05/13/2025 / By Lance D Johnson
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has quietly green lit the first-ever gene-edited pigs for human consumption, marking a controversial leap into the future of biotechnology. While corporate giants and biotech proponents celebrate this as a solution to disease-ridden factory farming, skeptics warn of hidden dangers—unintended genetic mutations, viral resistance, and a disturbing lack of transparency for consumers. As CRISPR-altered pork inches toward dinner tables, the question remains: Are we trading short-term agricultural gains for long-term health disasters?
Key points:
Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) has plagued pig farms for decades, causing massive economic losses. Genus, a British biotech firm, claims its CRISPR-edited pigs—engineered to lack the CD163 receptor targeted by PRRS—could be the answer. However, genetic modifications often have unintended consequences. In 2018, He Jiankui’s controversial CRISPR experiment on human embryos demonstrated the technology’s unpredictability. While pigs are not humans, similar risks exist: viruses evolve, and genetic alterations may disrupt biological functions in unforeseen ways. As one expert warned, PRRS has no simple fix—CRISPR may create new problems while solving old ones.
He Jiankui’s controversial human embryo experiment
He Jiankui used CRISPR to edit human embryos (targeting the CCR5 gene) to purportedly confer HIV resistance.
The PRRS-resistant pig dilemma
Genus’s CRISPR-edited pigs lack the CD163 receptor, theoretically making them immune to PRRS.
The FDA quietly approved gene-edited pork without public debate, burying the decision in obscure regulatory documents. Even more concerning, Genus acknowledges that no labeling is required, leaving consumers unaware if their food contains CRISPR-modified meat. The Center for Food Safety has long advocated for transparency, arguing that people deserve the right to know what they’re eating. This secrecy mirrors past failures, such as AquaBounty’s GMO salmon, which faced consumer rejection. If history repeats, gene-edited pork may enter the market unnoticed—until public backlash forces a reckoning.
The FDA’s approval of CRISPR pork sets a worrying trend, paving the way for gene-edited chickens, cattle, and other livestock with minimal oversight. Corporate interests, including Bill Gates—a major CRISPR proponent—are driving this agenda under the guise of solving food insecurity. But the lack of long-term safety studies and mandatory labeling raises ethical and health concerns. Critics warn that tampering with nature can backfire, introducing unforeseen risks to human health and ecosystems. As industrial agriculture pushes forward, food sovereignty—the right to choose what we eat—hangs in the balance.
Buy organic – USDA-certified organic products prohibit GMOs, including CRISPR-edited meat.
Support local farmers – Seek out transparent, ethical meat sources that avoid genetic modifications.
Demand labeling – Advocate for laws requiring clear GMO labeling so consumers can make informed choices.
Reduce industrial meat consumption – Opt for pasture-raised, non-GMO, and regenerative farming options.
The CRISPR food revolution is already underway, but public awareness and resistance can shape its future. The question remains: Will we accept unregulated genetic experiments in our food, or demand accountability?
Sources include:
Tagged Under:
agriculture, bill gates, biotechnology, consumer rights, corporate corruption, CRISPR, factory farming, FDA, food labeling, food safety, food supply, gene editing, genetic engineering, GMO, health risks, meat industry, organic farming, Pork, PRRS, viral resistance
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author