A Harvard Church Lab list enumerates human gene variants that provide strong protections (e.g., HIV resistance via CCR5 −/−, lower CAD via PCSK9 −/−, prion resistance via PRNP G127V) and notes tradeoffs (e.g., West Nile risk with CCR5 −/−, unnoticed injury with pain‑insensitivity). By collating protective and ‘enhancing’ alleles across immunity, metabolism, cognition, sleep, altitude, and longevity, it functions as a practical target map for gene editing, embryo screening, or somatic therapies.
— Publishing a concrete menu of resilience edits forces society to confront whether and how to pursue engineered resistance and enhancement, and to weigh benefits against biologic side‑effects.
Merlot Mary Fogarty
2026.01.15
90% relevant
The article’s MAHA argument for permitting advanced germline edits maps directly onto the existing idea that labs and clinics are already cataloguing protective alleles as practical targets for editing; if MAHA succeeds legally or politically it would accelerate exactly the research and commercial agendas outlined in that playbook.
Emma Waters
2026.01.14
90% relevant
The article advocates normalizing advanced germline edits — the exact policy terrain addressed by the existing 'Protective‑allele playbook' idea which catalogues concrete alleles labs might target and the governance questions that follow (consent, trade‑offs, side‑effects). The MAHA case (as framed) maps directly onto calls to identify, prioritize, and potentially deploy protective edits such as CCR5 or PRNP variants.
2026.01.05
92% relevant
This article argues exactly the tactical shift the existing idea warns about: instead of editing countless common, tiny‑effect markers, engineering will likely focus on rare variants with outsized effects (the same class listed as 'protective' edits in the playbook). The author explicitly cites common vs rare variant logic and gives BRCA as an illustrative precedent, connecting to the policy questions about which alleles labs and private actors will target.
Steve Hsu
2026.01.01
78% relevant
Hsu’s discussion of polygenic prediction and embryo choice directly connects to the agenda of targeting protective alleles (e.g., PCSK9, CCR5) and the practical choices parents/wealthy actors make — the same menu of edits and tradeoffs catalogued in the existing idea about targeted genomic 'playbooks' for editing or selection.
2025.10.07
90% relevant
The article explicitly discusses George Church’s list of 51 genes/alleles with large effects (e.g., disease resistance, endurance, prion resistance) and frames it as a blueprint for enhancement—exactly the 'protective‑allele' catalog proposed as targets for editing, embryo selection, or somatic therapies.
2025.10.07
100% relevant
The Church Lab’s 'Protective and Enhancing Alleles' table (e.g., CCR5 −/−, PCSK9 −/−, APP A673T/+) with annotated benefits and risks.