Patients Unsure about the Value of Cutting-Edge Gene-Editing Technology
By Dina Fine Maron,
Scientific American
| 02. 12. 2016
Untitled Document
The revolutionary gene-editing technology poised to reshape how researchers attack and prevent disease yesterday received a lukewarm reception from patient groups. Representatives from several patient advocacy organizations gathered in Washington, D.C., at a public meeting on gene editing to discuss if they would want researchers to one day tap this technology—first in the laboratory but eventually in the clinic—in an effort to prevent or treat serious inherited maladies including muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis and sickle-cell disease.
“We are not one advocacy or affected community,” said Sharon Terry, the president and CEO of Genetic Alliance and a member of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine panel that organized the meeting. Terry pointed to an earlier survey she conducted among more than 1,000 people in the patient community that pointed to human gene-editing opinions ranging from “What is gene editing?” to “Hell yes!”
Patients and their families are wrestling with these questions because new, powerful gene-editing techniques such as CRISPR–Cas9 allow researchers to make targeted changes in DNA much more easily than ever before. Such deletions or...
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...