Will gene editing human embryos ever be safe?

Debates continue about whether the societal risks of heritable genome editing are too great to proceed, as do calls for broadly inclusive public participation in such deliberations. In the meantime, we’ve been learning a lot about what can go wrong when using CRISPR to edit human embryos.

In October [2020], the journal Cell published an article describing significant damage to human embryos edited with CRISPR. The experiments conducted in Dieter Egli’s lab at Columbia University found unintended rearrangements or deletions of large stretches of DNA at and around the targeted site.

The idea that reducing technical errors in embryo editing experiments proves heritable genome editing safe continues to miss consideration of a broader set of problems. These include risks to any women who would carry gene-edited pregnancies, as well as risks to the health and well-being of any children born from edited embryos, and to any subsequent generations. Beyond these concerns lie urgent questions about the societal risks of altering the genes of future children and generations, which we have barely begun to discuss.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Safety is far from the only thing we need to discuss in making decisions about whether to pursue heritable genome editing, but recent scientific findings confirm that the question of whether it will ever be safe is far from settled.

Read the original post

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

ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-10_15_14-AM
Viewpoint—A hard look at the Fauci diaries: Do they change what we know about COVID’s origins?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-12_42_58-PM
Viewpoint: Fact-checking CNN interview with RFK, Jr. underscores the depth of his disinformation delusions
Picture1
Hiroshima at 81: America’s new nuclear bomb, a buried Iranian target, and a question no one wants to ask
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-17-2026-09_50_27-AM
Viewpoint: How disease tracking and prevention has cratered under the Kennedy-Trump administration
Screenshot-2026-07-17-at-1.34.59-PM
Poll: Vaccine hesitancy soars when patients distrust health providers and turn to social media
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-07_52_00-PM
No liability for scientific due diligence: California Supreme Court rejects bizarre lawsuit faulting Gilead for fully evaluating HIV drug before release
png livestock cow cattle a
Consumer skepticism about gene-edited milk is neither fixed nor particularly high—and falls even more if it’s priced lower
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 10_17_59 AM
Viewpoint: What does it mean when critics of conventional agriculture say many fruits and vegetables are “linked” to pesticide poisoning?
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 06_26_01 PM 2
Facts & Fallacies podcast: Organic food myths make a comeback on Instagram, with Dr. Kevin Folta
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 09_08_15 AM 2
The retreat of environmental extremism: Why activist NGOs are losing favor
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-02_05_46-PM
Does Congress have the guts to successfully challenge Trump’s politicization of science funding?
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-11_19_30-AM
41-state Cyclospora outbreak exposes widespread state-to-state communication failures
glp menu logo outlined

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