Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing Be Performed on Human Embryos?
By John Harris (Pro); Marcy Darnovsky (Con),
National Geographic
| 07. 15. 2016
Pro: Research on Gene Editing in Humans Must Continue
By John Harris
In February of this year, the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority in the United Kingdom approved a request by the Francis Crick Institute in London to modify human embryos using the new gene editing technique CRISPR-Cas9. This is the second time human embryos have been employed in such research, and the first time their use has been sanctioned by a national regulatory authority. The scientists at the Institute hope to cast light on early embryo development—work which may eventually lead to safer and more successful fertility treatments.
The embryos, provided by patients undergoing in vitro fertilization, will not be allowed to develop beyond seven days. But in theory—and eventually in practice—CRISPR could be used to modify disease-causing genes in embryos brought to term, removing the faulty script from the genetic code of that person’s future descendants as well. Proponents of such “human germline editing” argue that it could potentially decrease, or even eliminate, the incidence of many serious genetic diseases, reducing human suffering worldwide. Opponents say that modifying...
Related Articles
By Teddy Rosenbluth, The New York Times | 02.09.2026
Dr. Mehmet Oz has urged Americans to get vaccinated against measles, one of the strongest endorsements of the vaccine yet from a top health official in the Trump administration, which has repeatedly undermined confidence in vaccine safety.
Dr. Oz, the...
By Ava Kofman, The New Yorker | 02.09.2026
1. The Surrogates
In the delicate jargon of the fertility industry, a woman who carries a child for someone else is said to be going on a “journey.” Kayla Elliott began hers in February, 2024, not long after she posted...
By Alex Polyakov, The Conversation | 02.09.2026
Prospective parents are being marketed genetic tests that claim to predict which IVF embryo will grow into the tallest, smartest or healthiest child.
But these tests cannot deliver what they promise. The benefits are likely minimal, while the risks to...
By Lauren Hammer Breslow and Vanessa Smith, Bill of Health | 01.28.2026
On Jan. 24, 2026, the New York Times reported that DNA sequences contributed by children and families to support a federal effort to understand adolescent brain development were later co-opted by other researchers and used to publish “race science”...