Key points: A Wall Street Journal report says Silicon Valley start-up Preventive may be attempting to develop a genetically edited baby and could pursue tests abroad; Preventive denies the claim and says it is focused on pre-clinical research. Experts, including WHO adviser Jamie Metzl, warn the effort is premature and ethically fraught, citing the 2018 He Jiankui case as a cautionary example. Backer Brian Armstrong argues embryo editing could prevent genetic disease, but regulators and scientists stress that safe, consensual clinical germline editing is not yet achievable.
Report: Silicon Valley Start-up Accused of Seeking Genetically Edited Baby; Company Denies Claims
Key points: A Wall Street Journal report says Silicon Valley start-up Preventive may be attempting to develop a genetically edited baby and could pursue tests abroad; Preventive denies the claim and says it is focused on pre-clinical research. Experts, including WHO adviser Jamie Metzl, warn the effort is premature and ethically fraught, citing the 2018 He Jiankui case as a cautionary example. Backer Brian Armstrong argues embryo editing could prevent genetic disease, but regulators and scientists stress that safe, consensual clinical germline editing is not yet achievable.
07:19 PM, 11/14/2025Science
Silicon Valley start-up faces scrutiny over alleged embryo editing
A Wall Street Journal report says the Silicon Valley company Preventive is reportedly pursuing experimental efforts to produce a genetically edited human embryo and may consider conducting tests overseas in jurisdictions with looser regulations. Preventive has denied the allegations, saying the company is focused on pre-clinical laboratory research.
Genome editing of human embryos remains illegal in the United States and in many other countries. The issue rekindled international concern after the 2018 case involving Chinese scientist He Jiankui, who was jailed for three years after claiming to have created gene-edited babies allegedly resistant to HIV — a claim that subsequent reporting and scientific review cast into doubt.
Expert warnings and ethical concerns
Jamie Metzl, a best-selling author and a member of the World Health Organization’s expert advisory committee on human genome editing, told NewsNation that attempting germline modification now would amount to 'Nuremberg-style human experimentation.' He emphasized the scientific uncertainties and complex biology involved, saying research is not yet at a stage that would support safe, ethical clinical use.
'Human biology is extremely complex. We don’t really understand it all that well,' Metzl said. 'The science just isn’t there yet.'
Metzl drew a distinction between existing reproductive choices — such as preimplantation genetic testing in in vitro fertilization, where parents can screen embryos for known genetic disorders and choose which to implant — and the far more controversial practice of actively editing an embryo’s genome.
Where the work might occur and who is backing it
The report says Preventive may be exploring work in the United Arab Emirates, where regulations are reportedly less restrictive than in the U.S. Preventive counts Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong among its backers. Armstrong has argued that editing embryos could, in principle, prevent or correct genetic diseases that affect more than 300 million people worldwide, potentially reducing suffering if done safely and ethically.
But experts caution against simplistic analogies between human genetics and computer code and warn about private technology-driven initiatives moving before robust scientific, ethical and regulatory frameworks are in place.
Regulatory and scientific context
Regulators, scientific bodies and ethicists continue to debate the conditions under which germline editing could ever be acceptable. Most agree that substantial additional research, international consensus, oversight and safeguards would be required before clinical germline editing could be considered.
Preventive maintains it is carrying out laboratory-stage research and is not conducting clinical embryo editing. The Wall Street Journal report is the central source for the allegations.
Takeaway: The allegations — if true — would raise urgent ethical, legal and safety questions. The story underscores a broader debate over whether, when and how human germline genome editing should be regulated and governed globally.