening mitochondrial disease may soon have the chance of a healthy, genetically related child,” said Sally Cheshire, chair of the U.K.’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), in a statement. “This is life-changing for those families.

The technique isn’t new, and neither is the U.K.’s decision to embrace it. Rather, it’s the final step in a regulatory process that has been taking shape over the last two years.

And this is, of course, controversial. Bioethicists and certain advocacy groups have warned that such technology can lead to a slippery slope with unknown consequences for future generations, and give rise to a Gattaca-like world of “designer babies.” U.S. lawmakers even felt compelled to establish legislation barring research “in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification.” But what’s clear is this: the future is here, whether we’re ready for it or not.