X

Aggregator

Scientists Edited Human Embryo Genes. But Questions Remain

Slashdot
2 hours 33 minutes ago
"A DNA-editing feat involving editing the genes of early stage embryos was announced this week," reports the Wall Street Journal. They describe the feat as "a far cry from designer babies, but nevertheless a step in that direction." Dieter Egli, an associate professor of developmental cell biology at Columbia University and his co-authors, including Nathan Treff of Nucleus Genomics, a New York-based DNA-testing startup, say the technology could help fix disease-causing mutations in embryos. "We're not throwing the final 'OK, you will have gene-edited babies tomorrow' at the public," said Egli. "That is a process that can occur through discussion matched with scientific progress...." Previous gene-editing efforts have often used Crispr, which can cut out parts of the DNA sequence, but the technology can also cause damage if the wrong DNA is targeted or cut out. In 2018, Chinese scientist He Jianku said he used Crispr to tweak DNA in human embryos and was imprisoned for the work. The technology Egli's group used, called base editing, allows them to target individual DNA letters in sequences more precisely with fewer adverse effects... Egli's group focused on altering two genes, one that can raise the risk of heart disease and one that is tied to blood disorders like sickle cell disease, and the research showed they were sometimes able to do so successfully, in the same embryo, without damage. "I am generally supportive of the concept of embryo editing to prevent genetic disease," said Dr. Paula Amato, a fertility expert at Oregon Health & Science University who wasn't involved in the research... Base editing has been used in human embryos before, according to peer-reviewed studies. The technology was used to correct a disease-causing mutation and an Alzheimer's disease-risk gene variant, said Alexis Komor, associate professor of biochemistry and molecular biophysics at the University of California, San Diego, who wasn't involved in the work. "There really is not any unmet medical or clinical need for this, especially from an in vitro fertilization perspective," Komor said. "Usually what you'll hear is that they're doing it just so that you know we can prevent genetic diseases, but there are so many other better ways to do that." Using embryo editing to create babies is illegal in the U.S. and many other countries. Scientists have long worried that it is a slippery slope and that the technology could ultimately be used to promote eugenics. Her worry is that "they're basically building a blueprint" for more ethically problematic forms of embryo editing. "In my opinion, I think this is a huge no-no," Komor said. "There's just no ethical way to use this...." Nucleus Genomics Chief Executive Kian Sadeghi said his company plans to fund Egli's further research, building on the new findings. His company sells a polygenic embryo-screening product, which screens prospective parents' embryos and produces risk scores for their likelihood of developing disease, as well as factors like height, IQ and eye color. The company has said the IQ predictions are limited in accuracy. The research was published online Monday on a preprint server.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid

Failing CS Grades Soar At UC Berkeley As Professors See Greater AI Usage

Slashdot
4 hours 33 minutes ago
The University of California at Berkeley discovered the percentage of failing grades in multiple CS classes this spring "is significantly higher than past semesters," reports the campus's student newspaper. "Instructors point to students' increased reliance on AI, lack of mathematical preparedness and understaffing as potential contributing factors." According to [coursework platform] Berkeleytime, 35.3% of CS 10 students and 10.6% of CS 61A students received F's in spring 2026. In spring 2025 and spring 2024, the percentage of F's did not exceed 10% for either class. The electrical engineering and computer sciences department's grading guidelines state that 7% of students in lower division courses, including CS 10 and CS 61A, should receive D's and F's... [UC Berkeley teaching professor Dan Garcia, who taught both classes] believes the "primary driver" of these abnormally high failing rates is due to a "vast increase in academic dishonesty" due to students' usage of large language models, such as Claude, ChatGPT and Google Gemini. "Some of the numbers that you saw from the number of students who receive failing grades were because we caught them (cheating) and prosecuted them and are sending their cases to the Center for Student Conduct," Garcia said. "But in other cases, it's students who are leaning a little too hard on LLMs to do their work for them, and then at exam time just really aren't ready." According to Garcia, nearly 30 students in CS 10 were "caught cheating on take-home exams" in spring 2026... In addition to overreliance on AI, Garcia also pointed out that many students are underprepared mathematically, a concern echoed by campus associate teaching professor Gireeja Ranade. Ranade noticed a similar lack of prerequisite mathematical skills in her spring 2026 EECS 127 class, "Optimization Models in Engineering," which she described as "differently challenging" to teach this semester. The class saw a 16.8% F rate, far higher than the 5% of D's and F's that the EECS department describes as "typical" for an upper division course... Both Garcia and Ranade have joined more than 1,300 UC faculty in signing a petition calling for the reinstatement of ACT and SAT standardized testing scores for STEM admissions in the UC system. Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader theodp for sharing the article.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid