What are the cons to gene editing?

• A. It is inexpensive and easy to implement
• B. It must be regulated ("new drug"), may insert more DNA than intended, public perception (GMO) and still needs to spread through population
• C. It has no ethical concerns
• D. It always produces a single, precise edit

Answer: (B)

Regulatory, safety, and societal implications shape the major drawbacks of gene editing. In many places, gene-editing therapies are regulated as new drugs, which means they must pass extensive safety and efficacy testing before approval. This creates high development costs, long timelines, and added complexity compared to other interventions. On the technical side, edits can go beyond what was intended: there can be larger DNA insertions, unintended changes at off-target sites, or rearrangements, depending on the delivery method and cellular context. Public perception of GMOs and engineered organisms also influences policy, funding, and adoption, sometimes leading to resistance even when risks are well managed. When edits have population-wide potential, such as germline changes or gene-drive strategies, there’s the real possibility that the trait could spread through an entire population, raising concerns about ecological impact, reversibility, and the ability to contain or reverse effects if problems arise.