Once genetic lesions for diseases such as cystic fibrosis and haemophilia were identified, the idea of replacing or correcting defective genes grew into what we now call “gene therapy”.
Synthetic biology has the potential to change how we do agriculture – but will the public accept it?
from www.shutterstock.com
Synthetic biology is highly promising – but if we don’t get the regulation and engagement right, we risk alienating members of the public, and may even close doors for potentially fruitful research.
More than 3.9 billion people live in regions where the Aedes aegypti mosquito is present. This species transmits Zika, dengue, chikungunya, and yellow fever.
mycteria/Shutterstock.com
For several billion people mosquitoes are more than a nuisance – they transmit deadly diseases. Now genetic modification may prove the most effective defense against the mosquito, preventing disease.
It takes time to see which finding might be a golden egg.
Neamov/Shutterstock.com
Basic research can be easy to mock as pointless and wasteful of resources. But it’s very often the foundation for future innovation – even in ways the original scientists couldn’t have imagined.
A standee of the movie ‘Rampage’ at a theater in Bangkok, Thailand. Scientists in the film used CRISPR to create a monster.
By Sarunyu L/shutterstock.com
CRISPR has been hailed as the an editing tool that can delete inherited mutations and cure disease. But recent papers suggest that the technique may be too dangerous for use in human therapies.
CRISPR harnesses the natural defence mechanisms of some bacteria to cut human DNA strands. Then the DNA strand either heals itself or we inject new DNA to mend the gap. This is gene editing.
AML under the microscope.
Medtech THAI STUDIO LAB 249
A landmark study in the UK discovered the gene that allows cells to form into embryos. If Australian researchers attempted this they could go to jail for 15 years.
Bioterrorism exercise.
Oregon National Guard/Flickr
With rapid advances in gene editing, states signed up to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention need to do more to prevent CRISPR from becoming a dangerous weapon.
Harvard’s recent CRISPR experiment isn’t just a new frontier for science – it’s also a new take on how we conceive of human history.
gopixa/Shutterstock.com
The CRISPR gene-editing technique raises new questions about how we measure time and conceptualise history. Here, a cultural theorist takes on the philosophical side of this scientific breakthrough.
With all these ‘test-tube babies’ grown up, how have our reactions to the technology evolved?
AP Photo/Alastair Grant
Americans have moved on from worrying about ‘test-tube babies’ – but there are still ethical challenges to resolve as reproductive technologies continue to advance.
Nobel laureate David Baltimore of CalTech speaks to reporters at a 2015 summit on the safety and ethics of human gene-editing.
(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
Ability expectations are what people rely upon as they seek out productive and satisfying lives. They need to be a key part of the debate over gene-editing and other major scientific breakthroughs.
Gene drives aim to deliberately spread bad genes when invasive species such as mice reproduce.
Colin Robert Varndell/shutterstock.com
Releasing just 100 mice carrying a faulty gene designed to stop them reproducing can remove an entire population of 50,000, a new study shows, paving the way for new eradication efforts.
Just because we can edit genes in human embryos, should we?
Andrii Vodolazhskyi/shutterstock
A world first study shows CRISPR can remove a target gene from early stage human embryos. But with the advance in science come weighty ethical dilemmas.
Controversial gene editing should not proceed without citizen input and societal consensus.
(Shutterstock)
A team in the U.S. is said to have safely and effectively altered human embryos. The news is a reminder that citizens must be consulted on developments potentially affecting the future of the species.
There’s still a way to go from editing single-cell embryos to a full-term ‘designer baby.’
ZEISS Microscopy
The news may have come as a surprise, but it probably shouldn’t have. A bioethics expert walks through how big a deal this announcement is – and what we should be considering now.
Laboratory mice are among the first animals to have their diseases treated by CRISPR.
tiburi via Pixabay.com
A new research paper reports dangerous side effects in CRISPR-edited mice. Some scientists are pushing back, placing blame for the unwanted mutations on the experiment, not the technique.
Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, University of Oxford