The debate about gene editing will help shape the future of the human race. But how should the discussion get started?
The scientist who announced the world's first genome-edited twins received a prison sentence and a large fine for his research. But the systems that enabled him have not been held to account.
One year after the first CRISPR babies were announced, changes in policies and regulations have meant that there have been no new CRISPR announcements since.
A number of things may have gone wrong when researchers edited Chinese twins Lulu and Nana's genome. Either way, the failed experiment is a cautionary tale for us all.
Ideas from economics might help us decide the most ethical way of using gene editing technology for human enhancement in the future.
In a new study, a team of US scientists have used gene editing to change the genetic code of white blood cells and transform them into more efficient tumor fighting cells. How did they do it?
CRISPR technology is continually improving to make it more specific, but serious consideration should be given to when and how CRISPR is safe for gene editing.
Enterococcus faecalis can on pass its antibiotic resistant genes.
A growing international divide over cutting-edge medical research could worsen predatory practices, medical tourism and health inequality.
CRISPR technology could have momentous effects if it's used to edit genes that will be inherited by future generations. Researchers and ethicists continue to weigh appropriate guidelines.
The idea of CRISPR as scissors ignores an entire ecosystem of moving parts that are crucial for understanding the awe-inspiring, crazy thing scientists are trying to do when they attempt gene editing.
News of the gene-edited babies excludes images of the children's mother. Cutting her out of the picture underscores the idea that the mother is obsolete and babies can be created in the lab.
Box jellyfish stings are excruciating and occasionally deadly. We have identified a common, cheap drug that is already on the market and which could be a treatment candidate with further development.
With Gottlieb's departure from the FDA imminent, what should we expect from the FDA? How is it likely to regulate the still controversial genetically engineered foods?
CRISPR gene editing should learn from the Slow Food movement. Scientists must allow time for critical conversations and perfecting of techniques before rewriting the source code of humanity.
Four months ago a researcher claimed he had used the tool CRISPR to edit the genomes of twin girls. Now prominent researchers and ethicists are calling for a temporary halt to this sort of work.
According to current regulations, animals that have been genetically edited, like pigs or cows, are considered drugs. What are the consequences of such rules on American livestock and agriculture?
On average, important new lab techniques like CRISPR take 23 years to develop – but there is a public expectation that scientific breakthroughs occur quickly and efficiently.
You may not agree with using the gene-editing tool, CRISPR, to alter the DNA of human babies. But what about using it to engineer plants? Or wipe out one of the world's most dangerous creatures?
Genome editing technology has, and will always have, limits. Limits that are related not to the technology itself but to the intrinsic complexity of the human genome.