Spooky science: lab-grown breakthroughs or nightmares? 

Scientific and medical technology have rapidly advanced over the past decade. From growing mini-organs and bioprinting hearts to resurrecting the dodo and gene-editing embryos, boundaries between science fiction and present-day biotech advancements are dissolving fast. Scientists have been brewing up a lot; life-saving medicines but also recipes for disasters. This Halloween, we delve into the spooky science behind it all and the controversies surrounding them. 

Beat by beat, science gets spookier 

What if we could grow our own organs and create hearts and lungs and livers? Not exactly like in David Cronenberg’s Crimes of the Future, where bodies are capable of growing new organs; think less gore, more science. Well, with the right tools, scientists have finally managed to do it after years of trial and error. 

For decades, scientists have been growing organoids, which are a small cluster of stem cells that mimic organs. While they replicate the structure and function of an organ, because of their tiny size, they’re far from the real deal. Developing a full-sized organ proved tricky, as when organoids would grow to the desired size, they would die as they couldn’t live without oxygen and nutrients, much like organs in our own bodies. 

This year, scientists at Stanford Medicine in California cracked the code. All these organoids needed were blood vessels that branched out to take in said nutrients and oxygen. So, the bloodier, the better. 

They grew three kinds of cells to create a mini heart: cardiomyocytes – heart muscle cells – cells that line blood vessels, and smooth muscle cells, and came up with 34 different ways to grow them, which the scientists called ‘recipes.’ The 32nd recipe worked like a charm. 

They were similar to the conditions found in the early stages of development of an embryo, a period when new cells and blood vessels begin to form. The recipe was followed to make mini hearts, lungs, and livers. Next, they will explore how long these organoids will last, how much they can grow, and if there is a better concoction out there to grow more lasting organoids.  

Meanwhile, researchers at UC San Francisco and Cedars-Sinai in California did something similar last year when they engineered synthetic cells to gather near stem cells and form cluster of cells that eventually developed into a heart, one that beat rhythmically when they contracted.  

Beyond the hype around science fiction coming to life, these sophisticated organ models could potentially redefine how we conduct research. As the push to move away from animal testing gets stronger, these organoids could be beneficial in drug testing and diagnosing diseases. 

Gene-edited babies 2.0? 

The term ‘designer babies’ seems like it could be out of Aldous Huxley’s science fiction novel Brave New World, but nope, as dystopian as it sounds, they’re very much real. Seven years ago, it shocked the world when Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced that he had used CRISPR gene editing technology to create human embryos. Jiankui claimed at the time that he altered the genes on the set of twins to protect them from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections, as their father was HIV-positive.  

Indeed, this did not go down well, with bioethicists raising concerns about social inequality, eugenics – beliefs and practices surrounding selective breeding to improve the human race heavily criticized for propagating scientific racism – and the unforeseen medical consequences of gene-editing embryos. 

Fast forward to 2025 and companies like Manhattan Genomics want to ‘correct’ genes to fix mutations in embryos. The New York-based startup in particular claims it’s on a “mission to end genetic disease and alleviate pain and suffering.” Its co-founder and chief executive officer Cathy Tie, who was briefly married to Jiankui, has previously stated that the company draws the line at disease prevention.  

Bioethicists and critics, however, think it’s a slippery slope. In an interview with NPR, Alta Charo, lawyer and bioethicist, said: “You’ve got a convergence of people who are thinking that they can improve their children – whether it’s their children’s health, or their children’s appearance, or their children’s intelligence, along with people who are comfortable using the newest technologies and people who have the money and the chutzpah – the daring – to try and do this.”  

With most countries having imposed widespread bans on these practices, biotech entrepreneurs like Cathy Tie seek to change the minds of regulators and work with bioethicists to do so. How things will go down in the coming years, we don’t know yet but considering how fast-paced both technology and regulatory decisions have become, we might as well have updates for you by next Halloween. 

The Frankenstein printer: could 3D printed organs save lives? 

You’ve now heard of beating mini hearts grown in labs, but you haven’t heard it all just yet. Using cells instead of ink and printers instead of potions, scientists are crafting tissues and organs. It’s the stuff of Frankenstein’s dreams really. 

These bioinks, which are made up of cells, nutrients, and growth factors, serve as a scaffold for cells to grow and develop into clusters of cells and potentially organs through a process called bioprinting. Employing specialized 3D printers, scientists believe it’s the future of organ transplants.  

At first, a digital model is formed, typically retrieved from CT scans of real organs. The bioink is then deposited into the printer layer by layer, as each layer solidifies to form tissues. 

While the technology was invented in the 1980s, it really picked up in the past decade, and companies like Maryland-based United Therapeutics Corporation have printed a human lung scaffold with 4,000 kilometers of capillaries and 200 million alveoli that are capable of oxygen exchange in animal models. These transplantable lungs are set to hit the clinic in the coming years.  

Meanwhile, scientists at Harvard came up with a new way to 3D print hearts by interconnecting blood vessels that have cells through which blood can flow to mimic the human heart, very similar to the aforementioned organoids. Now, these researchers are attempting to create self-assembled networks of capillaries and combine them with the 3D-printed blood vessel networks to better replicate the human heart. 

This has sparked debate on potential disease risks, donor informed consent and the ethical use of cells, and who can access this technology. Moreover, a current lack of a fully-fledged legal and regulatory framework could lead to dubious clinical practices.  

However, researchers are keen to see whether, with proper regulations in place, bioprinted tissues could solve the ongoing organ transplant crisis, as more than a 100,000 people in the U.S. alone are on waiting lists to get life-saving surgery. 

The walking dead: the science and debate around de-extinction  

Revelling in tales of resurrection is a big part of celebrating Halloween. And in the research labs of the likes of Colossal Biosciences, a different kind of ‘resurrection’ is underway. Eager to bring back extinct animals to life, the Texas-based company has made significant breakthroughs in reviving the dodo and dire wolf from primordial cells. 

These cells are precursors to eggs and sperm, which eventually grow into a new organism, in this case, dodos and dire wolves. To ‘resurrect’ dire wolves, they retrieved DNA from a 13,000-year-old tooth and 72,000-year-old skull. They also extracted progenitor cells from blood samples of gray wolves, which are alive and well. Then, they edited 14 genes from their DNA to express certain traits of dire wolves that vary from gray wolves.  

The scientists took these engineered cells and placed them in egg cells, which grew into embryos that were then transported to wombs of hounds. These surrogates gave birth to Romulus, Remus, and Khaleesi after 65 days of gestation. 

While several celebrities like Peter Jackson, Paris Hilton, and Tom Brady, have all poured money into Colossal’s venture, critics have slammed it.  

Researchers and conservationists have claimed that de-extinction is morally wrong and that it will cause unnecessary suffering and divert actual efforts for biopreservation. Calling these genetically engineered animals ‘zombies,’ people have questioned whether the welfare of these animals has been taken into consideration. While some think it’s hubristic, others think the term ‘de-extinction’ is a mere buzzword, stating that genetically modified animals are not actual extinct species that have been brought back. 

The pushback doesn’t seem to faze Colossal as they plan on reviving the woolly mammoth by 2028, as well as other extinct species like the moa bird and the Tasmanian tiger. And last month, it announced that it had managed to culture primordial germ cells from the rock pigeon, a distant relative of the dodo. 

While science pushes boundaries, how far is too far? And will these technologies that seem like they’re out of a sci-fi novel, do more harm than good? We may not know until they’re much more prevalent, and we might not be far away from that.