Canada: Germline / Embryonic

Prohibited

Germline gene editing is strictly prohibited even for research purposes.

Germline gene editing, including for non-clinical research, is prohibited in Canada under the Assisted Human Reproduction Act of 2004 (AHRA) even if there is no intention of implanting the embryo. Health Canada is responsible for enforcing the Act. In 2017, Canadian scientists requested a review of the AHRA, arguing that potential human reproductive applications of the technologies are too promising to ignore. Health Canada is currently working to update AHRA.

Products/Research

None

Regulatory Timeline

2017: Consortium of scientists and bioethicists urge reform of AHRA, arguing that the government should allow gene editing for research, including pre-clinical research on germ cells prior to implantation.

2004: Parliament passes the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, which contains sections prohibiting human germline gene editing. It is fully in force by 2007.

1989: The government creates the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies to study the moral, ethical, and social implications of new reproductive technologies. The commission releases its final report in 1993, which becomes the basis for the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.

NGO Reaction

None

Additional Resources

Genes and Science’s FAQ on gene editing
Library of Congress summary of Canada gene regulations includes detailed analysis of the country’s evolving biosafety laws and liabilities

Click on a country (eg. Brazil, US) or region (eg. European Union) below to find which human / health products and processes are approved or in development and their regulatory status.

Human / Health Gene Editing Index
Compare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country

Gene editing regulations worldwide are evolving. The Gene Editing Index ratings below represent the current status of gene editing regulations and will be updated as new regulations are passed.

Colors and ratings guide

Regulation Status	Rating
Determined: No Unique Regulations*	10
Lightly Regulated	8
Proposed: No Unique Regulations†	6
Ongoing Research, Regulations In Development	5
Highly Regulated	4
Mostly Prohibited	2
Limited Research, No Clear Regulations	1
Prohibited	0

Lightly Regulated: Gene and stem cell therapies regulated with minimal restrictions and requirements.

*Determined: No Unique Regulations: Gene and stem cell therapies regulated as phamaceuticals with no additional restrictions.

†Proposed: No Unique Regulations: Decrees under consideration for gene and stem cell therapies that would not require unique regulations beyond current restrictions on pharmaceuticals.

Therapeutic:

Gene editing of adult human cells, including gene therapy and stem cell therapy, that is used to treat and cure disease. Recent breakthroughs include CAR T-cell therapy, which uses patients’ own immune cells to treat their cancer.

Germline:

Gene editing of the human embryo or germline that results in genetic changes that are passed down to the next generation. This type of gene editing is the most controversial because changes are inherited and because it could theoretically be used to create “designer babies”. A Chinese scientist announced in 2018 that he had successfully edited twins that were brought to term. International backlash from the announcement has resulted in China and other countries working to clarify regulations on germline gene editing.

Rating by Country / Region
Click each column header and arrow to sort the countries / regions

Swipe right/left if all columns aren't visible

Country / Region	Therapeutic	Germline	Human Rating
Japan	8	8	8
Brazil	4	0	2
Canada	4	0	2
Russia	10	5	7.5
Argentina	5	1	3
Israel	8	2	5
Australia	4	0	2
China	8	4	6
US	4	0	2
Chile	4	1	2.5
New Zealand	4	0	2
Ukraine	10	5	7.5
Central America	1	1	1
Paraguay	1	1	1
Uruguay	1	1	1
India	4	0	2
UK	4	4	4
Mexico	8	0	4
EU	4	0	2

Click on a country (eg. Brazil, US) or region (eg. European Union) below to find which gene drive products and processes are approved or in development and their regulatory status.

Gene Drive Index
Compare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country

Gene editing regulations worldwide are evolving. The Gene Editing Index ratings below represent the current status of gene editing regulations and will be updated as new regulations are passed.

Colors and ratings guide

Regulation Status	Rating
Determined: No Unique Regulations*	10
Lightly Regulated	8
Proposed: No Unique Regulations†	6
Ongoing Research, Regulations In Development	5
Highly Regulated	4
Mostly Prohibited	2
Limited Research, No Clear Regulations	1
Prohibited	0

Lightly Regulated: Gene drives regulated through existing biotechnology laws.

*Determined: No Unique Regulations: Gene and stem cell therapies regulated as phamaceuticals with no additional restrictions.

†Proposed: No Unique Regulations: Decrees under consideration for gene and stem cell therapies that would not require unique regulations beyond current restrictions on pharmaceuticals.

Gene Drives:

Genetic engineering technology used to transmit a characteristic throughout a wild population. For example, it can be used to develop mosquitoes that only have female offspring. If released into the wild, these mosquitoes would breed with wild malaria-carrying mosquitoes and over time would eliminate the population. Scientists are interested in using this technology to help eradicate disease-carrying insects and control invasive species, but questions about how gene drives will be directed and controlled are still being fleshed out.

Rating by Country / Region
Click each column header and arrow to sort the countries / regions

Swipe right/left if all columns aren't visible

Country / Region	Gene Drives	Gene Drive Rating
Japan	1	1
Brazil	8	8
Canada	8	8
Russia	1	1
Argentina	1	1
Israel	1	1
Australia	4	4
China	1	1
US	4	4
Chile	1	1
New Zealand	4	4
Ukraine	1	1
Central America	1	1
Paraguay	1	1
Uruguay	1	1
India	1	1
UK	2	2
Mexico	1	1
EU	2	2

Click on a country (eg. Brazil, US) or region (eg. European Union) below to find which agriculture products and processes are approved or in development and their regulatory status. The regulations on genetically engineered crops and animals are emerging out of the regulatory landscape developed for transgenic GMOs.

Agriculture Gene Editing Index
Compare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country

Gene editing regulations worldwide are evolving. The Gene Editing Index ratings below represent the current status of gene editing regulations and will be updated as new regulations are passed.

Colors and ratings guide

Regulation Status	Rating
Determined: No Unique Regulations*	10
Lightly Regulated	8
Proposed: No Unique Regulations†	6
Ongoing Research, Regulations In Development	5
Highly Regulated	4
Mostly Prohibited	2
Limited Research, No Clear Regulations	1
Prohibited	0

Lightly Regulated: Some or all types of gene editing are regulated more strictly than conventional agriculture, but not as strictly as transgenic GMOs.

*Determined: No Unique Regulations: Gene-edited crops that do not incorporate DNA from another species are regulated as conventional plants with no additional restrictions.

†Proposed: No Unique Regulations: Decrees under consideration for gene-edited crops that do not incorporate DNA from another species would no require unique regulations beyond current what is imposed on conventional breeding.

Crops/Food:

Gene editing of plants and food products. Research and development has mostly focused on disease resistance, drought resistance, and increasing yield, but more recent advances have produced low trans-fat oils and high-fiber grains.

Animals:

Gene editing of animals, not including animal research for human drugs and therapies. Fewer gene edited animals have been developed than gene edited crops, but scientists have developed hornless and heat-tolerant cattle and fast-growing tilapia may soon be the first gene edited animal to be consumed.

Rating by Country / Region
Click each column header and arrow to sort the countries / regions

Swipe right/left if all columns aren't visible

Country / Region	Food / Crops	Animals	Ag Rating
Japan	8	8	8
Brazil	10	10	10
Canada	8	8	8
Russia	5	5	5
Argentina	10	10	10
Israel	10	5	7.5
Australia	8	8	8
China	5	5	5
US	10	4	7
Chile	10	1	5.5
New Zealand	4	4	4
Ukraine	1	1	1
Central America	6	6	6
Paraguay	10	10	10
Uruguay	6	6	6
India	6	6	6
UK	2	2	2
Mexico	1	1	1
EU	2	2	2
Colombia	10	1	5.5

Global gene editing regulatory landscape

The regulations on genetically engineered crops and animals are emerging out of the regulatory landscape developed for transgenic GMOs. Regulations across 34 countries where transgenic or gene edited crops and animals are commercially allowed (as of 12/19) are guided in part by two factors:

(1) Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety [https://bch.cbd.int/protocol/]

Whether the country has ratified the international agreement that took effect in 2003 that aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from biotechnology that may impact biological diversity, also taking into account potential risks to human health. It entered into force for those nations that signed it in 2003. It applies the ‘precautionary approach as contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The US, Canada, Australia and Chile and the Russian Federation have not signed the treaty.

(2) Product v process

Whether regulations are based on the genetic process used to create the trait (conventional, mutagenesis, transgenesis, gene editing, etc.) or the final product.Transgenic crops and animals (aka GMOs) are product regulated in many countries including the US and Canada, while the EU, India, China and others regulate based on how the product is made. There is almost an equal number of countries with product- and process-based regulations. It’s not clear how much this distinction matters. It’s somewhat true that countries with product-based regulation have more crops approved and the approval process is more streamlined, but there are contradictions. For example, Brazil and Argentina have emerged as GMO super powers using different regulatory concepts, while there is no GMO commercial cultivation in Japan, North Korea, and the Russian Federation, which employ product-based regulations. How this will effect gene editing regulations is also unclear. For example, Japan, which has no commercialized GMOs, is emerging as a leader in the introduction of gene edited crops.

A Public Resource Compiled by the

Canada: Germline / Embryonic

Prohibited

Germline gene editing is strictly prohibited even for research purposes.

Click on a country (eg. Brazil, US) or region (eg. European Union) below to find which human / health products and processes are approved or in development and their regulatory status.

European Union

Brazil

New Zealand

United States

Australia

Canada

China

United Kingdom

Israel

Argentina

Japan

Mexico

Russia

Chile

Uruguay

Paraguay

India

Africa

Ukraine

Southeast Asia

Central America

Colombia

Norway

Ecuador

Africa

Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Canada

Central America

Chile

China

Colombia

Ecuador

European Union

India

Israel

Japan

Mexico

New Zealand

Norway

Paraguay

Russia

Southeast Asia

Ukraine

United Kingdom

United States

Uruguay

Human / Health Gene Editing IndexCompare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country

Human / Health Gene Editing Index
Compare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country