The Lessons of Asilomar for Today’s Science
By Alexander Capron,
The New York Times
| 05. 28. 2015
Untitled Document
There is a precedent for establishing internationally agreed-upon limits for new science, though it can be hard to do.
In 1973, scientists who were using novel molecular techniques to splice DNA between different organisms asked the National Academy of Sciences to consider the potential hazards as they might affect the public. In July 1974, an Academy-appointed committee publicly called for a large category of experiments to be suspended until leaders in the field could plan a way forward. Such a self-imposed moratorium on basic research was unprecedented, but it worked.
A hundred and fifty scientists and physicians from around the world gathered in February 1975 at the Asilomar conference center near Monterey, California, in what one scientist termed an amazing show of “self denial and social responsibility in the face of strong intellectual temptation” to continue the experiments.
The outcome of the meeting was equally impressive. Categories of experiments were graded by their riskiness: Some were deemed excessively dangerous and kept off-limits, while others were to be allowed once the appropriate biological and physical means of risk-containment had...
Related Articles
By Fyodor D. Urnov and Sadik H. Kassim, Nature | 04.21.2026
In February, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed a radical rethink of how scientists, physicians and manufacturers develop personalized genetic therapies. The regulator’s suggested introduction of a ‘plausible mechanism pathway’ should increase incentives for drug companies to develop...
By Miguel Muñoz, Cadena SER | 08.04.2026
"Para ellos, una familia numerosa no solo es una preferencia personal, sino que es una obligación. Creen que tener tantos hijos como sea posible es necesario para evitar un futuro apocalíptico", aseguraba Xavier Orri, periodista y cofundador de Página Internacional...
By Ryan Knutson and Jessica Mendoza, The Journal. | 03.27.2026
Genetically engineered babies are banned in the U.S. But that isn’t stopping Silicon Valley tech titans from trying to make one. In this final installment from The Journal’s investigation into the fringes of the fertility industry, WSJ’s Emily Glazer reports...
By Antonio Regalado, MIT Technology Review | 03.30.2026
After operating in secrecy for years, a startup company called R3 Bio, in Richmond, California, suddenly shared details about its work last week—saying it had raised money to create nonsentient monkey “organ sacks” as an alternative to animal testing.
In...