Latest news with #Gattaca
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Health
- Yahoo
The Gattaca Future Is Here
Advances in the world of embryonic screening: The company Nucleus Genomics announced the launch of Nucleus Embryo yesterday, which they bill as "the first genetic optimization software that lets parents pursuing IVF [in vitro fertilization] see and understand the complete genetic profile of each of their embryos." It's a dashboard, essentially, that lets parents see the full analysis of their frozen embryos—each embryo's probability of having some 900 diseases, as well as information about their appearance (male pattern baldness, eye color, hair color), IQ, and more. You can now compare each embryo to the others, and rank order your preferences for which ones you implant, if you so choose. You can know which embryos are more likely to have seasonal allergies, asthma, restless leg syndrome, schizophrenia, cystic fibrosis, alcoholism, celiac disease, and more. "Some people don't think you should have access to the choice Nucleus Embryo empowers you to make," writes Nucleus CEO Kian Sadeghi. "Here's the thing. It's not their choice to make. It's yours." (For the price of $6,000, of course.) Competitors like Orchid offer essentially the same thing. What's discussed a bit less in all the marketing copy is that you're not genetically tweaking the embryos, you're just discarding the ones that don't meet your specifications. And, look, I don't mean to let my Catholic show too much, but I have a hard time getting excited about a Gattaca future—as do many others who've been following the developments in the world of embryonic screening: Other folks within Silicon Valley are bullish on this, and interested in investing in gene-editing technology, applying it to embryos specifically. So expect this to be something we hear a lot more about in the future: Some people surely believe this is a means to reduce suffering, and that it is better to eliminate embryos that would be possibly destined for great suffering than to allow them to continue to grow and develop into children, and then adults, who would incur extreme hardship (like a life with cystic fibrosis or Tay-Sachs disease). To me, this argument is less compelling, because I don't believe it is the parent's role to pick and choose which children are "desirable" and to discard those with traits that might lead to suffering. I also fear the use of this technology as a means of indulging parental hubris, a belief that you are responsible not just for your child's care and safekeeping and spiritual growth—no matter what is thrown their way—but that you may also craft them into perfect beings who become as attractive as can be, as smart as can be. To some degree, parents do this once the children are outside the womb—they provide them with the best opportunities to grow and learn and foster their natural talents—but I do wonder how it might psychologically alter a child to know that they were selected for life due to their potential for excellence vs. their innate value. But, honestly, my own personal beliefs on this are beside the point. Many libertarians probably disagree with me, and see this technology as a massive expansion of human choice applied to the most important realm. This future is here; public support for IVF is already extremely high, and genetic screening is already routine in pregnancy. It's not crazy to theorize that, as the price tag continues to drop as the marketplace becomes more crowded, this type of screening will catch on for those who use IVF, and that some people—perhaps the most type-A parents with the most disposable income—will even be spurred to choose IVF creation of babies vs. the good old-fashioned method, as it gives them greater control over outcomes (but, if we're being honest, less fun). In other words, we're a far cry from parents trying to optimize their kids' intellect by letting them watch Baby Mozart; techniques for optimization are much more sophisticated now, and a whole bunch of ethical quandaries will come along with that. Expect progressives to object to a society increasingly bifurcated based on ability, corresponding to the disposable income of one's parents, and expect conservatives to object on pro-life grounds. Though, interestingly, maybe the MAGA types—who voted for "the fertilization president" (an image I still hope to get out of my head)—and the Silicon Valley types who are broadly supportive of this technology will sort of join forces with IVF-approving normies and it will all become broadly accepted. It's hard to say how it all plays politically. Another Trump travel ban: On Wednesday, President Donald Trump banned citizens of 12 countries—Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen—from entering the United States. He also announced restrictions on travel for citizens of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela, but stopped short of a full ban. People from those countries will not be allowed to come to the United States permanently or get tourist or student visas, but will be allowed to enter under certain circumstances. This is more extensive than the so-called Muslim travel ban of his first term, and it's not totally clear what the specific reasoning is for barring citizens of these countries from visiting or living in the United States. The attack on Jews in Boulder, Colorado, by an Egyptian man who had overstayed his visa and was thus here illegally, "underscored the extreme dangers" posed by the entry of foreigners, said Trump. Oddly, though, he didn't announce any restrictions on travel by Egyptians. I don't believe this statistic is correct, and I am also very curious about where all our taxpayer dollars are going if they're not going to food assistance for poor kids. Articles like this one claim that "an estimated 1 in 4 children don't have enough to eat—a 46% increase over pre-pandemic numbers" and cite the nonprofit Feeding America. When I follow the link, there's nothing to substantiate this number, and this X user is roughly correct that a huge chunk—some estimates say more like 43 percent—of NYC elementary schoolers are overweight. "Many today insist that it is critical—even morally required—that we use the word 'genocide' to describe Israel's war in Gaza. No other term will do. Those not joining the chorus are allegedly complicit in genocide. Those questioning the nature of the accusation are labeled genocide deniers," write Norman J.W. Goda and Jeffrey Herf for The Washington Post. "Why this insistence? Efforts to delegitimize Israel as colonial and racist began before the state was declared in 1948. Genocide, meanwhile, is the crime of crimes; a state committing genocide is forever illegitimate. Given this history and gravity, we should pose some questions. Israel's war against Hamas in the urban environments of Gaza has led to thousands of civilian casualties. But is genocide really the correct way to describe the war?" "Yunqing Jian, 33, and Zunyong Liu, 34, citizens of the People's Republic of China, were charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy, smuggling goods into the United States, false statements, and visa fraud, announced United States Attorney Jerome F. Gorgon, Jr.," per a press release from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Michigan. "The FBI arrested Jian in connection with allegations related to Jian's and Liu's smuggling into America a fungus called Fusarium graminearum, which scientific literature classifies as a potential agroterrorism weapon. This noxious fungus causes 'head blight,' a disease of wheat, barley, maize, and rice, and is responsible for billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide each year. Fusarium graminearum's toxins cause vomiting, liver damage, and reproductive defects in humans and livestock." But it sounds like the scientists mostly failed to file the proper paperwork; will be interesting to see what more comes out about this case. Classic Trump administration: Hell yeah, New Jersey! With age, I conquer my animus and grow in respect for that scrappy little state: The post The Gattaca Future Is Here appeared first on
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
This Gattaca Insider Increased Their Holding By 32% Last Year
Insiders were net buyers of Gattaca plc's (LON:GATC ) stock during the past year. That is, insiders bought more stock than they sold. While insider transactions are not the most important thing when it comes to long-term investing, we would consider it foolish to ignore insider transactions altogether. AI is about to change healthcare. These 20 stocks are working on everything from early diagnostics to drug discovery. The best part - they are all under $10bn in marketcap - there is still time to get in early. There wasn't any very large single transaction over the last year, but we can still observe some trading. The chart below shows insider transactions (by companies and individuals) over the last year. If you want to know exactly who sold, for how much, and when, simply click on the graph below! Check out our latest analysis for Gattaca Gattaca is not the only stock insiders are buying. So take a peek at this free list of under-the-radar companies with insider buying. I like to look at how many shares insiders own in a company, to help inform my view of how aligned they are with insiders. A high insider ownership often makes company leadership more mindful of shareholder interests. It appears that Gattaca insiders own 32% of the company, worth about UK£8.0m. While this is a strong but not outstanding level of insider ownership, it's enough to indicate some alignment between management and smaller shareholders. The fact that there have been no Gattaca insider transactions recently certainly doesn't bother us. On a brighter note, the transactions over the last year are encouraging. Overall we don't see anything to make us think Gattaca insiders are doubting the company, and they do own shares. In addition to knowing about insider transactions going on, it's beneficial to identify the risks facing Gattaca. When we did our research, we found 4 warning signs for Gattaca (2 shouldn't be ignored!) that we believe deserve your full attention. If you would prefer to check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt. For the purposes of this article, insiders are those individuals who report their transactions to the relevant regulatory body. We currently account for open market transactions and private dispositions of direct interests only, but not derivative transactions or indirect interests. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Hindustan Times
08-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Hindustan Times
Listicle: 10 movies that were way ahead of their time
Gattaca (1997). Gene editing, custom-making babies, DNA tests that determine your job, your status and who you can love. Andrew Niccol's sci-fi film is less about the tech and more about the drama. It came eight years before the human genome was sequenced. But even now, when we watch naturally conceived Vincent (Ethan Hawke) cheat his way to becoming an astronaut, we're rooting for him.
Yahoo
06-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Do These 3 Checks Before Buying Gattaca plc (LON:GATC) For Its Upcoming Dividend
Readers hoping to buy Gattaca plc (LON:GATC) for its dividend will need to make their move shortly, as the stock is about to trade ex-dividend. The ex-dividend date generally occurs two days before the record date, which is the day on which shareholders need to be on the company's books in order to receive a dividend. It is important to be aware of the ex-dividend date because any trade on the stock needs to have been settled on or before the record date. Thus, you can purchase Gattaca's shares before the 10th of April in order to receive the dividend, which the company will pay on the 14th of May. The company's upcoming dividend is UK£0.01 a share, following on from the last 12 months, when the company distributed a total of UK£0.025 per share to shareholders. Looking at the last 12 months of distributions, Gattaca has a trailing yield of approximately 3.1% on its current stock price of UK£0.80. We love seeing companies pay a dividend, but it's also important to be sure that laying the golden eggs isn't going to kill our golden goose! That's why we should always check whether the dividend payments appear sustainable, and if the company is growing. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. Dividends are usually paid out of company profits, so if a company pays out more than it earned then its dividend is usually at greater risk of being cut. Gattaca paid out 122% of profit in the past year, which we think is typically not sustainable unless there are mitigating characteristics such as unusually strong cash flow or a large cash balance. Yet cash flows are even more important than profits for assessing a dividend, so we need to see if the company generated enough cash to pay its distribution. It's disappointing to see that the dividend was not covered by profits, but cash is more important from a dividend sustainability perspective, and Gattaca fortunately did generate enough cash to fund its dividend. If executives were to continue paying more in dividends than the company reported in profits, we'd view this as a warning sign. Extraordinarily few companies are capable of persistently paying a dividend that is greater than their profits. View our latest analysis for Gattaca Click here to see the company's payout ratio, plus analyst estimates of its future dividends. Businesses with shrinking earnings are tricky from a dividend perspective. If earnings fall far enough, the company could be forced to cut its dividend. Readers will understand then, why we're concerned to see Gattaca's earnings per share have dropped 23% a year over the past five years. Such a sharp decline casts doubt on the future sustainability of the dividend. Another key way to measure a company's dividend prospects is by measuring its historical rate of dividend growth. Gattaca's dividend payments per share have declined at 19% per year on average over the past 10 years, which is uninspiring. It's never nice to see earnings and dividends falling, but at least management has cut the dividend rather than potentially risk the company's health in an attempt to maintain it. From a dividend perspective, should investors buy or avoid Gattaca? It's looking like an unattractive opportunity, with its earnings per share declining, while, paying out an uncomfortably high percentage of both its profits (122%) and cash flow as dividends. This is a clearly suboptimal combination that usually suggests the dividend is at risk of being cut. If not now, then perhaps in the future. Overall it doesn't look like the most suitable dividend stock for a long-term buy and hold investor. Having said that, if you're looking at this stock without much concern for the dividend, you should still be familiar of the risks involved with Gattaca. For example, Gattaca has 4 warning signs (and 2 which are significant) we think you should know about. A common investing mistake is buying the first interesting stock you see. Here you can find a full list of high-yield dividend stocks. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Gattaca First Half 2025 Earnings: EPS: UK£0.02 (vs UK£0.007 in 1H 2024)
Revenue: UK£193.5m (up 2.7% from 1H 2024). Net income: UK£502.0k (up 121% from 1H 2024). Profit margin: 0.3% (up from 0.1% in 1H 2024). EPS: UK£0.02 (up from UK£0.007 in 1H 2024). Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period Looking ahead, revenue is forecast to grow 4.3% p.a. on average during the next 3 years, compared to a 6.3% growth forecast for the Professional Services industry in the United Kingdom. Performance of the British Professional Services industry. The company's shares are down 4.2% from a week ago. We should say that we've discovered 4 warning signs for Gattaca (2 make us uncomfortable!) that you should be aware of before investing here. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio
