this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
517 points (93.6% liked)

Science Memes

14383 readers
1797 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] edinbruh@feddit.it 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Ok, but, does it really not work, or like, it's just that you would have to run it in a batch and kill the bad cells, which could be unethical on human embryos?

Like, could we grow legs on a lungfish (which Google says has a larger genome than humans) using CRISPR-cas9 if we did not care about botched embryos?

[โ€“] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

You'd need to test every cell in the embryo to be sure none of them had off-target mutations, and DNA sequencing doesn't leave the cell alive, so you can't prove it worked without killing the embryo. He tested some of the cells and discarded embryos where those cells were damaged, but there's no way to know if the untested cells in the embryos were fine, and given what we know about the reliability, it's more likely that there are problems than not.