Manhattan startup faces backlash for $5,999 embryo screening service

An embryo-screening service is drawing sharp criticism from scientists, ethicists and faith leaders, who say the technology turns parents into shoppers and children into products. Here’s what you need to know about the genetic optimization controversy:

The Nucleus Genomics platform

Manhattan startup markets genetic optimization tool:

• Nucleus Embryo platform allows couples to upload and rank DNA from up to 20 donor embryos
• Couples undergoing in vitro fertilization can rank based on intelligence, anxiety, addiction risk
• Minimum cost of $5,999 for “polygenic risk scores”
• Estimates likelihood children might develop diseases or possess specific traits

The company’s marketing approach

Nucleus promotes reproductive freedom argument:

• “Every parent wants to give their children more than they had” posted on X
• Promotional video shows dashboard where users sort embryos by projected traits
• Platform marketed as tool for genetic “optimization”
• Estimates traits like high IQ, low BMI, anxiety resistance, eye color

The founder’s defense

25-year-old CEO frames technology as evolution:

• Kian Sadeghi hailed platform as evolution of reproductive freedom
• “It’s about living a longer, healthier life” according to Wall Street Journal interview
• Argues genetic screening for embryos no different from adult risk testing
• Thiel fellow who raised $34 million after dropping out of University of Pennsylvania

Heritage Foundation criticism

Policy analyst warns about selection criteria:

• Emma Waters says parents look for treatable conditions like diabetes, deafness
• “More disturbing” cases involve selecting smartest children with certain personalities
• Parents selecting “right sex” or children fitting “model image”
• Technology used to choose “blue eyes or blond hair or something else”

Catholic bioethics concerns

Religious leader condemns embryo quality assessment:

• Father Tad Pacholczyk calls gauging child quality immoral attempt at control
• “Couples will now be tempted to impose quality control and eugenics”
• Technology represents “command and control mentality over procreation”
• Treats human embryos “like raw material” according to Catholic ethicist

Social media backlash

Platform faces “dystopian” criticism online:

• Venture capitalist posted reaction made him “so nauseous”
• Critics accused company of “trying to create an app store for embryos”
• Others said company “playing God with a ranking algorithm”
• Widely shared post declared “It’s eugenics with a slick UI”

Scientific reliability concerns

Polygenic scores face clinical acceptance challenges:

• Scores “aren’t widely accepted in clinical practice” according to multiple sources
• 2024 Cornell University study found scores include significant statistical uncertainty
• Columbia University bioethicist Robert Klitzman questions clinical validity
• Even breast cancer cases only quarter linked to genetics, rest environmental

The “new standard” concern

Ethics expert fears affluent adoption pressure:

• Patrick Brown of Ethics and Public Policy Center worries about technology becoming standard
• Questions whether parents terrible if not using optimization services
• “May become the new standard” among high income brackets
• Technology available to those parents who can afford it

Research investment criticism

Heritage analyst warns about misdirected scientific focus:

• Waters says filtering systems steer biotech community toward wrong priorities
• Technology “prefers to destroy the potential for disease or adverse outcomes”
• Dissuades scientists from investing in life-saving research and treatment
• Less innovation in research fields for future children with conditions

Industry expansion expectations

Nucleus reportedly first of several similar companies:

• Source close to biotech industry says Nucleus just the first company
• Several companies set to announce similar products
• Sadeghi embraced controversy in promotional video
• Compared genetic screening to once-controversial IVF now common

The broader philosophical debate

Critics question insufficient ethical consideration:

• Patrick Brown says “simply not enough” philosophical questions asked
• References Jurassic Park quote about scientists concerned with “could” not “should”
• Father Pacholczyk says embryos should be “received unconditionally and lovingly”
• “Every child, exactly as he or she arrives into our families, is precious”

Read more:

• Genetic “optimization” sparks outcry as critics say embryo ranking treats children like products