SpaceX’s Starship Completes 11th Test Flight, Paving Way for Moon and Mars Missions 
NASA Astronauts Wilmore and Williams Recover After Boeing Starliner Delay 
Lab-grown meat: you may find it icky, but it could drive forward medical research 
Ancient Mars may have had a carbon cycle − a new study suggests the red planet may have once been warmer, wetter and more favorable for life 
Trump Administration to Launch Autism Initiatives Targeting Acetaminophen Use and New Treatment Options 
FDA Pilot Program Eases Rules for Nicotine Pouch Makers 
Astronomers have discovered another puzzling interstellar object − this third one is big, bright and fast 
NASA Partners with Katalyst to Save Swift Observatory with Innovative Docking Mission 
SpaceX Starship Explodes in Texas During Test, Citing Nitrogen Tank Failure 
Cogent Biosciences Soars 120% on Breakthrough Phase 3 Results for Bezuclastinib in GIST Treatment 
Trump and Merck KGaA Partner to Slash IVF Drug Costs and Expand Fertility Coverage 
Eli Lilly’s Inluriyo Gains FDA Approval for Advanced Breast Cancer Treatment 
Neuralink Expands Brain Implant Trials with 12 Global Patients 
The world of science and academia has always been a fierce battleground for intellectuals, regardless of the outward appearance of serenity and dignity presented. In the case of the gene-editing tool CRISPR, scientists are practically tripping over themselves to prove or disprove something or other with regards to the method. In a recent case, scientists are butting heads as to whether or not the use of the tool is causing unexpected mutations.
The challenge to the use of CRISPR willy-nilly was made by Columbia University Medical Center (CUMC) researchers and published their finding last May. In a press release, one of the study’s authors Stephen Tsang noted how the use of the gene-editing tool can cause hundreds of unintended mutations within just one subject.
“We feel it’s critical that the scientific community consider the potential hazards of all off-target mutations caused by CRISPR, including single nucleotide mutations and mutations in non-coding regions of the genome,” Tsang had said.
However, in a recent rebuttal, Harvard University and MIT researchers came together to look into the matter and discovered that the previously released study had some problems with the data. The scientists said as much in a new paper that they published, which indicates that the mutations might have already been present in the subjects before CRISPR was used on them.
The central figures in this brawl are the lab mice that were tested and subjected to genetic manipulations. The CUMC researchers tested the mice and found that their genomes showed changes that were not part of the intended edits.
However, the researchers that were part of the Harvard/MIT team-up notes how one of the mice exhibited no mutations, which indicates the observed accidental mutations were not caused by CRISPR. As a result, the team is urging the CUMC scientists to review their data and make the necessary alterations to their statements in order to prevent lasting damage to the use of CRISPR.
