this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
16 points (71.1% liked)
science
19105 readers
482 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Holy fuck this is a terrible idea.
The child was "saved" in that they can last longer until they'd die without a liver transplant.
It was successful because of how easy the liver is to target with medications.
"Fixing" one organ doesn't change the entire bodies genotype, female sex cells will continue to (potentially) carry the defect.
These genetic "diseases" are not all without any benefit, the most common example is sickle cell anemic people have higher resistance to malaria.
There's no telling how "fixing" things generically will alter other systems in the body, it was done to one organ to a briefly observed window of success, that's barely more than anecdotal evidence.
This is what I came up with in 5 minutes, I'm not a geneticist.
We could use gene editing to get the DNA of an organ and use it to clone a copy inside a pig for example and then use it for the patient.
While I know someone have benefits being a carrier in the west has zero benefits. People should at least be able to sign up to be test subject if they have a chronic or terminal illness