SHANE CASHMAN: Cloning developments are frightening, not historic

The ethics of reviving extinct species is under scrutiny after Colossal Biosciences successfully brought back the dire wolf. While some are excited about this scientific breakthrough, others are concerned about the potential consequences. The process, known as de-extinction or “resurrection biology,” involves reviving species like the dodo bird, passenger pigeon, and saber-tooth tiger. The dire wolves created by Colossal Biosciences are not clones but the result of genetic engineering, with a 99.9% similarity to gray wolves.

The lab-made dire wolves named Khaleesi, Romulus, and Remus exhibit physical characteristics of the extinct dire wolves, such as longer fur and larger skulls. However, their behavior remains uncertain as their DNA closely resembles that of gray wolves. The company, based in Dallas, Texas, used CRISPR technology to create these dire wolves by combining DNA from dire wolf fossils with that of gray wolves.

While some see the potential for innovation in genetic engineering, others caution against the ethical implications of such advancements. The growing capabilities in de-extinction and cloning raise concerns about the consequences, including the possibility of resurrecting humans. Scientists like He Jiankui have challenged ethical boundaries in gene-editing experiments, emphasizing the need to consider the ethical implications of these technologies.

Colossal Biosciences has stated that their dire wolves will not breed, but the risk of genetic contamination remains a concern. Similar situations have occurred with genetically engineered salmon populations, raising questions about the impact on ecosystems. As scientists push the boundaries of genetic manipulation, the debate over the ethical implications of resurrecting extinct species continues.