Denis Rebrikov, the Russian scientist who is creating gene-edited babies that don’t have inheritable deafness, is glad that Dr. He Jiankui, the Chinese scientist responsible for the world’s first gene-edited babies, took the initiative and used CRISPR to make HIV-immune children, despite the backlash that Dr. He consequently received.

Rebrikov, who used CRISPR to modify embryos for HIV-immunity earlier than Dr. He did – but did not carry out any implantation, said this in an interview with a German weekly, saying that because of Dr. He, Russian authorities will not dismiss his application for permission to make gene-edited babies:

“Without Jiankui, the Health Ministry wouldn’t even have talked about it. They would have said: Genetically-edited babies? What for? Forget about it!” Rebrikov said.

Even though gene-editing regulation is a legal gray area in Russia, and Russian law allows for personalized drugs under certain circumstances, Rebrikov still has to ask for permission from the Health Ministry in order to carry out a human clinical trial. And so far Rebrikov’s application for the government’s green light seems to be going smoothly, with the Healthy Ministry agreeing to accept his documents on the condition that that he has good results showing his system is safe to use.

Rebrikov is however unsure how long it will take to get authorization, estimating it might take a few months or an entire year. But the 43 year old biologist is also on record stating that he is crazy enough to proceed with his experiments – even without permission. He reiterated this in the interview saying he does not want to wait for years:

“I don’t want to wait years until I get permission from my government to make these babies. I’ll publish my results as soon as possible, so we can have a discussion.”

Dr. He Jiankui’s modification of the CCR5 gene on the embryos of would-be twins Lulu and Nana, which most likely conferred HIV-immunity to one of the twins, and quiet possibly some form of enhancement in cognition, has been heavily criticized through over-the-top contradictory statements from institutional scientists either claiming that Dr. He did not achieve what he intended to achieve and only produced mosaicism and off-target effects, or that he did achieve what he intended to, but reduced the lifespans of the twins and made them susceptible to obscure diseases like the West Nile Virus.

Rebrikov, who says there is too much hype about the risk of mosaicism and off-target effects, which he finds odd given that mosaicism happens even in non-gene edited IVF procedures, has repeatedly emphasized that his method is safer and more precise than Dr. He’s, and although he initially intended to apply this “safer model” as a way to also make HIV-immune babies through modifying the CCR5 gene, he is now only focused on editing a deafness-causing mutation on a gene called GJB2. And one of the measures Rebrikov is taking to ensure his methodology remains safe, is working on embryos from donors without the GJB2 mutation to look for off-target effects:

“We’re already using sperm and oocytes from donors who don’t have the gene defect in a model system to look for off-target effects,” says Rebrikov, who expects preliminary results in a couple of weeks, and will only proceed with modifying embryos from the deaf couples when he is sure there are no off-target effects.

The choice to use CRISPR to prevent inheritable deafness has angered many bioethicists and disability activists, with some of them labeling what Rebrikov plans to do as genocide against deaf people.

But Rebrikov says there are justifiable reasons why he chose deafness; one of the reasons being that so far, the science only allows for a few models where embryo gene-editing can be applied. And these are: HIV, dwarfism, phenylketonuria and deafness.

But Rebrikov had to put a halt to his initial plan of creating HIV-immune CRISPR babies – because unlike the case of Dr. He where only the father was HIV-positive, Rebrikov wanted a more medically justified reason and so he sought out HIV-positive mothers who do not respond to anti-HIV drugs. Rebrikov says it has been difficult to find such statistically rare mothers:

“First, we were looking for HIV patients who do not respond to antiretroviral HIV treatment. But it is very rare and affects maybe one out of 50,000 HIV-positive people in Russia,” says Rebrikov.

And so Rebrikov had to look for another good clinical use of CRISPR. He says it could not be phenylketonuria because that is not a big health problem, and it can be treated with diet. It also could not be dwarfism because as Rebrikov puts it, “people with dwarfism might be smaller, but they can also be just as happy as everyone else.”

And so preventing inheritable deafness was the only ethical option left for Rebrikov. But bioethicists are complaining that deafness is not life-threatening and it can be treated without gene-editing through methods like cochlear implants. Rebrikov argues that this is a philosophical standpoint, and not a scientific one – because as he asks, “What is better, to use a therapy that requires surgery and an implant in the head, or to make healthy babies?”