Start-ups reignite debate over CRISPR embryo editing

The article covers Manhattan Genomics, founded by entrepreneur Cathy Tie and Eriona Hysolli, and Preventive, founded by Lucas Harrington, both of which plan to explore gene editing in human embryos. Neither company has disclosed which diseases they intend to target or which techniques they will employ. However, both suggest they will use newer tools such as base and prime editing, rather than the original CRISPR–Cas9 system.

The announcements come six years after Chinese biophysicist He Jiankui was imprisoned for creating the world’s first gene-edited babies, an experiment widely condemned across the scientific community. Tie argues that gene-editing technologies have since advanced in precision and safety, and that private-sector efforts are needed in light of regulatory and funding constraints in academia.

However, researchers, including Alexis Komor from the University of California, San Diego and Junjiu Huang from Sun Yat-sen University, maintain that the safety bar for embryo editing remains extraordinarily high, and current technologies are not yet suitable for clinical application. They highlight unresolved risks specific to germline editing—particularly unintended DNA changes that could affect every cell of a developing embryo and be passed to future generations.

The legacy of the first CRISPR-edited births continues to cast a long shadow. While somatic gene-editing therapies have moved into clinical use, editing embryos introduces fundamentally different scientific and ethical concerns. Critics argue that the necessary biological understanding, societal consensus and regulatory structures remain incomplete. Even proponents concede that clinical application is not imminent and that substantial preclinical work remains to be done.

The News & Views piece suggests that renewed interest from private companies may indicate a shift in discourse – but not yet in readiness. It was written by Heidi Ledford and published in Nature on 3 November 2025.