CEO Says New Tool Allows Couples To 'Genetically Optimize Their Children'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The CEO of a U.S.-based biotech company that developed software to enable parents to select embryos used for in vitro fertilization (IVF) based on genetic markers, told Newsweek that this "genetic optimization" would help people "live longer and thrive."
Kian Sadeghi created his DNA testing and analysis company Nucleus to "give parents direct insights into whatever matters most to them when they choose their embryo."
Nucleus offers the world's first genetic optimization software that allows parents to have preferences over their child's genetics during the IVF process, with the aim of reducing preventable genetic disease.
"There's no moment when parents need to know how genetics will impact them and their loved ones more than when they're preparing to start a family," Sadeghi said.
Genetic disease impacts millions of children in the U.S., with Down syndrome, Thalassemia, cystic fibrosis, Tay-Sachs disease and sickle cell disease among the most common.
As well as screening for these sorts of conditions, Nucleus also analyses embryos for chronic conditions like Alzheimer's disease and heart disease.
In total, it checks for almost 1,000 traits and conditions, from cystic fibrosis to heart disease, cancer risks, and mental health conditions like anxiety and ADHD.
Kian Sadeghi, CEO of biotech company Nucleus, told Newsweek that "genetic optimization" would help people "live longer and thrive."
Kian Sadeghi, CEO of biotech company Nucleus, told Newsweek that "genetic optimization" would help people "live longer and thrive."
Newsweek/Getty Images/Canva
Sadeghi said that many families "have experienced death at the hands of these common conditions and seek to prevent similar suffering."
He told Newsweek that his own experience of the loss and grief brought on by genetic disease was actually what guided him to set up his company.
When he was 7 years old, his 15 year-old cousin suddenly died in her sleep from what he said was a "preventable genetic disease."
"My parents were heartbroken and terrified that my siblings and I would have the same fate," he said.
Being so young at the time, Sadeghi said "it didn't make sense to me why someone would drop dead at 15, when other 15-year-olds are fine."
He said that the loss of his cousin was the the first time he "intuitively grasped this idea of generational health."
"Seeing this genetic lottery, when someone wins and someone doesn't, really stuck with me," he said.
As he grew up, he developed a keen interest in genetics in school and by the time he got to college he was determined to create software that "could prevent what happened to my family from happening to anyone else in the world."
After dropping out of the University of Pennsylvania, he then set up Nucleus in 2020, and believes that his software will spare families from the grief he himself felt when he lost a loved one to a preventable genetic disease.
Kian Sadeghi, CEO of Nucleus, a company that has developed software to help parents screen their embryos for genetic conditions.
Kian Sadeghi, CEO of Nucleus, a company that has developed software to help parents screen their embryos for genetic conditions.
Uncredited/Nucleus
Sadeghi added that his company is "democratizing access to genetic information," as at the moment, he said genetic testing results can be hard to decipher without a clear explanation from a doctor.
"We're putting comprehensive, actionable data directly in parents' hands with tools that let them actually understand and compare their options," Sadeghi said.
However, given that the software allows parents to genetically "optimize" their children, it raises various ethical questions, ones which members of the public have taken to social media to ask.
Some social media users on X, formerly known as Twitter, voiced their concern that genetic screening could have unknown, secondary impacts, while others criticized Nucleus for oversimplifying the issue, saying "we can't predict longevity even for adults, so how can we possibly do this for embryos."
Discussing ethical issues raised by the public, Sadeghi said, "until now, how this science would impact how we have children and how we would deploy it has been discussed only behind closed doors—not in public."
He said now that Nucleus has announced the availability of the technology, the public has the opportunity to "listen to each other, hear each other out, and use this information to establish their views to ensure the insight Nucleus Embryo can provide is put to good use."
Sadeghi added that the best way to have the public understand the technology was "to have them use it," and that it was important to make it accessible to as many people as possible.
There have also been concerns raised about whether genetically optimizing IQ in embryos could increase risk of mental health conditions like schizophrenia.
Sadeghi said that his company's report on schizophrenia risk for embryos noted that the condition is linked to both bipolar disorder, as well as intelligence, and that ADHD, OCD, Alzheimer's disease and autism were also linked to intelligence.
He added that "we always educate parents on links between high disposition to neurological diseases and exceptional traits."
"When you analyze genes for disease risk, you're also uncovering insights into traits, since both share a common genetic foundation," he said.
The software, while being offered to parents to help them prevent their children from developing genetic disease, therefore does come with ethical considerations—considerations which will continue to be explored and discussed in public, now that the technology has brought the issue into the spotlight.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Family and friends shoulder the real cost of dementia − $224B in unpaid care
About 5.5 million Americans live with dementia, requiring US$53 billion in annual medical spending on doctor visits, hospitalizations, medications, home health aides and nursing homes. But the true cost of dementia care in the U.S. is far higher because it relies heavily on unpaid care from family and friends. I am a researcher who studies health spending, and my colleagues and I set out to quantify the true costs of dementia care – not just to the health system, but to families and communities. After factoring in the value of unpaid care, we found that the total cost of dementia care increases fivefold to $277 billion per year. Our first-of-its-kind estimate of dementia care costs by state also revealed dramatic cost disparities by geography. In the District of Columbia, the average annual cost for a person living with dementia – including both medical spending and the cost of unpaid care – is $37,000, while in West Virginia it is $61,000. Moreover, we found that the total cost was highest in some of the poorest states, with West Virginia and Kentucky in the top three most expensive states despite a low cost of living. The biggest contributing factor to costs was the hours of unpaid care provided. Cost-of-illness studies often include a monetary value of unpaid care, which is referred to by economists as an indirect cost. While no money is changing hands, unpaid care represents the use of a resource – caregivers' time. Caregiving is often rewarding, but it also has tangible impacts on caregivers' well-being. Recent work by our team found that 12% of all caregivers have had to reduce their work hours or quit their jobs altogether. Caregivers who remain in the workforce often miss days of work due to caregiving responsibilities, or they experience reduced productivity while they are at work. Caregivers who aren't working for pay often have to give up other activities, such as volunteer work or leisure time. The indirect cost of care is particularly important in the context of dementia care. Direct medical spending for dementia is relatively small because there aren't many treatments available. While a new Alzheimer's drug, Leqembi, has recently been approved by the FDA, it is available only for a small portion of people living with dementia. People living with dementia also require significantly more hours of care than older adults without dementia. While many elderly adults eventually need help with activities of daily living, such as eating and bathing, people living with dementia often need constant or near-constant supervision. The fact that our study also found indirect costs varying widely by state raises important questions about why hours of unpaid care varies so much geographically. Here, several contributing factors are worth considering. First, many of the states above average in unpaid-care hours also have high rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes. People living with dementia coupled with other illnesses will require more care. Similarly, the severity of dementia affects the amount of care needed. Dementia progresses from mild to moderate to severe, with each stage needing progressively more care. The severity of dementia cases likely varies by state due to different rates of smoking, obesity and other dementia risk factors. And finally, available support from government and community − including the extent of programs such as Meals on Wheels − varies widely in each state. Researchers should continue to look at dementia care costs in the post-COVID-19 era. The stressors on caregivers have likely increased. Almost all states have a shortage of home health workers, and many states have experienced closures of adult day centers, assisted-living facilities and home health agencies over the past year. One-third of Meals on Wheels programs had a waitlist as of 2024. These shortfalls may worsen amid large-scale cuts to federal programs by the Trump administration. The Department of Health and Human Services recently announced plans to dissolve the Administration for Community Living, which oversees the Area Agencies on Aging, a network of nonprofit agencies that administer Meals on Wheels as well as other services aimed to maximize the independence of older adults. Our study highlights the massive contribution of family caregivers and the disproportionate reliance on unpaid care in states with some of the highest poverty rates in the U.S. More work is needed to pinpoint the factors driving these differences and to improve the well-being of caregivers. The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Amy Lastuka, University of Washington Read more: Older adults with dementia misjudge their financial skills – which may make them more vulnerable to fraud, new research finds How being friends with someone who has dementia can be good for you both Does forgetting a name or word mean that I have dementia? Amy Lastuka does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Trump Mobile's Long-Term Viability Questioned by Expert
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Trump Organization's new phone product may put "America First," but an expert told Newsweek that brand could face several long-term problems in the U.S. market. The "Trump Mobile," which was announced by President Donald Trump's elder sons on Monday, comes in two parts: a gold phone, and a wireless network provider, both of which present issues to the Trump Organization in a crowded market. Newsweek has contacted the Trump Organization via email for comment. The Context Trump Mobile was first announced on Monday at an event spearheaded by Donald Trump Jr., EVP of the Trump Organization and the president's eldest son. The pitch is a "purely American-made smartphone" backed by a 5G service through all three major cellular carriers. The "T1" model, coated in gold coloring, is priced at $499, and said to be available by September 2025. What To Know The new mobile hardware is not changing anything drastic in the Trump Organization's playbook. Opulent gold branding and a label closely associated with the president has been a mainstay of the company's aesthetic for years. However, an expert told Newsweek that the mobile network industry was a very different beast to the markets the Trump family has traditionally targeted, and that what works in one area might not work in another. "It is important to distinguish between the phone and the service because the only apparent differentiator between the Trump product is the Trump affiliation," Professor Kenneth Wong, a marketing expert at the Queen's University School of Business in Northern Ireland, told Newsweek. "The difference is that the phone is 'conspicuously consumed'—if you have one, everyone who sees you with it knows you have it. "The service, by contrast, is 'invisibly consumed'. So while the phone's appeal is potentially 'augmented' by the Trump association, the service will be bought on its own merits. And I see few merits." Wong said that the Trump branding would do little for a more intangible product like mobile service, especially as the competitors in the space already have advanced infrastructure that the Trump Organization could struggle to match. Promotional images of the Trump Mobile Phone, June 16, 2025. Promotional images of the Trump Mobile Phone, June 16, 2025. Trump Mobile Trump Mobile plans to offer a plan at $47.45 a month, in reference to its namesake's status as the 47th and 45th president. "I do not see anything distinctive about the service: in fact, since mobile service is generally bought on the basis of price and reliability and coverage, such as how many bars, the Trump service is a weak competitor," Wong said. "Will it sell? Of course it will…but not necessarily in big numbers. Celebrities like the Korean boyband (KT) Justin Bieber (donuts) and Ryan Reynolds (breakfast fast food) have received big waves of initial sales based on fan support and people 'investing' in the hope the containers become collectibles. "But those sales don't sustain for very long. I see an initial wave of acceptance from Trump's biggest fans and supporters and 'investors,' but not much beyond that." Furthermore, the claim that the phone will be manufactured in America has raised eyebrows over the price of the phone, advertised at $499. Tinglong Dai, a supply chain expert and professor at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, told Newsweek: "a phone truly made in the U.S. today would likely cost well over $1,000. Without access to Asia-based manufacturing and scale, the economics simply don't work." A similar issue was raised earlier in Trump's second term, when the president put pressure on Apple to move iPhone manufacturing entirely to the U.S. However, complex technology like smartphones requires both international supply chains and a wealth of tech talent—which the U.S. does not have on the same scale as other countries. The popular conception is that companies go to China because of low labor costs, Tim Cook, Apple's CEO, said in 2018 when asked why he did not manufacture iPhones in the U.S., as Trump wants to do. "China stopped being the low labor cost country many years ago and that is not the reason to come to China from a supply point of view. "The products we do require really advanced tooling. And the precision that you have to have in tooling and working with the materials that we do are state-of-the-art. And the tooling skill is very deep here. "In the U.S. you could have a meeting of tooling engineers and I'm not sure we could fill the room. In China you could fill multiple football fields." What Happens Next The Trump Organization has said the first model of the phone will be available before the end of 2025.
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
NICE Rejects Alzheimer's Drugs Over Limited Benefit for Cost
Two new drugs to treat Alzheimer's disease have been rejected for NHS use in England and Wales because they are too expensive to justify their 'relatively small' benefits. In final draft guidance, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) said it could not recommend donanemab (Kisunla, Eli Lilly) or lecanemab (Leqembi, Eisai) for adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease. The guidance applies to adults who are either heterozygous for the apolipoprotein E4 gene or who do not carry it. The Alzheimer's Society described the decision as 'highly disappointing.' Professor Fiona Carragher, chief policy and research officer at the charity, said 'the science is flying but the system is failing.' Modest Benefits at High Cost Both drugs have been shown to slow cognitive decline. However, NICE concluded that the benefits were too small to justify the high costs to the NHS, including their administration. The decision upholds NICE's earlier position from March this year. Tackle Underlying Disease There are currently no pharmacologic treatments for MCI caused by Alzheimer's disease. Donanemab and lecanemab are monoclonal antibodies designed to reduce amyloid plaques in the brain. They aim to slow disease progression, unlike current treatments that only relieve symptoms. Donanemab is given monthly via IV infusion. Lecanemab is administered intravenously every 2 weeks. Clinical Evidence Considered Clinical evidence for donanemab came from the phase 3, randomised placebo-controlled double-blind TRAILBLAZER‑ALZ 2 trial, which included 1736 people aged 60-85 with early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (MCI or mild dementia). Lecanemab was evaluated in the phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled, superiority double-blind Clarity AD trial, involving 1795 people aged 50-90 with early Alzheimer's disease. Both trials showed that patients on active treatment continued to experience worsening cognitive function over time, but at a slower rate than those on placebo. Donanemab may have some sustained benefit after treatment ends, but for lecanemab, long-term outcomes remain unclear, the regulator said. Although both treatments delayed progression from mild to moderate Alzheimer's by 4-6 months, NICE concluded that this did not justify the overall costs of purchasing and administering the drugs. Impact on NHS Resources Helen Knight, director of medicines evaluation at NICE, said that significant NHS resources would be needed to enable access to the drugs. 'While we recognise the hope these treatments offer, the evidence shows they only provide modest benefits at best,' she said. Knight added that NICE remained focused on the promising pipeline of new Alzheimer's drugs. The regulator said it would consider revisiting guidance on lecanemab once data on a subcutaneous reformulation become available. Hilary Evans-Newton, chief executive at Alzheimer's Research UK, described the rejection as a 'painful setback' for patients with Alzheimer's but not surprising given the 'modest benefits.' Rob Howard, professor of old age psychiatry at University College London noted to the Science Media Centre that the annual cost of the drugs and the safety monitoring required 'would have been close to the cost of a nurse's salary for each treated patient.' Charles Marshall, professor of clinical neurology at Queen Mary University of London, said more effective drugs are needed 'so that the magnitude of benefit becomes indisputable.' Evans-Newton noted that with more than 30 Alzheimer's drugs currently in late-stage trials globally, 'momentum is building.' However, the government needed to work with NICE, the NHS, and industry 'to pilot licensed drugs, gather more data, and prepare the health system for what's ahead,' she said. Registered stakeholders, including the manufacturers and patient groups, have until 8 July to appeal against NICE's final draft recommendations.
