While resurrecting dinosaurs may not be on the docket just yet, gene drives have the power to alter entire species.
Hiroshi Watanabe/DigitalVision via Getty Images
As genetic engineering and DNA manipulation tools like CRISPR continue to advance, the distinction between what science ‘could’ and ‘should’ do becomes murkier.
Potential benefits of human genome editing include new ways to diagnose, treat and prevent genetic disorders. But there’s a significant gap in regulation.
We could edit our genes to make us more resistance to viruses.
We could start making our genomes equipped to deal with more frequent pandemics. But it may come at a cost.
Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier have been awarded the Nobel prize in Chemistry for their revolutionary work on ‘gene scissors’ that can edit DNA.
CRISPR is a gene editing tool that can create permanent changes in the human genome.
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.
Editing just one gene in an embryo could create many unanticipated side-effects once the baby is born.
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.
A Chinese scientist claims he edited the DNA of twin girls during an in vitro fertilization procedure.
CI Photos / Shutterstock.com
A Chinese scientist has revealed he edited the DNA of twin girls born through in vitro fertilization. These girls are designed to be resistant to HIV. Is the edit a medical necessity or an enhancement?