Polygenic Embryo Selection: A Glimpse into a Divisive Future of Human Enhancement and Deepening Inequality

Global - Ekhbary News Agency

Polygenic Embryo Selection: A Glimpse into a Divisive Future of Human Enhancement and Deepening Inequality

The realm of genetic engineering often conjures images from science fiction, yet the capabilities of modern biotechnology are rapidly bringing such concepts into reality. Among the most ambitious and potentially transformative of these is polygenic embryo selection. This cutting-edge technology allows prospective parents undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) to evaluate embryos based on their genetic profiles, theoretically predicting the likelihood of a child manifesting certain traits or developing specific diseases. While the promise of mitigating future health risks or enhancing desirable characteristics is compelling, experts caution that this technology, currently in its nascent stages, carries profound ethical implications that could drastically widen existing social divides.

In their forthcoming book, "What We Inherit: How New Technologies and Old Myths Are Shaping Our Genomic Future" (Princeton University Press, 2026), bioethicist Daphne Martschenko and sociologist Sam Trejo delve into the complexities surrounding these emerging technologies. They argue that for many traits and diseases, the offerings from companies providing polygenic embryo selection are, at present, "little more than snake oil." The accuracy of these "polygenic scores" is currently limited, meaning the ability to reliably predict outcomes or make meaningful selections is questionable for most characteristics. However, the authors underscore a critical point: this accuracy is projected to improve significantly in the coming decades, turning what is now largely speculative into a potent, and potentially problematic, tool.

The primary concern articulated by Martschenko and Trejo revolves around the exacerbation of structural inequality. If current trends persist, access to polygenic embryo selection will remain exclusive to a privileged few. The process of IVF itself is prohibitively expensive, with a single cycle costing between $15,000 and $20,000. Most couples typically require three to four cycles for success, often incurring additional costs for embryo freezing or donor eggs. This financial barrier alone places IVF, let alone advanced genetic screening, far beyond the reach of working- and middle-class families in countries like the United States, where private health insurance coverage is often limited and public programs like Medicaid offer no coverage for IVF.

The added layer of polygenic embryo selection further inflates these costs. Companies such as Genomic Prediction charge $1,000 per embryo analyzed, while Orchid Health demands $2,500. Heliospect, another provider, reportedly charges up to $50,000 to test 100 embryos. Without robust regulation, this economic barrier guarantees that only the wealthiest segments of society will be able to leverage these technologies, effectively creating a two-tiered system of reproductive choice and, potentially, genetic advantage.

Beyond the financial divide, a significant scientific hurdle known as the "portability problem" introduces another layer of inequity. Polygenic scores are often developed and validated primarily using data from individuals of European ancestries, leading to decreased effectiveness when applied to non-European populations. This means that communities of color, already facing systemic health disparities, could be largely excluded from any potential health benefits offered by embryo selection. The authors highlight the case of Pacific Islander Americans, who often suffer higher rates of diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease due to factors like colonialism, poverty, and inadequate access to healthy foods. If polygenic selection remains less effective for these groups, it could inadvertently lead to a future where they face systematically higher genetic risks for chronic conditions compared to White Americans with European genetic ancestry, thereby deepening existing health gaps.

The implications extend beyond health into educational and socioeconomic spheres. Imagine a scenario where upper-class families can utilize advanced genetic screening to select for embryos with traits potentially linked to academic success, while working-class families cannot. This could further entrench and magnify existing educational disparities, where children from affluent backgrounds are already significantly more likely to graduate from high school. The authors warn of a "biological reification of structural inequality," a frightening prospect where societal disadvantages, historically rooted in social and economic factors, become intertwined with perceived genetic predispositions, creating a new, genetically-produced source of racial and economic structural inequality.

The trajectory of polygenic embryo selection necessitates urgent global dialogue and thoughtful regulatory frameworks. Without proactive measures to ensure equitable access and address the inherent biases in its application, this groundbreaking technology risks becoming a powerful engine for deepening societal divides, rather than a tool for universal human betterment. The choices made today about its governance will profoundly shape the genomic future and the very definition of equity for generations to come.

Ekhbary News Agency