Will China be the first to genetically enhance future generations?
Regulations, funding and public opinion around genetically enhancing future generations vary from country to country. Here's why China may be poised to be the pioneer.
Growing human organs in pigs mean they’re doing our dirty work for us.
We're living longer and more ill lives – could we use animals to grow human organs for transplants?
Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are at the center of Zika virus’ spread.
Look beyond transgenic techniques that add new genes to a species. People have used selective breeding techniques to change plants and animals for millennia – why not try them on mosquitoes?
A patent has far-reaching implications for future research.
U.C. Berkeley and the Broad Institute are fighting to control the patents on the revolutionary gene-editing technology. But there's a lot more at stake than just who gets the credit and licensing fees.
We’re talking about a lot of seeds.
Great Divide Photography
The concerns about genetically modified foods are well known. But when we look at population and climate projections, what happens if we don't use them to increase our food supply?
Research on how our lifestyles affect our genes raises the possibility of giving your future kids a better start in life before they're even born.
New research suggests how we could prevent genetically modified organisms from surviving - and potentially spreading - in the wild.
A snip here, but not a snip there?
DNA image via www.shutterstock.com
The International Summit on Human Gene Editing drew a distinction between editing an individual's body cells and editing germline cells that would pass changes to future generations. Does that make sense?
Image of babies via www.shutterstock.com.
As we consider the ethics of human gene editing, we need to understand what can and can't be meaningfully edited.
Future people would be grateful if their disease is cured, rather than being replaced by a different healthier or non-disabled person.
Experts from around the world are in the US to discuss the scientific, ethical and governance issues linked to human gene editing. Here are five reasons they shouldn't ban research in the field.
The real question is not whether gene editing should be allowed or banned, but how it should be regulated.
The debate about regulating gene editing technology is often couched in polar terms, but understanding degrees of regulation that might be a better approach.
Gene editing allows us to eliminate any misspellings, introduce beneficial natural variants, or perhaps cut out or insert new genes.
Should the gathering of experts from around the world that's considering the scientific, ethical, and governance issues linked to research into gene editing ring alarm bells?
Genetic changes to embryos will not only affect the person that embryo becomes but also all their descendants.
While gene editing offers the exciting potential for disease therapies, using it on human embryos opens up a can of worms.
New genetic technology could change the DNA of entire species to prevent them from spreading diseases.
The red Cas9 nuclease protein uses a blue guide RNA sequence to cut yellow DNA at a complementary site.
CRISPR-Cas9 via www.shutterstock.com
Until more is understood, it's sensible to limit experimentation that would make changes to germ line cells that would be passed on to future generations.
A powerful new genetic engineering technique allows scientists to precisely cut out and replace DNA in genes.
Jennifer Doudna/University of California Berkeley
Leading researchers have called for a ban on using a precise gene-editing technology on humans. How can CRISPR advance science and why is it raising concerns?
CRISPR-Cas systems provide a new way to target pathogenic bacteria, without some of antibiotics’ downsides.
CRISPR-CAS9 image via www.shutterstock.com.
A naturally-occurring system discovered in bacteria holds promise as a way to fight pathogens – very specifically and without the risk of antibiotic resistance.