US Approves CRISPR Pigs For Food (technologyreview.com)
- Reference: 0177265203
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/05/02/1651254/us-approves-crispr-pigs-for-food
- Source link: https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/05/02/1116059/the-us-approves-crispr-pigs-for-food/
PRRS causes losses of approximately $300 million annually in the US alone by killing piglets and spreading rapidly through factory farms. According to Matt Culbertson, chief operating officer of Genus subsidiary Pig Improvement Company, the gene-edited pork could reach US markets sometime next year. Before launching sales to pig farms, Genus must secure regulatory approval in key export markets including Mexico, Canada, Japan, and China.
[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/05/02/1116059/the-us-approves-crispr-pigs-for-food/
No need to check on export markets (Score:4, Insightful)
US exports are pretty much over, at least for the next 3.7 years. They might as well release now.
We exported 3 metric tons at 8.63 billion (Score:2)
TIL that Mexicans love American pigs. I've always been told that China is one of our top markets, but they're only #3. Source [1]https://www.porkcheckoff.org/markets/us-pork-exports/ [porkcheckoff.org]. It's pretty weird that China can't produce enough pigs to feed their people. I thought the point of pigs is that they're easy to raise and can live off anything. I know the USA is one of the very best at agricultural practices, worldwide...but you'd think pigs would be much cheaper to raise in Mexico and China.
[1] https://www.porkcheckoff.org/markets/us-pork-exports/
MMM...CHRISPY PIG (Score:2)
arrggllhelehhargglehhge...
Kennedy is okay with this? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Considering how anti-science he is, one would think he would be wholly against this.
For all we know this gene editing might cause autism. /s
Re: (Score:2)
Does it mean that the new pigs won;t need as many vaccines ?
Man, I'm never getting used to the 31st Century (Score:2)
Caffeinated bacon? Baconated grapefruit?
Admiral Crunch??
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot [1]tomacco [youtube.com].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX08tDXPnz0
I prefefer my pigs to be more CRISPR-er (Score:3, Funny)
Mmmm, genetically modified bacon, mmmmmm.
Re: (Score:2)
Unironically yes, GMO's and CRISPR food science is cool as shit imo and should be considered an advantage if it cuts down the use of herbicides and pesticides and it makes things cheaper and potentially better in a lot of ways. We all learned the maize to corn story. [1]More tomato? [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvEiFq77c3c
Re: (Score:2)
I generally agree, though I always wonder what problem we'll have caused by, in this case for example, removing that receptor.
Re: (Score:2)
What problems could it cause that actually matter though? These are livestock and not wild animals with the possibility of some long-tail repercussions to the overall ecology down the road. As long as they can reproduce as needed, grow to the expected size, and stay healthy long enough to make it to slaughter, what else is there?
Re: (Score:2)
> What problems could it cause that actually matter though? These are livestock and not wild animals with the possibility of some long-tail repercussions to the overall ecology down the road. As long as they can reproduce as needed, grow to the expected size, and stay healthy long enough to make it to slaughter, what else is there?
What problems could it cause? I mean, that's exactly the thing I wonder about. Maybe it will cause unforeseen problems down the line that will impact their ability to "reproduce as needed, grow to the expected size, and stay healthy long enough to make it to slaughter". I'm not saying that means it's bad, or we shouldn't do it, I just figure that when it comes to making genetic modifications there's a good chance we're not able to simulate every possible consequence beforehand.
Re: (Score:2)
I think these are valid concerns, but I think gene editing is strictly better than random mutations, and we are doing literally nothing about random mutations.
Re: (Score:1)
> These are livestock and not wild animals with the possibility of some long-tail repercussions to the overall ecology down the road.
Sure as long as they stay livestock. Just look at the wild boar issue in Texas to see how that can become problematic. Pigs can and will eat just about anything, breed quickly, and are fairly smart.
Plus they don't really have a lot of natural predators in many countries. Wolves and mountain lions are 2 of the 3 predators in the US that can take on an adult hog. But their numbers are too few to make a dent. Bears being the other. But boars can live in places bears don't do well. The UK has no predators
Hog-killers in the UK (Score:1)
> The UK has no predators that can take down an adult hog.
[1]Legend has it [darkoxfordshire.co.uk] that a young man weilding a book of Aristotle took down a wild boar back in the day.
Maybe it was a juvenile boar?
[1] https://www.darkoxfordshire.co.uk/explore/christmas-traditions-at-queens-college/
Re: I prefefer my pigs to be more CRISPR-er (Score:2)
Greenpeace is concerned that the pigs will turn into Frankenstein's zombies and eat all of the whales into extinction, because nobody anywhere on the planet knows how proteins work and the unknown is to be feared and avoided at all costs, even if it means every Asian kid goes blind
Re: (Score:2)
CRISPieR pork rinds.
Re: (Score:2)
It should be. However, you first have to trust the government organizations responsible for vetting it. I think it's pretty clear at this point that a lot of people have been bought off by various business interests and care more about lining their own pockets rather than public health.
Re: (Score:1)
As they should! Caveat Emptor is the watchword of any free society!
Re: (Score:2)
This is the same government that inspects your non-GMO food. If you're not already skeptical about what you're getting I don't see how this should change anything for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Non-GMO businesses don't stand to gain anything from the government not doing its job. If I were a lettuce grower, I'd want the government to do its inspections correctly and prevent e.g. a salmonella outbreak turning customers away from lettuce.
Meanwhile, if I ran a company that did GMO research, then the government is the difference between making zero money and making hundreds of millions. Paying off a few people to the tune of a few million each would be well worth the cost.
Re:I prefefer my pigs to be more CRISPR-er (Score:4, Interesting)
IIRC, one of the arguments against Monsanto's genetic modification of crops was that they effectively made them resistant to glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup. This allowed them to then spray the cancer-causing herbicide all over everyone's food. They also engineered lines of crops that produced sterile seeds, guaranteeing that farmers would have to keep coming back to the company for each crop. This probably shouldn't come as a surprise, though, as Monsanto was also the genius behind DDT, and Agent Orange. At least these guys brought LEDs to market. They were bought by Bayer in 2016 in what is considered one of the worst corporate mergers in history.
In this case, using CRISPR to knock out the receptor PRRS uses, making the pigs immune to it. Similar things have been proposed to knock out CCR-5 in humans, conveying immunity to HIV for a similar reason. Now, what effects it might have on the pigs is a different question, but it isn't going to make the pigs poisonous or something. It wasn't the genetic modification that was the problem back with the crops, it was the fact that Monsanto was a bunch of greedy crooks and used genetic modification to enable them to carpet bomb the world's food with glyphosate.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I think unfortunately that's the more likely the scenario of really good and useful tech but wielded by the worst behaving corporate interests. Like roundup resistant crops is actually quite a good idea and it works from the perspective of the science but those negatives were the lawsuits and forced sterility since now it was made into a subscription mode. The science worked
I remember reading the outcome of that case and I believe the cancer contention never came through the data in terms of general
Re: (Score:2)
> IIRC, one of the arguments against Monsanto's genetic modification of crops was that they effectively made them resistant to glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup. This allowed them to then spray the cancer-causing herbicide all over everyone's food.
Does it actually cause cancer though?
The consensus among national pesticide regulatory agencies and scientific organizations is that labeled uses of glyphosate have demonstrated no evidence of human carcinogenicity. The Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), the European Commission, the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment have concluded that there is no evidence that gly
Re: (Score:2)
They should have approved the genetically modified salmon that have been around for a while now. Letting natural populations of fish recover is more important than having cheaper pork. We should look into extending it to other fish populations as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I hadn't heard about that but trying to find more information apparently the company went out of business this year
[1]https://ca.news.yahoo.com/aqua... [yahoo.com]
Unfortunate because you are right that there is a lot of potential in aquaculture and fishing practices.
[1] https://ca.news.yahoo.com/aquabounty-cutting-substantially-staff-plans-180926410.html
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm sure someone asked Trump about this and he was like "yes, I love crispy bacon".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That would make him a cannibal since he is a giant pig of a human being.
Re: (Score:2)
So glad I'm vegan.
Re: (Score:2)
And then someone asked RFK Jr and he had a panic attack.
Re: (Score:3)
And [1]square [youtu.be]
[1] https://youtu.be/gJtHMe3MltU?t=192
Re: (Score:1)
Crispy CRISPR pork scratchings. Mine's a pint of best, if you're in the chair.