Mitochondrial replacement techniques: egg donation, genealogy and eugenics

Abstract

Several objections against the morality of researching or employing mitochondrial replacement techniques have been advanced recently. In this paper, I examine three of these objections and show that they are found wanting. First I examine whether mitochondrial replacement techniques, research and clinical practice, should not be carried out because of possible harms to egg donors. Next I assess whether mitochondrial replacement techniques should be banned because they could affect the study of genealogical ancestry. Finally, I examine the claim that mitochondrial replacement techniques are not transferring mitochondrial DNA but nuclear DNA, and that this should be prohibited on ethical grounds.

Assisted reproductive technologies to prevent human mitochondrial disease transmission

“…A number of challenges have been made to MRT on legal and ethical grounds 43,[74][75][76][77] . These include the objection that there are safe alternatives for affected women if they relinquish the requirement for genetic relatedness.…”

Development of mitochondrial replacement therapy: A review

“…(2019) reported that mutations in mt-DNA are responsible for 10–15% of mitochondrial diseases. It should be noted that mitochondrial dysfunction results from a mutation in both mt-DNA and nDNA ( Palacios-Gonzalez, 2016 ). Some of the diseases associated with mitochondrial dysfunction are given in Table1 .…”

“…It also does not ensure prevention ( Klopstock et al., 2016 ). While providing eggs to patients, the harm-benefit ratio is not sufficiently commendable for the continuation of the procedure ( Palacios-Gonzalez, 2016 ). The procedure typically results in a wide variety of heteroplasm loads in newborns plodding up the effects ( Gemmell and Wolff, 2015 ).…”

Are there moral differences between maternal spindle transfer and pronuclear transfer?

“…There is, however, no moral difference between MST and PNT when examined from the somatic/germline optic. This is so as both can be instances of germline interventions and of somatic interventions (Palacios-González 2016 , p. 47–48; Institute of Medicine of the National Academies 2016 , p. 89; Bredenoord et al 2011 , p. 100).…”