Societal Debates About Emerging Genetic Technologies: Toward a Science of Public Engagement
By Christopher D. Wirz,
Environmental Communication
| 09. 29. 2020
Gene editing is an inherently wicked problem
Societal debates about the applications of novel gene editing techniques like CRISPR in agriculture, wildlife, and humans have only rarely focused on questions that have correct or even factual answers. Of course, many discussions within the bench scientific community are focused on technical risks and benefits and the weighing of the latter against the former in the desire to develop climate- or pest-resistant crops (National Academies of Sciences, 2016) or therapies for devastating genetically-inherited diseases in humans (National Academy of Sciences & National Academy of Medicine, 2017).
While public debates are ideally informed by these scientific considerations, they are – by nature – much broader in scope. Gene drives developed to limit the spread of vector-borne illness carried by mosquitos, for instance, have raised concerns about the morality of “messing with nature” by editing the genome of living organisms for dominant traits, about creating imbalances in already fragile ecosystems, and about unintended and potentially irreversible long-term consequences for humans and nature (Brossard et al., 2019). At the same time, pesticides...
Related Articles
By Jared Whitlock, Endpoints News | 10.09.2025
When Nirnay Murthy learned about a treatment for his toddler son’s rare condition, relief quickly gave way to disappointment.
A one-time gene therapy called Zolgensma from the Swiss drugmaker Novartis can halt spinal muscular atrophy, a deadly condition that causes...
By Meagan Parrish, PharmaVoice | 10.10.2025
When CEO Ben Lamm steps into the spotlight, it’s usually to talk about his efforts bringing extinct animals back to life. Once a far-flung idea, Lamm and the company he heads, Colossal Biosciences, have proven they can pull it off...
By Rob Stein, NPR | 09.30.2025
Scientists have created human eggs containing genes from adult skin cells, a step that someday could help women who are infertile or gay couples have babies with their own genes but would also raise difficult ethical, social and legal issues...
By Daniel Hildebrand, The Humanist | 10.01.2025
When most people hear the word eugenics, they think of dusty history textbooks and black-and-white photographs: forced sterilizations in the early 20th century, pseudoscientific charts measuring skulls, the language of “fitness” used to justify violence and exclusion. It feels like...