Manhattan Genomics, a New York-based startup, is reviving the debate on gene-edited babies with the aim of eradicating genetic disease and alleviating human suffering by editing embryos at the earliest stage of development. The company's stated goal is to correct harmful mutations that cause serious diseases like Huntington's disease, cystic fibrosis, and sickle cell anemia.
Cofounder Cathy Tie, a former Thiel fellow who left college at 18 to start her own company, believes that editing human embryos will make the idea more acceptable in society. However, experts warn of unintended "off-target" effects and ethical concerns surrounding gene editing, which could lead to unforeseen consequences such as cancer.
The company has assembled a team of prominent scientists, including Norbert Gleicher, an IVF doctor who frequently asks why it's not yet possible to "improve" or "fix" embryos. Manhattan Genomics plans to focus on genes with the strongest correlation with disease and will start by testing its technology in mice before moving on to monkeys.
However, many genetic diseases are caused by spontaneous mutations that cannot be detected with current preimplantation genetic diagnosis methods. This raises questions about when gene editing should be used – only for those couples who have little or no chance of having a genetically related baby that does not inherit a serious monogenic condition?
Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University, has concerns about heritable gene editing bypassing academic research and being taken up by tech startups. He recommends caution and incremental progress, citing the need for societal dialogue before determining whether to permit human embryo editing.
As the debate around human embryo editing continues, Manhattan Genomics' efforts highlight both the potential benefits and risks of this technology. While some see it as a revolutionary solution to genetic disease, others express concerns about its ethics and safety.
Cofounder Cathy Tie, a former Thiel fellow who left college at 18 to start her own company, believes that editing human embryos will make the idea more acceptable in society. However, experts warn of unintended "off-target" effects and ethical concerns surrounding gene editing, which could lead to unforeseen consequences such as cancer.
The company has assembled a team of prominent scientists, including Norbert Gleicher, an IVF doctor who frequently asks why it's not yet possible to "improve" or "fix" embryos. Manhattan Genomics plans to focus on genes with the strongest correlation with disease and will start by testing its technology in mice before moving on to monkeys.
However, many genetic diseases are caused by spontaneous mutations that cannot be detected with current preimplantation genetic diagnosis methods. This raises questions about when gene editing should be used – only for those couples who have little or no chance of having a genetically related baby that does not inherit a serious monogenic condition?
Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University, has concerns about heritable gene editing bypassing academic research and being taken up by tech startups. He recommends caution and incremental progress, citing the need for societal dialogue before determining whether to permit human embryo editing.
As the debate around human embryo editing continues, Manhattan Genomics' efforts highlight both the potential benefits and risks of this technology. While some see it as a revolutionary solution to genetic disease, others express concerns about its ethics and safety.
. I mean, on one hand, can you imagine being able to erase the genes that cause your kid to have a debilitating illness? It's like a dream come true for many parents out there 
. But at the same time, I'm getting these major feels of unease when I think about all the unknowns and unintended consequences 
.
) and she's been saying that this tech could be a game-changer for families like hers. But at what cost? Is it really fair to subject embryos to all this editing just so we can "fix" them without thinking about the bigger picture 
?
. We can't just let tech startups run wild with this kind of power 
.
.
But at the same time, can you blame Manhattan Genomics for wanting to help people live longer and healthier lives? My cousin has cystic fibrosis and it's heartbreaking to see them suffer. I get why they want to do this.
We need more research and dialogue before we can even think about doing this on a human scale. And what about all the genetic diseases that aren't even related to specific genes? How do we even begin to address those? It's like, we're trying to solve a puzzle with too many missing pieces.
. We need to be careful and make sure we're not rushing into something that could have unintended consequences.
I'm low-key excited about Manhattan Genomics' mission to eradicate genetic diseases with gene-edited babies 
, this could be a game-changer for humanity. On the other hand, I'm also getting some major concerns from experts about off-target effects and ethics 
Like, shouldn't we at least try to explore all options before dismissing them completely? 
It's like, they're saying "Hey, let's fix babies!" but what if it's not that simple? 
. 
. Maybe instead of editing embryos right off the bat, we should start with tiny animals like mice 
and then move on to humans? That way we can test & refine our tech before it hits the real world 
.
. Maybe there's a way to help people live healthier lives without messing with their genes 
. 
. we're talking about changing the fundamental building blocks of life here! what if we make things worse instead of better? 
and then there's the issue of who gets to decide when and where this tech is used - is it just for couples who have a high risk of passing on serious diseases, or is it available to anyone who wants it?
and its like yeah bc what if u mess up the genes and make cancer or sumthin 
. Seriously though, this tech has the potential to save countless lives, but we gotta be careful not to play God... or at least, not yet 
. I mean, imagine being able to edit out all the bad genes and just leave the good ones – it's like a genetic makeup makeover! 
But with great power comes great responsibility, so let's make sure we're doing this right and having some serious conversations about ethics and safety before we start tampering with nature 
Okay, maybe not that easy.
But then there's experts like Jeffrey who say we need to slow down and think this through. I kinda get both sides of it. 
. Like, what even is the point of making embryos if we can't guarantee that they won't turn into cancer or something? 
. It's like, hello, scientists have been studying genetics for years and we're just gonna leapfrog to human trials without even testing it in mice first? 
.
. But at what cost?
. And then there's the question of who gets access to this tech - only those couples with "serious monogenic conditions"? That raises so many questions about accessibility and equality 
.