“Biotech Barbie” Involved In Gene-Edited Human Embryo “Arms Race” To Direct Evolution of Humanity

Canadian entrepreneur Cathy Tie, known as “Biotech Barbie,” is leading an innovative push to genetically modify human embryos to remove the likelihood of disease, but it is technology that could also be used to create “designer babies” in a lab. Tie is the ex-wife of He Jiankui, the Chinese biophysicist who was sentenced to three years in prison after his experiment led to the birth of the first genetically modified twins in October 2018.

Tie, who founded the New York biotech company Origin Genomics, posted on X last fall that we are now in the “dawn of the biological arms race.” She added, Global superpowers are rushing to control the most important technology of humankind, one that has the power to direct evolution for the rest of humanity.”

On June 28, Tie posted that Origin Genomics received approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) to conduct human embryo gene-editing experiments in the New York City laboratory. The Dickey-Wicker Amendment prohibits federal money from being used to fund research that involves the creation or destruction of human embryos for research purposes. However, there is no federal oversight for human embryonic research if it is funded by private donors.

“Stopping this research will only drive bad actors to do it secretively,” Tie said to the Guardian in an interview. “There is no way to stop this. This is inevitable. The only way to proceed is to do it openly and transparently.”

Just days before celebrating her IRB approval on X, Tie said, “We are now at the turning point of human evolution. In all of human history, mutations took thousands of years to form. Now it can be created instantly, by our design. Unpublished data reveal 100% efficient gene editing at the embryo level. The technology is ready, and unlike AGI or BCI, it can be used today.”

Tie goes on to say in the thread that she was “at the center” of the case when Jiankui conducted his experiments that led to the birth of the gene-edited twins. She adds that the two primary criticisms of unintended edits and “mosaicism (not all of the cells have the same edit)” have been fully resolved in 2026. Tie condemned Chinese politics for crushing innovation and the US’s outdated bioethics frameworks for stifling further research.

Despite the existence of two US labs that have conducted research with private funding, Tie said the breakthroughs were still possible. She said the technology is ready for its next step. “Let us engineer entire generations of humans to be disease-free, to prevent suffering, to adapt,” Tie said.

Laurie Zoloth, professor of religion and ethics at the University of Chicago, warned that editing human embryos has both ethical and safety concerns. “The problem of mosaicism is not resolved; they don’t really understand the long-term effects of the intervention; and there is no way to do a trial of a pregnancy without, well, an actual pregnancy and a child,” Zoloth told CNN.

In an interview with NPR, Canadian Bioethicist Francoise Baylis said, “This is a continuation of the eugenic project that has been sort of in vogue at different times throughout civilization. This is just the modern incarnation of that idea.”

The National Human Genome Research Institute says “Eugenics is the scientifically inaccurate theory that humans can be improved through selective breeding of populations.” Previous eugenics methods included involuntary sterilization, segregation, and social exclusion. “Positive eugenics” is encouraging the fittest of society to reproduce while “negative eugenics” prevents or discourages minorities or those with genetic defects from reproducing.

Zoloth references the 1997 film “Gattaca,” a dystopian science fiction film that depicts one potential problem with using gene editing to create biologically “superior” human beings. In the film, society was divided into two classes – “valids” and “in-valids.” Those who were genetically engineered for the best traits and to be free from diseases were “valids.” Those who were born naturally were derogatorily called “invalids” and “God-children.”

“Might this road lead us to a future that is even more unfair and unjust with the children of the wealthiest curated, and the children of the poor without resources, unable to compete in a democracy?” Zoloth asked CNN.

Recent studies using base editing (a CRISPR variant) indicate an ability to achieve more precise single-base changes with reduced chromosomal damage compared to traditional CRISPR-Cas9. Two studies published in 2026 report lower off-target effects and mosaicism than previous methods, sparking a push by Tie and other biophysicists in this space to advocate for wider acceptance of the overall concept.

A study released this month reveals that a majority of respondents in the UK, the Netherlands, and Spain support the use of genetically modified embryos to eliminate severe or life-threatening conditions. 46% of Italian respondents also supported human embryo gene-editing for this purpose.

The ethical dilemma is still prevalent because embryo editing in a laboratory is not sufficient to understand the long-term implications of a human who is born after the embryo has been genetically modified and implanted into the womb. There is no way for researchers to evaluate the long-term effects without having women carry pregnancies to term and observing their health across all stages of life.

There have been no official updates on the health of the gene-edited twins that were born in 2018. Jiankui told a Japanese newspaper in 2024 that the twins were “perfectly healthy” with no problems, and he claims the evidence shows the genome editing was safe.