Fertility doc backs off on custom kids
By United Press International,
United Press International
| 03. 04. 2009
A New York fertility doctor says he will be limiting his genetics work to dodging diseases rather than customizing physical traits such as hair and eye color.
Dr. Jeff Steinberg caused a stir this week with claims that he could help parents predetermine various characteristics of future offspring but the New York Daily News said Wednesday he is holding off for the time being.
"We are going to limit it to people with genetic diseases because we just cannot keep up with what's going on," Steinberg said.
Steinberg's clinics in New York and Los Angeles will be focusing on such disorders as color blindness and albinism, the newspaper said.
The Daily News said word of Steinberg's ability to select embryos with desirable physical traits and gender appalled some New York parents while others thought it was a great idea.
Related Articles
By Rob Stein, NPR [cites CGS' Katie Hasson] | 08.06.2025
A Chinese scientist horrified the world in 2018 when he revealed he had secretly engineered the birth of the world's first gene-edited babies.
His work was reviled as reckless and unethical because, among other reasons, gene-editing was so new...
By Susanna Smith, Genetic Frontiers | 07.28.2025
Key Topics
How does the American far right view genetics and genetic technologies?
What is the history of the American cultural pursuit of trying to choose smarter children? What has science shown us about the relationship of heredity and intelligence...
By Arthur Caplan and James Tabery, Scientific American | 07.28.2025
An understandable ethics outcry greeted the June announcement of a software platform that offers aspiring parents “genetic optimization” of their embryos. Touted by Nucleus Genomics’ CEO Kian Sadeghi, the $5,999 service, dubbed “Nucleus Embryo,” promised optimization of...
By John H. Evans, Craig Callender, Neal K. Devaraj, Farren J. Isaacs, and Gregory E. Kaebnick, Issues in Science and Technology | 07.04.2025
The controversy around a ban on “mirror life” should lead to a more nuanced public conversation about how to manage the benefits and risks of precursor biotechnologies.
About five years ago, the five of us formed a discussion group to...