The Rise of Preventive: A New Frontier in Human Genome Editing
Preventive, a groundbreaking startup based in Silicon Valley, is making waves with its ambitious mission to eradicate hereditary diseases through human embryo editing. Backed by prominent figures like Sam Altman of OpenAI and Brian Armstrong of Coinbase, the company has sparked intense discussions about the ethical, legal, and scientific implications of its work.
Founded earlier this year by Lucas Harrington, a gene-editing scientist, Preventive has already secured $30 million in funding and established its headquarters in San Francisco. The company’s primary objective is to develop safe and transparent methods for editing human embryos before birth, aiming to prevent genetic disorders from being passed on to future generations.
Despite the potential benefits, the technology has ignited fierce debates over safety, ethics, and the possibility of “designer children.” The Wall Street Journal reported that Preventive’s mission is to prove that genome editing can be made safe and transparent before any attempt to create a baby is made.
Sam Altman and Brian Armstrong are among the early investors in the company. Oliver Mulherin, Altman’s husband, highlighted that their investment was driven by a desire to help families avoid genetic illnesses. Armstrong, who has long supported embryo editing, expressed excitement about backing Preventive, arguing that correcting genetic defects in embryos is far more efficient than treating diseases later in life.
However, federal law in the United States prohibits the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from considering applications for human trials involving genetically edited embryos used to start pregnancies. This regulatory barrier poses significant challenges for companies like Preventive, which aim to push the boundaries of genetic science.
Harrington, who earned his doctorate under CRISPR pioneer Jennifer Doudna, denied that Preventive is preparing to implant an edited embryo or working with couples to do so. He emphasized that the company’s focus is on preclinical research to determine whether editing embryos can be done safely.
“We are not trying to rush things,” Harrington told the Journal. “We are committed to transparency in our research and will publish our findings, whether positive or negative.”
Sources familiar with Preventive’s operations revealed that the company has explored foreign jurisdictions, including the United Arab Emirates, where embryo editing might be permitted. However, Harrington clarified that such considerations are due to regulatory restrictions, not an attempt to evade oversight.
The company has also recruited advisers from reproductive medicine and genetics, ensuring a multidisciplinary approach to its research. Preventive’s website describes it as a public-benefit corporation, meaning it can legally prioritize social good alongside profit.
Preventive’s goal is to end hereditary disease by editing human embryos before birth. Its charter defines this purpose as the “responsible advancement of genome editing technologies applied before birth to benefit humanity.”
This effort echoes the 2018 scandal involving He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist who created the world’s first gene-edited babies, twins whose embryos had been altered to resist HIV. He served three years in prison for illegal medical practices, highlighting the risks and ethical dilemmas associated with such advancements.
Scientists remain uncertain about the long-term effects of He’s edits, as the children have not been publicly identified. This incident underscores the need for rigorous oversight and transparency in the field of genome editing.
As Preventive continues its research, the global community remains watchful, balancing the promise of eradicating genetic diseases with the ethical and legal challenges that accompany such powerful technology.