Connect with us

Business

Silicon Valley sets its sights on building the perfect baby

Published

on



If you could design your ideal baby, what would you choose? A lover of naps who sleeps through the night? A mind for math and an affinity for the viola? For the founders of fertility tech startup Herasight, this is not a hypothetical. 

Herasight founder Michael Christensen is 6-foot-6, and even in a world where taller men are perceived as stronger and more competent, it’s a bit much. He wants his future children to be shorter and more comfortable on commercial planes. 

“It’s annoying to be super tall,” he said. “Nothing is made for you.” 

Chief science officer Tobias Wolfram has already banked frozen embryos with his partner in preparation for their future family. His great-grandparents lived past 100 with no cancer or serious health problems, suggesting a family tendency toward healthy aging. But there’s depression on his side of the family. 

“I’d really like to make sure that’s not passed down,” he said. Wolfram has waited five years for Herasight’s technology to reach its current state, so that he can screen embryos for mental health indicators. 

Jonathan Anomaly, a communications executive with Herasight, is approaching 50 and planning a family with his partner, 37. His grandmother was a genius, said Anomaly, but she suffered from five different autoimmune disorders that kept her homebound. He plans to screen embryos for autoimmune diseases, and like Christensen, Anomaly said he’ll screen for height. But he wants potential sons to be slightly taller than his 5 feet 9 inches. 

This is the new era of family planning emerging across the Bay Area, a place known for its concentration of extreme wealth, high risk tolerance, affinity for new technology, and early-adopter mentality. Rather than having babies the Where Did I Come From? way, prospective parents are blazing an unprecedented approach to family planning. Gone are the wealthy parents who pay women for their eggs because they have desirable traits or who seek out sperm donors based on Ivy League degrees and athletic prowess. This is reproduction reimagined through the lens of algorithms and data science down to the genetic blueprint that makes up a human being. 

This new method means opting for IVF from the start even if infertility isn’t an issue to create embryos. From there, prospective parents are investing thousands in different types of next-level embryo screening that can essentially spin up versions of your future children’s health prospects by showing their risk of inherited diseases, childhood cancers, schizophrenia, autism, and Types 1 and 2 diabetes. Other traits like height, body mass index, musical ability, and higher IQ points are also among the offerings at certain firms. And with billionaires backing fertility tech startups and funding new research related to conception and embryo selection, the boundaries between proven science, emerging possibilities, and aspirational hype become increasingly complex to parse.

On the outer edges, scientists and researchers are studying the efficacy of penis transplants, and five have been performed worldwide so far, including one in the U.S. Uterus transplants have led to 29 live births, nearly all by C-section. A team of Chinese scientists successfully conceived mice with two male mice fathers—without DNA from a mother mouse. And more is on the horizon, including AI-enabled and automated IVF processes that could lower costs substantially and artificial womb development. A height and intelligence screening startup backed by Reddit and Seven Seven Six fund founder Alexis Ohanian plastered New York City subway stations with ads this month for Nucleus Genomics, imploring riders to “Have Your Best Baby.”

The global IVF industry remains a nascent $28 billion enterprise, and investment in women’s health and IVF-related tech startups began picking up last year, with 2024 standing out as the largest year for investment at $2 billion, a 55% increase over 2023. 

Some of these new add-ons to IVF are driven by people who just “want to know” about their embryos in the way people want to find out the sex of their baby before birth, said Barry Behr, director of Stanford’s IVF lab and a professor of obstetrics and gynecology who is known for his groundbreaking work in improving IVF and advancing the field of embryo selection. Other times, it’s about how to make more money from the IVF process or lower the cost for patients. Regardless of the motivation, for anyone who has had a child or relative who has been sick with a debilitating disease or condition, “you know how that makes you feel,” said Behr, who is an advisor to Orchid Health, which offers embryo screening. 

“A parent would do anything—give a kidney, give a limb, or whatever you could give to a child to avert suffering,” said Behr. “So don’t tell me how anyone could even question doing something to your embryo that we do for other reasons routinely.” 

Yet the rapid pace of innovation and investment has created a regulatory and ethical vacuum, experts have observed. “Technology will always outpace the law,” said Rich Vaughn, a prominent fertility lawyer who has seen the field evolve during the past two decades. “Technologies develop first; law and regulations make things legally safer for everyone, but they trail behind.”

Moreover, the controversial process of embryo editing—which refers to changing the DNA of an embryo before it is implanted and is illegal in 70 countries or banned through funding restrictions—is being studied and backed financially despite the considerable risk involved. Coinbase cofounder and billionaire Brian Armstrong said he invested in embryo-editing startup Preventive, which has raised $30 million. Armstrong is joined by OpenAI CEO and cofounder Sam Altman’s husband, Oliver Mulherin. 

Another startup focused on embryo editing is led by former Thiel Fellow Cathy Tie, who wants to genetically correct mutations in embryos before they are implanted to dramatically minimize the risks of inherited disease. (Investor Peter Thiel offers a two-year, $200,000 fellowship program to entrepreneurs who want to drop out of or take time off from college to focus on developing an idea.)

“I believe that gene correction technology is much more effective in achieving those goals than embryo screening,” said Tie, cofounder of Manhattan Genomics. She plans to begin testing on nonhuman primates early next year before moving to human embryos, pending regulatory approval. 

Tie believes many couples, especially those with relatively older women, wind up with too few embryos to choose from after they go through the process of stimulating their follicles and retrieving eggs. “Let’s say I’m a woman in my mid-thirties,” said Tie. “I’m lucky if I’ll get 10 eggs, and from that I’ll maybe get two embryos. Then a company will tell me one embryo is better than the other.” Despite public controversy over embryo editing, which alters genes that would be passed down to new generations and involves irreversible decision-making, Tie said she has received a lot of support from researchers, scientists, and IVF doctors. 

Hank Greely, a Stanford law professor who specializes in issues surrounding biomedical technologies and authored The End of Sex, a 2016 book that predicted humans will eventually reproduce mainly through IVF, told Fortune screening for cosmetic traits like hair, eye, and skin color or nose shape isn’t far off. 

People in Silicon Valley, where Greely lives,are most interested in influencing their offspring’s intelligence, personality, musical and sports ability, and proficiency in math. Right now those are areas scientists “know almost nothing about,” he said. 

But the technology is moving at a swift pace, and some experts think the line between acceptable and not will evolve as well. 

“There was a time when it wasn’t appropriate to show your knees, and now you can wear a thong at the beach,” said Behr. “The line moves with time.”

The new line in tech-assisted IVF

Reproductive tech startup CEO Noor Siddiqui has a personal inspiration behind founding polygenic screening firm Orchid Health. Her mother suffers from a rare genetic eye condition called retinitis pigmentosa, which led to progressive vision loss and her mother’s eventual blindness. Siddiqui, also a Thiel Fellow, said she was motivated to pursue embryo screening after watching her mother’s condition progress. Siddiqui also plans to have four children, and has screened her own embryos using Orchid’s technology. 

The firm occupies the middle ground of the IVF tech market—pushing the boundaries of science, but mainly to prevent disease.

For years now, prospective parents who use IVF to have babies have been able to opt for preimplantation genetic testing to make sure the embryo has the correct number of chromosomes. In addition to chromosomal abnormalities like trisomy 21—an extra copy of chromosome 21 that causes Down syndrome—tests also scan for life-altering diseases stemming from single-gene mutations like sickle cell anemia or cystic fibrosis. 

Orchid offers “polygenic risk” scoring for their embryos. The startup counts Day One Ventures and Prometheus Fund among its backers, as well as angel investors including Figma CEO Dylan Field and 23andMe cofounder Anne Wojcicki. Eventbrite cofounders Julia and Kevin Hartz have also invested in Orchid, and the couple screened their embryos for inherited diseases including Alzheimer’s before having twins they dubbed “Cohort 2” after their first two daughters were in their teens. Published reports have anonymously quoted sources claiming that Shivon Zilis, who has children with the world’s wealthiest man, Elon Musk, has used Orchid’s services. 

Orchid’s approach involves whole genome sequencing, and expands on traditional screening by sequencing nearly all of an embryo’s genome. Siddiqui said Orchid scans for more than 1,000 genetic diseases as one option for clients, while another option scans for 3,000 single-gene diseases, covering inherited and spontaneous changes in the embryo. Traditional tests scan for chromosome numbers and single-gene disease. She often compares it to publishing a book that a writer would want to be fully accurate. 

“If your proofreader didn’t actually read your book to check for spelling errors, missing words, missing punctuation, would you be satisfied if they just told you all the chapters were present?” she said. Siddiqui said parents are also interested in the genetics of autism, and Orchid screens can detect genetic mutations in specific genes known to cause autism spectrum disorder, although it cannot predict all autism risk. Experts have warned that there is no reliable test for autism, although recentstudies have found a genetic cause in 25% to 50% of cases. 

“We want the maximum amount of information to be provided to parents to mitigate the maximum amount of risk when it comes to genetics,” said Siddiqui. 

Herasight, the startup with the three founders who each are hoping to screen for traits in their next generation, recently emerged from stealth mode after several years and conducts polygenic screening with a different technical approach that allows it to work with any IVF clinic. It screens the data for potential childhood and adult diseases and health problems, and in some cases height, IQ, longevity, and mental health conditions like depression. 

The firm offers a free IVF calculator so prospective parents can get an idea of their chances at conception, from retrieving eggs through birth, based on more than 100,000 IVF treatment cycles recorded in the U.K. national registry. Herasight’s published studies show it can reduce disease risks by 20% to 44% when selecting among five embryos. The validation results come from the firm’s own research rather than independent studies, but Herasight has published its methods and data for others to review. The company’s research has shown what they call “positive pleiotropy,” which means when selecting against one disease, parents often reduce risks for related conditions, too. 

“Everyone has a unique family history, so we don’t have one type of customer,” Christensen told Fortune. Sometimes a prospective parent will come to the firm, excited about screening embryos for IQ, and then they’ll discover a BRCA gene mutation, which can increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancers. Then that becomes the top priority in screening embryos, said Christensen. Anomaly said every embryo-screening choice represents a tradeoff. “Creating the perfect baby—that doesn’t exist,” he added. 

Kyle Farh, a scientist with DNA sequencing and genetic analysis company Illumina’s artificial intelligence lab, said a huge gap in data interpretation remains at the moment because AI models simply need more information. About 1 million people globally have sequenced their genomes, and realistically about 1 billion people need to sequence their genomes for models to function more meaningfully. 

“It’s a chicken and egg problem,” said Farh. “We can predict [traits], and we can show that there’s some significant correlation between our predictions and what happens in real life, but the correlation is still very poor.”

But for parents looking to prevent a major life-altering disease, the technology has been transformative. Software engineer and consultant Roshan George and art director Julie Kang, who live in San Francisco, hired Orchid to screen their embryos after the couple discovered they shared a genetic mutation that could cause profound deafness in their children. One day after having their newborn daughter, Astra, it took about two minutes to find out if the thousands they invested in embryo screening had helped them toward the outcome they wanted for their child. A tech gave Astra a hearing test in their sunny Sutter Health hospital room, the culmination of months of genetic analysis and embryo risk scores. 

“I mean, we spent all this money, we did this whole thing and got through all this,” said George. The test showed Astra’s hearing was normal, and the new parents were relieved and are planning for another child soon; they still have screened embryos, George said. 

Cases of preventing disease are growing, which is giving these startups a boost. And in addition to screening for certain health risks, founders are hopeful that the impact on pregnancy loss for couples and families who go through IVF will be substantial. Certainresearch shows chromosomal abnormalities are responsible for about 50% of first-trimester miscarriages, and the hope is that screening allows people to prioritize embryos most likely to result in successful pregnancies. 

But the use cases that scientists and ethicists fret about aren’t quite here—yet. “Even the most optimistic folks—and I think scientists and most geneticists are way too optimistic—think they can account for, oh, three or four IQ points,” said End of Sex author Greely. “Plus, we know plenty of ways to improve IQ test results with things like good childhood nutrition, childhood vaccinations so kids don’t get sick, and parents who read to their kids.” Brains are incredibly complicated, he said, and may ultimately prove too complicated to screen for intelligence and qualities like extroversion. 

“It makes great headlines, it makes great clickbait, it makes great dystopian science fiction,” said Greely. “But the designer baby idea? At least when you’re talking about behavioral traits, it’s not very plausible—at least for decades.”

But given the intensity and expectations of the tech-oriented set interested in this brave new world, NYU bioethicist Arthur Caplan notes there’s a danger that some parents might view their children as products and potentially even “commercial failures.” He questions how positive this will be for kids. “When you start saying, ‘I tested you, and I have a certain outcome that I expect,’ you’re taking away the kids’ future,” said Caplan. “You’re making them less free because you have expectations, and they better turn out that way.”

Victoria Fritz and her husband, who used Herasight to screen embryos to try to prevent passing along her Type 1 diabetes, hope to do an embryo transfer in January, and are realistic about the prospect.

“I feel like, regardless of what embryo we choose, we will hopefully have a happy, healthy child and be a happy family regardless,” said Fritz. The screening provides peace of mind, she noted, but “it doesn’t guarantee that your child is going to have a perfect, healthy life.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Nearly three-quarters of Trump voters think the cost of living is bad or the worst ever

Published

on



President Donald Trump and his administration insist that costs are coming down, but voters are skeptical, including those who put him back in the White House.

Despite Republicans getting hammered on affordability in off-year elections last month, Trump continues to downplay the issue, contrasting with his message while campaigning last year.

“The word affordability is a con job by the Democrats,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. “The word affordability is a Democrat scam.”

But a new Politico poll found that 37% of Americans who voted for him in 2024 believe the cost of living is the worst they can ever remember, and 34% say it’s bad but can think of other times when it was worse.

The White House has said Trump inherited an inflationary economy from President Joe Biden and point to certain essentials that have come down since Trump began his second term, such as gasoline prices.

The poll shows that 57% of Trump voters say Biden still bears full or almost full responsibility for today’s economy. But 25% blame Trump completely or almost completely.

That’s as the annual rate of consumer inflation has steadily picked up since Trump launched his global trade war in April, and grocery prices have gained 1.4% between January and September.

Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance pleaded for “patience” on the economy last month as Americans want to see prices decline, not just grow at a slower pace.

Even a marginal erosion in Trump’s electoral coalition could tip the scales in next year’s midterm elections, when the president will not be on the ballot to draw supporters.

A soft spot could be Republicans who don’t identify as “MAGA.” Among those particular voters, 29% said Trump has had a chance to change things in the economy but hasn’t taken it versus 11% of MAGA voters who said that.

Across all voters, 45% named groceries as the most challenging things to afford, followed by housing (38%) and health care (34%), according to the Politico poll.

The poll comes as wealthier households are having trouble affording basics, while discount retailers like Walmart and even Dollar Tree are seeing more higher-income customers.

And in a viral Substack post last month, Michael Green, chief strategist and portfolio manager for Simplify Asset Management, argued that the real poverty line should be around $140,000.

“If the crisis threshold—the floor below which families cannot function—is honestly updated to current spending patterns, it lands at $140,000,” he wrote. “What does that tell you about the $31,200 line we still use? It tells you we are measuring starvation.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Apple is experiencing its biggest leadership shakeup since Steve Jobs died, with over half a dozen key executives headed for the exits

Published

on



Apple is currently undergoing the most extensive executive overhaul in recent history, with a wave of senior leadership departures that marks the company’s most significant management realignment since its visionary co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs died in 2011. The leadership exodus spans critical divisions from artificial intelligence to design, legal affairs, environmental policy, and operations, which will have major repercussions for Apple’s direction for the foreseeable future.

On Thursday, Apple announced Lisa Jackson, its VP of environment, policy, and social initiatives, as well as Kate Adams, the company’s general counsel, will both retire in 2026. Adams has been Apple’s chief legal officer since 2017, and Jackson joined Apple in 2013. Adams will step down late next year, while Jackson will leave next month.

Jackson and Adams join a growing list of top executives who have either left or announced their exits this year. AI chief John Giannandrea announced his retirement earlier this month, and its design lead Alan Dye, who took charge of Apple’s all-important user interface design after Jony Ive left the company in 2019, was just poached by Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta this week.​

The scope of the turnover is unprecedented in the Tim Cook era. In July, Jeff Williams, Apple’s COO who was long thought to succeed Cook as CEO, decided to retire after 27 years with the company. One month later, Apple’s CFO Luca Maestri also decided to step back from his role. And the design division, which just lost Dye, also lost Billy Sorrentino, a senior design director, who left for Meta with Dye. Things have been particularly turbulent for Apple’s AI team, though: Ruoming Pang, who headed its AI Foundation Models Team, left for Meta in July and took about 100 engineers with him. Ke Yang, who led AI-driven web search for Siri, and Jian Zhang, Apple’s AI robotics lead, also both left for Meta.

Succession talks heat up

While all of these departures are a big deal for Apple, the timing may not be a coincidence. Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times have reported on Apple ramping up its succession plan efforts in preparation for Cook, who has led the company since 2011, to retire in 2026. Cook turned 65 in November and has grown Apple’s market cap from about $350 billion to a whopping $4 trillion under his tenure. Bloomberg reports John Ternus has emerged as the leading internal candidate to replace him.​

Apple choosing Ternus would be a pretty major departure from what’s worked for Apple during the past decade, which has been letting someone with an operational background and a strong grasp of the global supply chain lead the company. Ternus, meanwhile, is focused on hardware development, specifically for the iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch. But it’s that technical expertise that’s made him an attractive candidate, especially as much of the recent criticism about Apple has revolved around the company entering new product categories (Vision Pro, but also the ill-fated Apple Car), as well as its struggling AI efforts.​

Now, of course, with so many executives leaving Apple, succession plans extend beyond the CEO role. Apple this week announced it’s bringing in Jennifer Newstead, who currently works as Meta’s chief legal officer, to replace Adams as the company’s general counsel starting March 1, 2026. Newstead is expected to handle both legal and government affairs, which is essentially a consolidation of responsibilities among Apple’s leadership team, merging Adams’ and Jacksons’ roles into one.​

Alan Dye, meanwhile, will be replaced by Stephen Lemay, a move that’s reportedly being celebrated within Apple and its design team in particular. John Gruber, who’s reported on Apple for decades and has deep ties within the company, wrote a pretty scathing critique about Dye, but in that same breath said employees are borderline “giddy” about Lemay—who has worked on every major Apple interface design since 1999, including the very first iPhone—taking over.

Meanwhile, on the AI team, John Giannandrea will be replaced by Amar Subramanya, who led AI strategy and development efforts at Google for about 16 years before a brief stint at Microsoft.

Hitting the reset button

All of the above departures cover critical functions for Apple: AI competitiveness, design innovation, regulatory navigation, and operational efficiency. Each replacement brings specialized expertise that aligns with the challenges Cook’s successor will inherit.

The real test will be execution across multiple fronts simultaneously. Can Subramanya accelerate Apple’s AI development to match competitive threats? Will Lemay’s design leadership maintain Apple’s interface advantages as AI reshapes user interaction? Can Newstead navigate regulatory challenges while preserving Apple’s privacy-first approach?

What’s certain is the company will look fundamentally different in 2026—and the executive team that grew Apple into a $4 trillion behemoth is departing. The transformation could be as profound as any since Jobs handed the reins to his COO at the time, Tim Cook, 14 years ago.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk says Tesla owners will soon be able to text while driving

Published

on



Elon Musk has given the thumbs up to some Tesla drivers texting behind the wheel.

The EV maker recently introduced a 30-day free trial of its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) (FSD) features on its North American cars, which has traffic-aware cruise control, autosteer, and autopark. To the Tesla CEO, the automated features in place are enough to condone texting while driving. According to safety experts, Musk’s suggestion is actually plain illegal.

In response to an X user’s question on Thursday about being able to text and drive while a Tesla is operating FSD v14.2.1, its latest full self-driving capabilities, Musk responded: “Depending on context of surrounding traffic, yes.”

Musk’s response mirrors his comments at Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting last month, where he said the company would soon feel comfortable with a multitasking driver.

“We’re actually getting to the point where we almost feel comfortable allowing people to text and drive, which is kind of the killer [application] because that’s really what people want to do,” Musk said. “Actually right now, the car is a little strict about keeping eyes on the road, but I’m confident that in the next month or two—we’re going to look closely at the safety statistics—but we will allow you to text and drive essentially.”

With a $1 trillion pay package on the line, Musk has worked to jumpstart Tesla after continued lagging sales. His lofty automation goals tied to the compensation plan include delivering 20 million vehicles and having 10 million active FSD subscriptions, as well as 1 million robotaxis on the commercially operational.

FSD roadbumps 

Tesla’s FSD rollout, much like its other automated technologies, has hit snags. In October, the U.S. Department of Transportation-run National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) opened an investigation into the EV maker, alleging its FSD software violated traffic laws and led to six crashes, four of which resulted in injuries. It cited data from 18 complaints from Tesla users claiming the FSD-equipped cars ran red lights or swerved into other lanes, including into oncoming traffic.

There is another complication for Musk’s vision of a Tesla owner typing away behind the wheel: Texting and driving is illegal in nearly the entire country, barring Montana, according to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. According to the NHTSA, distracted driving resulted in 3,275 deaths in 2023.

Even Tesla has warned owners against texting while driving, even with some automated features in place: Tesla’s Model Y Owner’s Manual asks drivers not to use their phones while driving with Autopilot software enabled. (Autopilot refers to Tesla’s basic driver assistance features requiring hands on the steering wheel, while FSD is a paid subscription package with enhanced automated features and does not require a driver to have hands on the steering wheel.)

“Do not use handheld devices while using Autopilot features,” the manual said. “If the cabin camera detects a handheld device while Autopilot is engaged, the touchscreen displays a message reminding you to pay attention.”

Tesla did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

What experts are saying

Alexandra Mueller, senior research scientist for Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, told Fortune condoning texting while behind the wheel completely undermines the purpose of Tesla’s current automated features Tesla, which are a level 2 on the five-point automation scale, meaning the models require the driver to still be fully in control of the vehicle.

“Having partial automation support doesn’t mean that you suddenly can kick back and text and not worry about driving,” Mueller said, “because that’s just not how these systems are designed to be used—and that’s also not the responsibility that the driver has when using these systems, and that’s by design.”

She said automated systems like Tesla’s are not designed to replace the driver and work because they are “human-in-the-loop” and were designed to support the driver’s discretion behind the wheel. Beeps and notifications from the vehicle if a driver changes lanes without signalling can help shape good behaviors, Mueller noted. Encouraging multitasking behind the wheel turns these features into convenience factors, rather than the safety precautions they were intended to be.

“Suddenly all your safety assessments on the technology don’t apply anymore, because you’ve changed the very nature of how the technology is supporting human-in-the-loop behavior,” Mueller concluded.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.