At a farm in Edinburgh, a dozen newborn piglets are grunting happily.

They look like normal piglets, behave like normal piglets and the scientist who created them says their DNADeoxyribonucleic acid is the material in an organism that carries genetic information. is 99.9999991% like normal piglets. But these animals have captured the attention of the world. 

Each year, a lung disease prompts the slaughter of thousands of piglets. It is a huge loss.

These pigs are different. Scientists at Edinburgh University edited their genesSections of DNA strands that act as a kind of instruction manual for a human being. There is still a great deal we do not understand about how they work. to make them resistant to the disease. The technology could be a game changer. 

For now, gene-edited animals are a rare sight in Britain. This could change. The UK government is set to approve gene editing in England.

The news is exciting for scientists. Unlike genetic modification, gene editing does not involve introducing DNA from other species. Instead, academics snip out and correct pieces of DNA, making changes that could occur naturallyFarmers have been selectively breeding crops for desirable traits for thousands of years. Many say gene editing simply speeds up this process.  take place over months, not years. 

Researchers are working on a salad that is more tasty, oats that grow in the winter, pigs that can grow organs for human transplantation and even a cure for sickle cell diseaseA group of inherent disorders that cause unusually shaped red blood cells in sufferers. . 

Not everyone is convinced. Nearly 90% of Britons believe gene editing poses a greater risk to health than naturally grown crops. One campaigner accused the UK government of creating "a high-tech free for all". Critics argue gene editing could lead to unintended consequences, and even be deliberately weaponised. 

Their fears are not new. The Biological Weapons ConventionFirst signed in 1972 by 178 states, an update was made to include gene editing in 2018. identified gene editing as "dual use" research, meaning it can be used for harm and good. 

Some are warning that the growing accessibility of gene editing tools like CRISPRCRISPR-Cas9 allows scientists to remove, add or alter sections of DNA with ease and simplicity.  are making this threat more real. 

In Australia, Paul Dabrowa edits his own gut bacteria in his kitchen using skills he learnt online. His home weight loss experiment was a success, but he decided to find an accredited lab for his next project: making glowing beer out of jellyfish DNA. 

But Dabrowa worries other amateurs are not as scrupulousPrincipled, or very careful to avoid doing the wrong thing.  about the law. It would be easy to create lethal pathogensAn organism that causes disease to its host. and inflict devastation on the world. 

After Covid-19, his cautions are taken more seriously. "Bioterror possibilities may seem like the realm of science fiction," said former UK leader Tony Blair this month. "But we would be wise now to prepare for their potential use by non-state actors." 

Yet many think the discussion should not be focused on unlikely risks, but rather the amazing potential of gene editing in the fight against climate changeLong-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Human action is a major cause of climate change.. 

With drought-resistant, insect-resistant crops on hand, scientists say gene editing could save the world, not destroy it. 

Yes. The threat of biological weapons cannot be dismissed as overactive imagination. We have all witnessed the power of mutated viruses to paralyse the world. The ability to edit the genes of pathogens, plants and people is terrifying. 

No. All innovation involves some risk, but gene editing is no more dangerous than any other technology. Its awe-inspiring potential to improve farming, cure diseases and even save the planet should not be thrown away.