In April, an influential group of scientists recommended that scientists hold off germline editing until the implications are better known. STAT asked experts, including our Debra Mathews, for their take. Here’s what they said.

Quick Read

As various advisory bodies, scientific organizations and funding agencies deliberate on genome editing in humans, Debra JH Mathews, Robin Lovell-Badge and colleagues lay out some key points for consideration

Read More

The Crispr Quandary

November 10, 2015

A new gene-editing tool might create an ethical morass — or it might make revising nature seem natural

Quick Read

Kathy Niakan’s application to use a new gene-editing technique on embryos is controversial because we lack a clear moral framework for such science

Quick Read

Researchers apply for licence months after Chinese team become first to announce they have altered DNA. Robin Lovell-Badge, member of the Hinxton Group, said: “There is clearly lots of interesting and important research you can do with these techniques which has nothing to do with clinical applications.” But, he added: “We are absolutely not ready for clinical applications yet.”

Quick Read

It is “essential” that the genetic modification of human embryos is allowed, says a group of scientists, ethicists and policy experts. A Hinxton Group report says editing the genetic code of early stage embryos is of “tremendous value” to research

Quick Read

Claims influential Hinxton Group in a consensus statement issued following a meeting organized by an international steering committee of experts including a group from the Berman Institute

Read More

To realize the full potential of large data sets, researchers must agree on better ways to pass data around, says Martin Bobrow

Quick Read