‘Go for it’: Dozens of people on the brink of death put faith in controversial ‘in vivo’ CRISPR gene therapy treatments

crispr clinical trials header
Credit: Innovative Genomics Institute

Without treatment, he would die. After a desperate search, his family found a promising but risky option: an experimental drug that would edit his DNA inside his body to stop his disease, which is called transthyretin amyloidosis.

[73-year-old Akintunde] Odunsi decided it offered his best chance. “Go for it,” he told himself.

It sounds like science fiction, but Odunsi is among dozens of people participating in studies on a controversial new forefront of the gene-editing revolution.

Regulators last year approved the world’s first medicine using Crispr, the Nobel Prize-winning tool for modifying genes. The medicine, for sickle-cell disease, a group of inherited blood disorders, involves extracting cells, editing them in a lab and putting them back in the patient’s body.

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

“In vivo” gene editing, as the approach is called, could transform medicine. Several of the therapies are for cardiovascular disease, and if proven safe and effective could reach millions of patients.

…

In vivo editing could be less expensive and reach more people than editing cells outside the body. It doesn’t require the laboratories and expertise needed to extract and edit cells.

Editing inside the body might also be easier on patients. They don’t have to undergo chemotherapy, for example, which is necessary for sickle-cell patients before receiving their cells that have been edited outside the body.

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

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 2026-10-16 at 5.38
PFAS in Agriculture: Science, Uncertainty, and Risk Communication
Discarded Green Cap on Public Trash Can
'Blatant slap in the face': MAHA activists turn on RFK Jr. and Trump administration
newborn baby spit up gerd
Vaccine-preventable congenital infections are a leading driver of autism
Screenshot 2026-10-16 at 11.17
Viewpoint: Latest attack on renewable energy and farmers, new USDA rules could put solar grants out of reach for small producers
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Government Briefing on Autism Trends
Viewpoint: ‘Statistical murder’: Kennedy’s expanding record of “duplicity and mendacity”
FDA Vials and Syringes Flat Lay
Online gold rush of unapproved peptides is outrunning federal regulators
Screenshot-2026-10-12-at-10.44.38-AM
Widely condemned as unethical, hepatitis B vaccine study funded by RFK Jr’s CDC gets a final greenlight
Screenshot-2026-10-15-at-9.51.15-AM
 Viewpoint: Selective pronatalism: The radical “ethical” case challenging parents’ right to end a pregnancy when a fetus has a severe genetic disorder
Screenshot-2026-10-08-at-10.41.33-AM
Viewpoint: Wellness patches: Most vitamin supplements are useless and sometimes even dangerous, but this craze is even worse
Screenshot-2026-10-15-at-12.13.33-PM
Ahead of the midterms, Meta has paid at least 29 anti-LGBTQ accounts for their posts
Prescription Capsules Scattered on Twenty-Dollar Bills
Facts & Fallacies podcast: America's health care system is broken. A doctor explains how to fix it, Part 2
glp menu logo outlined

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