Gene editing raises concerns about furthering divide between rich and poor

Screen Shot at AM

Scientists are pioneering the ability to tweak our DNA to wipe out disease and maybe even allow us to choose desirable traits in our unborn children, like height or intelligence. None of these technologies have moved out of the lab, but Americans are already uncomfortable with them. In a survey from Pew Research Center, almost half said they wouldn’t want to edit their baby’s genes—whether it were to combat disease or shop for traits.

They saw these options as “meddling with nature,” even though we’ve been using technology to enhance our lives for thousands of years.

[However], the more important point raised was the concern that technological enhancements could lead to greater inequality—that the rich could pay to live longer, healthier lives, and the poor couldn’t. This consideration is important because…gene editing [is] becoming a reality faster than many of us realize.

[S]cience is moving fast, so we need to vigorously debate the implications of these technologies sooner rather than later, or we’ll risk programming inequality deep into our DNA.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. Read full, original post: We Risk Programming Inequality into Our DNA

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-14-at-11.11.06-AM
‘Turbo cancer’ or mRNA cancer cure? Strategies to counter misinformation
ChatGPT Image May 28, 2026, 08_16_38 PM
Viewpoint: Why the EPA mismeasures cancer risk of chemicals and what should be done to fix it
edb7f6d7-2370-418f-9578-74e29678e35c
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Nicotine vaping—public health miracle, or risk to children? Professor Cliff Douglas
fda_logo_decimated
Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s FDA is on a screaming downward path—and why it may never recover
ChatGPT-Image-May-22-2026-10_56_42-AM-2
‘It’s not super useful’: As wariness about AI grows, Trump proposes rollback of healthcare safeguards
ChatGPT-Image-May-22-2026-10_26_09-AM
Gutting the National Science Board: How the Trump-RFK, Jr. crusade is erasing the separation of science and state
ChatGPT-Image-May-28-2026-11_31_47-AM-2
Relying on your doctor or AI miracle cure, death and debilitation? Neurologist makes the wrong choice
Screenshot-2026-05-27-at-10.51.25-AM
Viewpoint: ‘Monsanto’ blues—Planned Netflix movie promises yet another round of anti-glyphosate disinformation
Picture1
The Orange Bowl without oranges: Can CRISPR save Florida citrus?
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-11_51_01-AM
Viewpoint: RFK, Jr.’s ‘sadistic’ solution to autism, depression, and other ills looks a lot like prison camp
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-12.36.18-PM
MAGA’s latest ‘health obsession’? Nicotine patches promoted by ‘Zynfluencers’—including some in the Trump administration 
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.