Could Silicon Valley soon play God with human life? Texas Sen. John Cornyn is sounding a serious alarm about a San Francisco biotech startup, Preventive PBC, which is diving into gene-editing research on embryos, raising fears of a slippery slope toward eugenics and so-called "designer children."
According to the New York Post, at the heart of this controversy, Cornyn is pressing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to confirm that Preventive PBC, backed by big tech names like OpenAI's Sam Altman and Coinbase's Brian Armstrong, is fully complying with federal regulations on this cutting-edge and ethically fraught technology.
Preventive PBC, flush with $30 million in funding, claims its mission is noble: to prevent severe hereditary diseases in future generations by editing embryos using CRISPR, a tool that allows precise DNA tweaks.
Yet, while the startup insists it’s only conducting lab research and won’t touch clinical human use until safety is proven, Cornyn isn’t buying the reassurances without hard oversight. He’s warned HHS that this tech could open a Pandora’s box of moral dilemmas.
“All parents want their children to live the healthiest lives possible, but advancing this type of technology would come with grave consequences, intentional or not,” Cornyn wrote in a letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Let’s be real—good intentions don’t erase the risk of unintended horrors when you’re tinkering with the building blocks of life.
Reports from The Wall Street Journal reveal Preventive is even scouting locations like the United Arab Emirates, where embryo editing might face fewer restrictions. That’s an eyebrow-raising move for a company claiming to prioritize safety over speed.
Federal law already puts strict limits on this kind of work—Congress has blocked funding for research on genetically modifying human embryos, and the FDA can’t even review applications for related human trials. So why the global workaround?
Preventive’s website promises they “will not compromise safety standards to accelerate timelines.” That sounds nice, but when tech titans are bankrolling the project, one has to wonder if profit or prestige might nudge ethics aside.
Cornyn’s caution isn’t just political posturing amid a tough GOP primary; it echoes pro-life voices who argue an embryo is human life from conception. Playing editor with DNA at that stage isn’t just science—it’s a profound moral choice.
History offers a chilling reminder: only three children are known to have been born from edited embryos, thanks to a Chinese scientist, He Jiankui, who ended up jailed for illegal experimentation. That’s not exactly a glowing endorsement of unchecked innovation.
Preventive’s co-founder, Lucas Harrington, told The Post, “We are in compliance with all applicable regulations.” But compliance on paper doesn’t always match reality, especially when the stakes are this high. Cornyn’s letter to HHS didn’t mince words on the potential for abuse: “Scientific advancement cannot devolve into evil and immoral eugenic practices.” He’s right to demand clarity—once you start “improving” embryos, where do you draw the line before discarding those deemed less than perfect?
The senator acknowledges gene therapy’s promise for conditions like sickle cell disease or certain cancers, but he insists embryonic editing is a different beast. It’s a fair distinction—curing a living person isn’t the same as redesigning one before birth.
While Preventive’s scientists argue it’s “far easier to correct a smaller number of cells before disease progression,” the question remains: who decides what’s a disease and what’s just undesirable? That’s a cultural minefield progressive agendas often ignore in their rush to “fix” humanity.
As this debate unfolds, Cornyn’s push for HHS oversight is a necessary guardrail against Silicon Valley’s tendency to move fast and break things—even if those things are the very essence of human life. The Post has reached out to HHS for comment, and the nation awaits answers on how—or if—this technology can be responsibly wielded.