Mouse sperm could win awards for resilience. Sperm freeze-dried and sent into space for months of exposure to high levels of solar radiation later produced healthy babies, researchers report online May 22 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
If humans ever embark on long-term space flights, we’ll need a way to reproduce. One potential hurdle (beyond the logistical challenges of microgravity) is the high amount of solar radiation in space — radiation exposure is 100 times as high on the International Space Station as on Earth. Those doses might cause damaging genetic mutations in banked eggs and sperm. To test this possibility, Japanese researchers sent freeze-dried mouse sperm up to the space station, where the sperm spent nine months. When rehydrated back on Earth, the sperm showed some signs of DNA damage compared with earthly sperm.
But when the researchers used the space sperm to fertilize eggs in the lab and then injected the eggs into female mice, the mice birthed healthy pups that were able to have their own offspring. The researchers suspect that some of the initial DNA damage might have been repaired after fertilization.
If mouse sperm can survive a trip to space, perhaps human sperm can, too.
HAT-P 7b is a windy world. Stiff easterlies typically whip through the atmosphere of the distant exoplanet, but sometimes the powerful gales blow in surprisingly varied directions. Now, simulations of the planet’s magnetic field lines, illustrated here as a rainbow of scrawled marks, reveal that HAT-P 7b’s magnetic field influences the winds, even turning some into westerlies. The result, published May 15 in Nature Astronomy, could lead to a better understanding of the atmospheres of other exoplanets. Known as a “hot Jupiter,” HAT-P 7b is a gas giant that orbits its star once every 2.2 Earth days. The exoplanet, located 1,043 light-years away, is also tidally locked: One side always faces toward its star while the other faces away. That orientation pushes temperatures to about 1,900° Celsius on the planet’s dayside compared with about 900° C on the nightside. Those extreme temperature differences tend to power strong easterly winds, according to an analysis of data from the Kepler satellite. But that analysis also revealed that over time the winds are surprisingly mercurial.
The magnetic field, which may be generated by the planet’s core, is connected to the winds because of high temperatures stripping electrons from atmospheric atoms of lithium, sodium and potassium, making them positively charged. Those particles then interact with the field, creating an electromagnetic force strong enough to disrupt the stout easterly winds, writes study author Tamara Rogers, an astrophysicist at Newcastle University in England.
In the image above, blue lines track strong magnetic field lines directed one way, while those in magenta trace powerful lines in the opposite direction. Weaker parts of the field lines are shown in green and yellow. The stronger the magnetic field, the wilder the winds — with the strongest lines completely reversing the direction the winds blow, Rogers concludes.
Take a trip to a black hole with Stephen Hawking as a guide, watch glowing bioluminescent earthworms wriggle away from predators and discover the fascinating mathematics of origami — all while cuddled up in front of a laptop. That’s the promise of the online streaming service CuriosityStream, which offers hefty doses of science for viewers who prefer fact-based documentaries over reality TV, sports and the political bickering that dominate today’s television programming.
CuriosityStream, which recently celebrated its second birthday, operates much like Netflix. With plans starting at $2.99 per month, users can browse more than 1,700 commercial-free programs covering science, technology, history and the arts. The service works on computers, mobile devices and streaming players such as Roku and Apple TV. CuriosityStream aims to supplement the media diet of science-starved viewers. “When you look at television … there’s very little science on anymore,” says Steve Burns, CuriosityStream’s chief programming officer. Subscribers, he says, “crave the substance that they’ve been missing on TV for so long.”
Along with a slew of documentaries from the BBC and other public broadcasters, CuriosityStream offers more than 600 original programs that you won’t find anywhere else. One standout is David Attenborough’s Light on Earth, in which the naturalist takes viewers on an engaging survey of bioluminescent life, from flickering fireflies and luminous mushrooms to eerily glowing ocean creatures.
Another enjoyable original is Stephen Hawking’s Favorite Places, in which the famed physicist tours a black hole, exoplanet Gliese 832c, Saturn and other cosmic locales. Computer-generated imagery of the turbulent region around a black hole, for example, provides a brilliant visual background to Hawking’s explanations of relevant research. One episode is currently available, and two new ones are slated to go online later in the year.
Some shows are more engaging than others. Another original, The Hunt for Dark Matter, takes a deep dive into the technology behind the search for the invisible substance thought to pervade the universe. But the show will likely fall flat for many viewers, as its introduction lacks some of the background on the physics of dark matter that is necessary to grasp the relevance of the work.
CuriosityStream provides a wealth of options to choose from, including a variety of shorter shows, each 10 or 15 minutes long. With new programs added regularly, the service should provide enough binge-worthy fodder to keep even the most avid documentary lovers busy
On June 18, 4-year-old Bentley Thomas Koch fatally shot himself in the face. A few weeks earlier, Harmony Warfield, age 7, was shot and killed by her 2-year-old cousin. And teens Shadi Najjar and Artem Ziberov, both on the eve of graduating from high school, died in a hail of gunfire. Stories like these of kids dying from gunshot wounds are devastating, but, sadly, they aren’t an anomaly.
The most comprehensive look at fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries among children in the United States makes that abundantly clear. Every day, roughly 19 children die or are medically treated in an emergency department for gun-inflicted wounds, a study published June 19 in Pediatrics finds.
The statistics, based on data from 2002 to 2014, are stark:
Nearly 1,300 children, from birth to age 17, die from gunshot wounds each year on average and another 5,790 kids are wounded; Of the deaths, 53 percent are homicides, 38 percent are suicides and 6 percent are accidents; Boys ages 13 to 17 make up the bulk of gunshot victims; Cause of death varies by race — African-Americans are overwhelmingly more likely to die from homicide than suicide; white kids are nearly three times as likely to die from suicide as from homicide; and for American Indian and Asian-American kids, it’s 50-50. But this study doesn’t just lay out the numbers. It starts to dig deeper into the whys. And those whys can have important implications, laying the framework for policies that could ultimately lead to a drop in the numbers.
For the numbers, Katherine Fowler, a behavioral scientist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and colleagues started with data from the National Vital Statistics System and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System.
For the whys, her team looked at cases described in the National Violent Death Reporting System, or NVDRS. That let the researchers fill in details like where an incident took place and whether it involved multiple victims — for instance, a homicide followed by suicide or a multiple victim homicide. The database also includes demographic information about the shooter, evidence of alcohol or drugs at the time of death, and whether the incident was gang-related or involved a boyfriend or girlfriend or parents. Clues to whether relationship, financial or school issues were part of the problem also come to light, as does evidence of depression, anxiety, any previous suicide attempt, treatment for mental health problems and physical health problems. Notes about playing with a gun or thinking the gun was a toy, as well as hunting accidents are also included. This tally of circumstances led Fowler and colleagues to conclude that firearm homicides of younger children, up through age 12, often involve conflict between parents, intimate partners or among family. “This highlights how children can be caught in the cross fire in cases of domestic violence and points to the importance of addressing the intersection of these forms of violence,” she says.
The results also reveal something important about child suicides involving guns. “While mental health factors are important, the findings also show that firearm suicides were also frequently related to situational life stressors and relationship problems with an intimate partner, friend or family member,” Fowler notes.
It’s these kinds of details that can help researchers and lawmakers create more effective policies to prevent such tragic deaths and injuries. It’s worked in other cases. Statistics have shown that tweaks to laws regulating the times of day teens can drive lead to injury prevention. Ditto for access to free swimming lessons when it comes to stopping accidental drownings. But similar data on gun deaths and injuries and the effectiveness of policy to prevent them are harder to come by thanks to lack of funding and political support (SN: 5/14/16, p. 16).
Even so, “we know kids are killing themselves and others with guns,” says David Hemenway, a Harvard University economist and an expert in gun research. When it comes to combatting the problem, “the circumstances help narrow down the policy.”
Fowler says the findings “highlight the need for evidence-based solutions to address this public health problem.” She’s armed with a laundry list of potential policies that could have an impact on the whys of gun violence and make a dent in the stats. School counseling programs could help kids manage their emotions and develop skills to resolve problems in relationships and with peers, she says. Along with therapy, those programs could help to reduce suicidal behavior and youth violence. Street outreach programs may also reduce gang-related violence. Parents and pediatricians talking about storing guns safely — a policy touted by the American Academy of Pediatrics, but one that has met resistance in some states — is another option.
There’s another big need, too: more data.
Despite a better picture of what’s happening when kids get a hold of guns, the data are fragmentary and incomplete, says pediatrician Eliot Nelson of the University of Vermont Children’s Hospital in Burlington. For instance, information from the NVDRS was limited to 17 states, so the numbers aren’t nationally representative. Last year, the database was expanded to 42 states and could eventually be expanded to all 50, but that will take additional funding from Congress.
The way gun injury and death data are coded in databases is another issue. Many unintentional deaths, such as when a child accidentally shoots and kills a sibling or friend, are labeled homicides, Hemenway says. Such misclassifications make it more difficult to create a policy, he says. Take, for instance, encouraging parents to lock up guns in the house. Without correctly coded data to say that younger kids are more likely to be killed by a gun at home while older kids are more likely to be killed by guns at a friend’s house, it’s harder to know how to talk to parents. For parents of young kids, the message might be to lock up their own guns; for parents of older kids, it might be to inquire about guns at the homes of their children’s friends. “We don’t always know who best to target our message to,” Nelson says.
Studies such as Fowler’s are slowly filling in the gaps. But not fast enough for kids like Bentley, Harmony, Shadi and Artem. “We want to keep growing our knowledge to prevent problems,” Nelson says. But, he says, it’s hard to do when money and politics hamper research into the problem. Gun-related deaths ranks third as the leading cause of death in 1- to 17-year-olds in the United States. “Gun death in kids is such a common problem,” Nelson says. “We can’t continue to ignore it.”
In Carl Sagan’s 1985 sci-fi novel Contact, a radio astronomer battles naysayers and funding setbacks to persist in her audacious plan — scanning the skies for signals from aliens. Sagan had real-life inspiration for his book (and the 1997 movie of the same name): astronomer Jill Tarter, who spearheaded the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, for decades.
In Sagan’s story, the protagonist, Ellie Arroway, detects mysterious chatter from the cosmos. Tarter had no such luck. But her story, told by journalist Sarah Scoles in Making Contact, still provides insights into what it means to be human in a vast universe potentially harboring other life. Tarter began her career as a typical radio astronomer, studying mainstream topics like stars and galaxies as a Ph.D. student. But after graduating in 1975, she began to focus on SETI, poring over data from radio telescopes, searching for unnatural blips that could be a sign of an intelligent civilization. SETI researchers typically focus on radio waves because those long wavelengths can travel through our galaxy’s dust without being absorbed. Writings about SETI are prone to dreamy romanticism, but Making Contact admirably steers clear of excessive sentimentality. As a child gaping at the stars, Tarter wondered if creatures in the heavens were looking in our direction. Of course, Scoles notes, plenty of kids have wondered the same thing. Though Tarter’s childhood musings might seem special in retrospect, they aren’t what make her stand out.
Instead, Scoles — who has clear affection for her subject — highlights Tarter’s tenacity. In the face of numerous obstacles, Tarter pushed the field forward, seemingly by force of will.
In a detailed portrait of how the science sausage gets made, the book follows Tarter as she faced numerous funding woes. The field of SETI, which has at various points in its history received money through NASA, is an easy target for funding cuts, with some politicians deriding it as a wasteful hunt for “little green men.” Tarter, like the fictional Arroway, fought with Congress for taxpayer dollars SETI received, then scrambled for cash from other sources to keep telescopes and other equipment in operation. Wealthy donors kept SETI afloat — and still do. To maximize their ability to accept funding, Tarter and other SETI pioneers founded the nonprofit SETI Institute, in Mountain View, Calif., in 1984. Throughout, Tarter somehow managed to maintain her passion for a long shot search.
Although it’s a compelling story, the book stumbles in a few places, mainly minor sloppiness with physics facts, which may bother the most astute readers. (Scoles writes, for example, “Light is the only way we can learn about the universe,” neglecting gravitational waves and neutrinos, both of which have revealed secrets of cosmic objects.)
Now retired, Tarter has lost her chance to follow in Arroway’s fictional footsteps — she will never find any alien communiqués. But even if astronomers never hear from E.T., Tarter sees benefits in the search: SETI is an opportunity to make humankind less selfish. Just the thought that other creatures might inhabit the universe can make human squabbles seem less significant.
Nearly 1 in 5 adolescents has suffered at least one concussion, according to a survey of U.S. teens. And 5.5 percent reported two or more concussions diagnosed in their lifetimes, researchers report in the Sept. 26 JAMA.
About 13,000 eighth-, 10th- and 12th-graders participated in the 2016 Monitoring the Future survey, an annual national questionnaire of adolescent behavior and health given in schools. Among other questions, teens were asked whether they had ever had a head injury that was diagnosed as a concussion — 19.5 percent replied “yes.” Those teens were more likely than others to play competitive sports and be male, white and in a higher grade.
Previous studies have found that kids taking part in contact sports are at higher risk of suffering a concussion. These new data on actual prevalence of concussions, though self-reported, are important, say the authors, for crafting prevention efforts that protect teens from injuries.
Gene-editing tools heralded as hope for fighting invader rats, malarial mosquitoes and other scourges may be too powerful to use in their current form, two new papers warn.
Standard forms of CRISPR gene drives, as the tools are called, can make tweaked DNA race through a population so easily that a small number of stray animals or plants could spread it to new territory, predicts a computer simulation released November 16 at bioRxiv.org. Such an event would have unknown, potentially damaging, ramifications, says a PLOS Biology paper released the same day. “We need to get out of the ivory tower and have this discussion in the open, because ecological engineering will affect everyone living in the area,” says Kevin Esvelt of MIT, a coauthor of both papers who studies genetic solutions to ecological problems. What’s a pest in one place may be valued in another, so getting consent to use a gene drive could mean consulting people across a species’s whole range, be it several nations or continents.
Researchers have constructed this kind of drive in yeast, a fruit fly and several mosquitoes, but none of the tools have been deployed yet in the wild (SN: 12/12/15, p. 16). Meanwhile, some researchers are already working to add brakes or off-switches into a new generation of gene drives.
The major concern is that current gene drives “are probably too powerful for us to seriously consider deploying in conservation,” says geneticist Neil Gemmell of the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand. Gemmell is a coauthor of the PLOS Biology paper. This opinion could prove especially controversial in New Zealand. In 2016, the government resolved to protect the nation’s imperiled biodiversity by exterminating invader rats, stoats and possums that are wreaking havoc on native species. Gene drives just might make that possible.
Though warning of perils, the researchers also propose some solutions. A weaker system, which Esvelt calls a daisy drive, splits up components of the drive called guide RNAs. These guide RNAs direct the gene-editing machinery to its DNA target, where molecular scissors then snip and swap genetic material. As genes get inherited or not in the chancy jumbling of sexual reproduction, descendants in later generations become less likely to inherit all the spaced-apart pieces needed to operate the gene drive.
Esvelt’s lab is working to create a daisy drive in two kinds of nematode worms and is looking at other species as well. Other labs are now working on tamer gene drives, too.
Anthony A. James of the University of California, Irvine says that the disease-carrying Anopheles mosquito species that he and his colleagues have equipped with gene drives are self-limiting. When females end up with two of the genes he’s inserting, they don’t “survive very well after they have fed on blood.” Researchers are now raising these mosquitoes to see whether the genes spread and then dwindle away. “We don’t need our genes to last forever,” James says, “only long enough to contribute to getting rid of malaria.”
Another lab’s current version of disease-fighter mosquitoes already has a touch of the daisy. Aedes aegypti mosquitoes engineered with some built-in parts of the gene editor have their guide RNA split into two parts and put on different chromosomes, says molecular biologist Omar Akbari of the University of California, San Diego. Pictures of many weird mosquitoes created this way — all yellow or with three eyes or forked wings — attest to the fact that the drive system works. Akbari’s research appears November 14 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Akbari is not very worried about the risk of accidentally wiping out disease-carrying mosquitoes. “A thousand children die every day,” he says. It would be unethical not to use a tool that could lessen the loss, he says.
He does recognize that the case for caution could be different for other species. “A lot of pet owners would be sad,” he says, if a gene drive went wrong and escaped worldwide during some future attempt to rid, say, Australia of its terribly destructive feral cats.
When quickly reheated in a microwave and then pierced, the picnic staple can explode with a loud bang in a shower of hot, rubbery shrapnel. But this blast is far more likely to make a hot mess than hurt your hearing, according to research presented December 6 at the Acoustical Society of America meeting in New Orleans.
That distinction isn’t as odd as it might sound. In a lawsuit, a man claimed to have suffered burns and hearing damage after a microwaved, hard-boiled egg exploded in his mouth at a restaurant. Researchers from Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc. in San Francisco called as expert witnesses couldn’t find scientific papers backing up the claim that an egg could burst with enough vigor to cause hearing loss — just a lot of YouTube videos documenting eggsplosions. So the researchers microwaved peeled hard-boiled eggs in water on high power for three minutes.
The eggs were “uncooperative,” study coauthor Anthony Nash said in a news conference. Some exploded in the microwave, while others wouldn’t explode at all. But of nearly 100 eggs tested, 28 exploded outside of the microwave after being poked with a meat thermometer. From 30 centimeters away, the sound pressure from those explosions ranged from 86 to 133 decibels.
The median sound pressure level recorded, 108 decibels, is about the same as that at an average rock concert. Continuous exposure to that noise level could damage hair cells inside ears that respond to sound. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health sets recommended exposure limits for sound pressures above 85 decibels, says William Murphy, a researcher at NIOSH who wasn’t part of the study. But those limits are based on daily exposure over years, he says. A burst egg’s boom, on the other hand, lasts just milliseconds — not long enough to do much harm. “The likelihood for hearing damage from a single exploding egg was very low,” Nash said.
The lawsuit was settled out of court before Nash and his colleagues conducted the second phase of the study – considering how sound hits your ears when it’s coming from inside your mouth. An in-mouth explosion might send slightly more sound pressure to the ears, Nash says, but still probably not enough to cause lasting damage as a one-time accident.
A peeled egg probably explodes when pockets of water trapped in the yolk become superheated — hotter than the boiling temperature of water without actually bubbling, Nash suggested. When disrupted, say by a fork or a tooth, the water pockets spontaneously boil, bursting through the squishy egg white and sending bits flying. (It’s the same phenomenon that can occasionally make microwaved coffee spurt out of the mug onto your clean work clothes.)
A bigger risk than the noise might be the heat. Nash and his colleagues measured the temperature of yolks in eggs that didn’t burst. Those temperatures were, on average, 12 degrees Celsius above the surrounding water bath, which was often close to boiling.
This year, gene therapy finally became a clinical reality. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved two personalized treatments that engineer a patient’s own immune system to hunt down and kill cancer cells. The treatments, the first gene therapies ever approved by the FDA, work in people with certain blood cancers, even patients whose cancers haven’t responded to other treatments.
Called CAR-T cell immunotherapy (for chimeric antigen receptor T cell), one is for kids and young adults with B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, or ALL, approved in August (SN Online: 8/30/17). The other is for adults with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, approved in October. Other CAR-T cell therapies are in testing, including a treatment for multiple myeloma. “It’s a completely different way of treating cancer,” says pediatric oncologist Stephan Grupp, who directs the Cancer Immunotherapy Program at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Grupp spearheaded the clinical trials of the newly approved ALL therapy, called Kymriah.
Researchers are developing many different versions of CAR-T cell therapies, but the basic premise is the same: Doctors remove a patient’s T cells (immune system cells that attack invaders) from a blood sample and genetically modify them to produce artificial proteins on their surfaces. Those proteins, called chimeric antigen receptors, recognize the cancer cells in the patient’s body. After the modified T cells make many copies of themselves in the lab, they’re unleashed in the patient’s bloodstream to find and kill cancer cells. CAR-T cell therapy is particularly exciting because it works well in people whose cancers haven’t responded to other available treatments, says Renier Brentjens, an oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. Of the 63 kids and young adults treated in a clinical trial of Kymriah, 83 percent had their cancers go into remission within three months. Now that these therapies have been clinically approved, there’s been an “explosion of interest” in the approach, says Dario Campano, an immunopathologist at the National University Cancer Institute in Singapore. Going forward, he expects to see even more rapid progress in the technology. Fifteen years ago, Campana helped develop the chimeric antigen receptor that’s used in Kymriah today. For now, the treatments are approved for use only when other treatments have failed, but someday CAR-T cell therapy could be the first treatment doctors try, he says.
One drawback is the price. Kymriah costs $475,000 for a onetime treatment, according to Novartis, which makes Kymriah. The non-Hodgkin lymphoma treatment made by Gilead Sciences, called Yescarta, is listed at $373,000. The total price tag for treatment could be higher when the costs of dealing with side effects and complications are factored in.
The approach is approved only for blood cancers. Using CAR-T cell therapy on solid tumors will require finding ways to get the T cells past additional cellular roadblocks, Grupp says.
Have you fallen behind on your reading this year? Or maybe you’ve plowed through your must-reads and are ready for more. Science News has got you covered. Here are the staff’s picks for some of the best science books of 2017. Find detailed reviews from previous issues in the links below or in our Editors pick: Favorite books of 2017.
Against the Grain James C. Scott
Armed with the latest archaeological research, a political anthropologist argues that the rise of civilization came at a big cost. The initial switch from hunting and gathering to agricultural states brought poor diets, labor-intensive work, outbreaks of infectious diseases and other hardships (SN: 10/14/17, p. 28). Yale Univ., $26
The Great Quake Henry Fountain
Historical records and interviews with survivors flesh out this tale of how a massive earthquake in Alaska in 1964 provided geologists with key evidence needed to verify the theory of plate tectonics (SN: 9/16/17, p. 32). Crown, $28
Eclipse Frank Close
More than just a primer on the science of solar eclipses, this memoir chronicles a physicist’s lifetime fascination with the celestial phenomenon and introduces readers to the quirky world of eclipse chasers (SN: 5/13/17, p. 28). Oxford Univ., $21.95
Rise of the Necrofauna Britt Wray
Resurrecting woolly mammoths, passenger pigeons and other extinct creatures isn’t just a technological problem, as this book explains. “De-extinction” is also rife with ethical dilemmas (SN: 10/28/17, p. 28). Greystone Books, $26.95
Big Chicken Maryn McKenna
Antibiotics transformed chicken farming, to the detriment of the birds and of human health, a journalist contends. Widespread use of the drugs fueled the industrialization of poultry production and the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria (SN: 9/30/17, p. 30). National Geographic, $27
Inferior Angela Saini
A science writer makes a persuasive case that centuries of biased thinking and flawed scientific research have reinforced sexist stereotypes about women (SN: 9/2/17, p. 27). Beacon Press, $25.95
Caesar’s Last Breath Sam Kean
Through fun historical anecdotes and lesser-known backstories of scientific greats, this entertaining book profiles the chemical elements that make up the air we breathe and traces the history of Earth’s atmosphere (SN: 7/8/17 & 7/22/17, p. 38). Little, Brown and Co., $28
Cannibalism Bill Schutt
The grisly practice of eating your own kind turns out to be widespread in the animal kingdom, a zoologist explains in this captivating look at cannibalism (SN: 2/18/17, p. 29). Algonquin Books, $26.95
The Lost City of the Monkey God Douglas Preston
A journalist tags along on an archaeological expedition to search for the real-life remains of a mythological city in this rainforest adventure tale that morphs into a medical mystery (SN: 2/4/17, p. 28). Grand Central Publishing, $28
The Death and Life of the Great Lakes Dan Egan
Invasive species, urbanization and other threats have wreaked havoc on the Great Lakes, but this book still finds some glimmers of hope in the scientists who are making headway in resuscitating the ecosystem (SN: 3/18/17, p. 30). W.W. Norton & Co., $27.95
How to Tame a Fox Lee Alan Dugatkin and Lyudmila Trut
An experiment to replay animal domestication by selectively breeding wild silver foxes is lovingly retold, including by the researcher who has kept the project alive for nearly 60 years (SN: 5/13/17, p. 29). Univ. of Chicago, $26
Making Contact Sarah Scoles
In the face of numerous obstacles, Jill Tarter still managed to spearhead the search for extraterrestrial intelligence for decades, as this biography recounts (SN: 8/5/17, p. 26). Pegasus Books, $27.95
A Crack in Creation Jennifer A. Doudna and Samuel H. Sternberg
Two experts, including one of the pioneers of CRISPR/Cas9, discuss the science and ethics of gene editing. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, $28
These book reviews contain links to Amazon.com. Science News is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. Please see our FAQ for more details.
