Some social justice activists have alleged that Western companies use biotechnology to "colonize" the developing world. There isn't a bit of evidence in support of this popular but very dangerous accusation.
Starting next month, many grocery store products will have to carry the USDA's bioengineered ("GMO" in the vernacular) food labels. Here's what you should know about this pointless, costly regulation.
Japanese consumers now have access to a genetically engineered -- specifically, a CRISPR-edited -- tomato that can help prevent high blood pressure. Hopefully, it's one of many gene-edited products we'll begin to see in grocery stores around the world.
Could governments mandate that we quit reproducing sexually for the sake of public health? It sounds outlandish, but there are prominent thinkers making that case. Their argument is superficially plausible but ultimately absurd, both for scientific and ethical reasons.
Three well-known anti-GMO groups have attacked the New York Times for publishing a generally excellent story about crop biotechnology. Natural News, for example, called the article "pure propaganda masquerading as journalism." Unsurprisingly, Natural News is wrong.
Countries that ban biotech crops aren't necessarily GMO-free. There's a prohibition-inspired lesson for regulators and activist groups in these nations if they're willing to listen.
For decades, using rational arguments, scientists failed to convince European politicians of the importance of biotechnology, including gene editing. The reason is that Europe is convinced it is on the side of great virtue.
Large pharmaceutical companies are multinational organizations with incentives to distribute their vaccines broadly.
As new breeding techniques create new ethical debates over food, we think the ethical toolbox needs updating. Talking about crossing species lines simply isn’t enough. If Darwin had known about gene editing, we think he would have agreed.
Innovation is built upon an ecosystem that takes decades to mature. Yet, China has already made substantial advances in computer science, chemistry, engineering, and robotics -- all of which pose a direct challenge to U.S. technological supremacy. However, the U.S. will remain dominant and largely unchallenged in biotech and medicine for the foreseeable future.
Biomedical scientists today stand in a position not dissimilar to that of our ancient ancestors. A thousand years from now, we will be viewed as naïve and of limited means. Yet, it's quite possible that historians of science will look back at the 20th and 21st centuries as periods in which great marvels were accomplished. If there's ever a list called The Seven Wonders of the Biotech World this is what should be on it.
The Trump Administration recently issued two executive orders relating to biomedical science. The first involved the regulation of biotechnology products; the second involved transparency in healthcare costs. We believe both are a step in the right direction.