What’s the difference between choosing healthy embryos and picking a baby’s eye color?

article
Credit: Ovia Health

Blair and James are trying to start a family. Like many parents, they hope their future offspring will be healthy. They’d also like the baby to have blue eyes.

The couple, both 35, describe themselves as type-A personalities who research everything. When they decided to try for a baby, they looked into DNA testing to rule out disease-causing genetic mutations they might pass along to their child. Then they learned about a test that might help predict a future baby’s eye color.

[T]he notion that parents might someday select embryos based on what some deem as aesthetic preferences—a future child who is a certain height or good at sports or looks a certain way—raises challenging ethical questions. Perhaps, some ethicists argue, DNA testing will create a society that further values certain types of children more than others.

Based on the results of the testing, [Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg] says, “You absolutely can make a blue-eyed baby.” The doctors say that they estimate that in a group of five of their embryos, one is likely to have blue eyes.

Once you start looking at an embryo to rule out diseases, [James] says, what’s one more thing like eye color?

“You are there already,” he says.

Read full, original post: Is It Ethical to Choose Your Baby’s Eye Color?

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
png-food-sweetener-nutri
Junk science alert: Does a recent ballyhooed study really prove that artificial sweeteners are worse for your brain than sugar? 
Screenshot-2026-08-05-at-7.37.27-PM-1
Facts & Fallacies podcast: 'Zombie apocalypse'? Cities move toward drug legalization, flirt with disaster
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-11_19_30-AM
41-state Cyclospora outbreak exposes widespread state-to-state communication failures
Screenshot-2026-08-05-at-8.51.10-AM
Viewpoint: ‘ICUs were empty in NYC and across the US’: RFK, Jr. accuses pro-vaccine liberals of exaggerating the number of COVID deaths
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-12_42_58-PM
Viewpoint: Fact-checking CNN interview with RFK, Jr. underscores the depth of his disinformation delusions
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
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-5-2026-09_54_10-AM
Viewpoint: Data center rejections hit 275 in 2026. Opponents are not the Luddites portrayed by the media
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
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-Aug-4-2026-10_56_29-AM
Viewpoint: Viral social media misinformation drives cancer patients toward ‘wellness grifters’ and dangerous, unregulated supplements
glp menu logo outlined

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