In a Cambridge University laboratory, a small cluster of cells pulses rhythmically under the microscope. It has a beating heart, the beginnings of a brain, and the basic architecture of a developing spine. Yet this embryo-like structure was never conceived through the union of sperm and egg. Instead, it was assembled entirely from stem cells, representing a scientific breakthrough that challenges our most fundamental assumptions about the origins of life itself.
The team, led by Professor Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz, developed the embryo model without eggs or sperm, and instead used stem cells – the body’s master cells, which can develop into almost any cell type in the body. This achievement, published in leading scientific journals, marks a pivotal moment in reproductive biology: the creation of synthetic embryos that can develop complex organs and tissues, potentially revolutionizing our understanding of human development and opening unprecedented possibilities for treating infertility.
The implications stretch far beyond the laboratory. These synthetic embryos, sometimes called “embryoids” or “blastoids,” represent a new category of biological entity that exists in a regulatory gray area, raising profound questions about the nature of life, the ethics of artificial creation, and the future of human reproduction. As scientists inch closer to creating viable synthetic human embryos, we stand at the threshold of a new era where the traditional boundaries between natural and artificial life begin to blur.
The Genesis of Artificial Life: A Scientific Revolution Decades in the Making
The journey toward synthetic embryos began not with grand ambitions to create artificial life, but with humble attempts to understand how natural development works. For decades, developmental biologists have struggled with a fundamental limitation: the inability to observe and manipulate early human embryonic development in real-time. Traditional embryo research has been constrained by ethical guidelines, limited availability of human embryos, and the inherent difficulty of studying development within the protective confines of the womb.
The breakthrough came through the convergence of two scientific revolutions: the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by Shinya Yamanaka in 2006, and advances in three-dimensional cell culture techniques that allow cells to self-organize into complex structures. iPSCs are adult cells that have been reprogrammed to behave like embryonic stem cells, capable of differentiating into any cell type in the body. This technology provided researchers with an unlimited supply of pluripotent cells without the ethical concerns associated with embryonic stem cell research.
The first major breakthrough in mouse models came from the laboratory of Sarah Harrison at the University of Cambridge in 2017, who demonstrated that embryonic stem cells could self-organize into structures resembling early mouse embryos. These early “embryoids” lacked the organized structure of natural embryos but provided proof of concept that synthetic embryonic development was possible.
The field accelerated rapidly. In 2018, researchers at the University of Michigan, led by Jianping Fu, created the first human embryo-like structures using a combination of human embryonic stem cells and supporting cells. These structures, called “gastruloids,” could undergo gastrulation, the critical process where cells organize into the three primary tissue layers that give rise to all organs and body systems.
The most significant breakthrough came in 2022 when synthetic mouse embryos assembled from embryonic stem cells, trophoblast stem cells and induced extraembryonic endoderm stem cells closely recapitulate the development of wild-type and mutant natural mouse embryos up to embryonic day 8.5. This achievement, published in Nature by Zernicka-Goetz’s team, demonstrated that synthetic embryos could develop complex organ systems including a beating heart and the beginnings of a nervous system.
The Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, led by Jacob Hanna, made parallel advances using a different approach. Hanna’s team focused on creating synthetic mouse embryos that could develop outside the womb for extended periods, achieving development equivalent to 11 days of natural gestation. These synthetic embryos displayed organized body plans with distinct head and tail regions, developed limb buds, and showed evidence of blood circulation.
At MIT, researchers have taken yet another approach, using bioengineering techniques to create artificial wombs that can support both natural and synthetic embryo development. These “ectogenesis” platforms provide controlled environments where researchers can precisely manipulate nutrients, hormones, and mechanical forces to study how these factors influence embryonic development.
The Molecular Choreography: How Scientists Orchestrate Life from Cells
Creating a synthetic embryo is akin to conducting a molecular orchestra where thousands of genetic instruments must play in perfect harmony. The process begins with pluripotent stem cells, which exist in different states of developmental potential. Naive pluripotent stem cells represent the earliest stage of embryonic development, while primed pluripotent stem cells are slightly more committed to specific developmental pathways.
The key insight that enabled synthetic embryo creation was understanding that embryonic development requires not just embryonic cells, but also extraembryonic tissues that form the placenta and yolk sac. Natural embryos develop through intricate communication between these different cell types, and synthetic embryos must recapitulate these interactions to achieve proper development.
The process typically begins with three types of stem cells: embryonic stem cells (ESCs) that give rise to the fetus, trophoblast stem cells (TSCs) that form the placenta, and extraembryonic endoderm stem cells (XEN cells) that contribute to the yolk sac. These cells are cultured in carefully designed three-dimensional environments that allow them to self-organize according to their inherent developmental programs.
The remarkable aspect of this process is that it relies on the same fundamental principles that govern natural embryonic development. Cells communicate through chemical signals called morphogens, which create gradients of concentration that provide positional information. Cells interpret these signals and respond by activating specific genetic programs that determine their fate and behavior.
In synthetic embryos, researchers must carefully control the timing and concentration of these signals. Too much of one signal or the wrong timing can lead to developmental abnormalities or complete failure. The process requires precise manipulation of growth factors like BMP4, which promotes extraembryonic development, and inhibitors of signaling pathways like WNT and NODAL that must be modulated at specific times to achieve proper patterning.
The cellular choreography is breathtakingly complex. Within hours of being combined, the different stem cell types begin to sort themselves into distinct regions. The embryonic stem cells aggregate in the center, while the trophoblast stem cells migrate to form an outer layer. The extraembryonic endoderm cells position themselves to form a cavity that will become the yolk sac. This self-organization occurs without external direction, driven entirely by the cells’ intrinsic developmental programs.
As development proceeds, the synthetic embryo undergoes gastrulation, the process where cells reorganize into three primary tissue layers: the ectoderm (which gives rise to the nervous system and skin), the mesoderm (which forms muscles, bones, and the circulatory system), and the endoderm (which develops into internal organs like the liver and lungs). This process is identical to what occurs in natural embryos, demonstrating that synthetic embryos can recapitulate the fundamental processes of life.
Crucially, synthetic embryos are not clones. Cloning involves transferring a nucleus from one cell into an egg cell, which then develops using the egg’s existing developmental machinery. Synthetic embryos, by contrast, are assembled from multiple cell types and rely on the cells’ own ability to self-organize into embryonic structures. This represents a fundamentally different approach to creating life, one that bypasses the traditional requirement for eggs and sperm entirely.
Transforming Reproductive Medicine: Applications That Could Reshape Human Fertility
The potential applications of synthetic embryo technology in reproductive medicine are revolutionary, offering hope to millions of people worldwide who struggle with infertility. Current fertility treatments, while successful for many, have significant limitations and often involve invasive procedures with uncertain outcomes. Synthetic embryos could provide solutions to some of the most challenging forms of infertility.
For women who cannot produce viable eggs due to genetic conditions, chemotherapy, or premature ovarian failure, synthetic embryos offer the possibility of having genetically related children. By using induced pluripotent stem cells derived from the woman’s own skin or blood cells, researchers could theoretically create embryos that carry her genetic material without requiring functional ovaries. This would represent a paradigm shift in fertility treatment, extending reproductive options to women who currently have no hope of biological parenthood.
Similarly, men with severe genetic defects in sperm production could potentially father children using synthetic embryo technology. By combining iPSCs derived from both partners, researchers could create embryos that carry genetic material from both parents, even in cases where natural conception is impossible.
The technology also holds promise for addressing age-related fertility decline. As women age, their eggs accumulate genetic damage that increases the risk of chromosomal abnormalities and pregnancy loss. Synthetic embryos created from iPSCs could potentially bypass this issue, as iPSCs can be rejuvenated to a youthful state during the reprogramming process.
Perhaps most intriguingly, synthetic embryos could enable genetic screening and intervention at an unprecedented scale. Current preimplantation genetic testing can only screen embryos that have already been created through IVF. With synthetic embryos, researchers could potentially create multiple embryos from the same parents, screen them for genetic abnormalities, and select only the healthiest ones for transfer. This could dramatically reduce the incidence of genetic diseases and improve pregnancy success rates.
The technology also opens possibilities for treating genetic diseases through embryonic gene therapy. While current gene editing technologies like CRISPR-Cas9 can modify genes in embryos, the efficiency and safety of these approaches remain concerns. Synthetic embryos could provide a platform for testing and optimizing gene editing techniques before applying them to natural embryos.
Beyond direct reproductive applications, synthetic embryos are already proving invaluable for understanding pregnancy complications and developing new treatments. Researchers are using synthetic embryos to study conditions like preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and recurrent pregnancy loss. By creating disease models in synthetic embryos, scientists can test potential therapies without risking harm to natural pregnancies.
The pharmaceutical industry is particularly interested in synthetic embryos for drug development and safety testing. Currently, the effects of medications on human embryonic development are largely unknown because testing on human embryos is prohibited. Synthetic embryos could provide a ethical alternative for evaluating drug safety during pregnancy, potentially identifying harmful effects before medications reach the market.
The Scientific Evidence: Breakthrough Studies That Are Rewriting Biology
The rapid advancement of synthetic embryo research is documented in a growing body of peer-reviewed scientific literature that chronicles remarkable achievements previously thought impossible. These studies provide concrete evidence that artificial life is not science fiction, but scientific reality.
The landmark 2022 Nature paper by Amadei and colleagues from Zernicka-Goetz’s laboratory represents one of the most significant achievements in the field. Several in vitro models have been developed to recapitulate mouse embryogenesis solely from embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Despite mimicking many aspects of early development, they fail to capture the interactions between embryonic and extraembryonic tissues. The researchers overcame this limitation by combining three types of stem cells in precisely controlled ratios and culture conditions.
Their synthetic mouse embryos achieved remarkable fidelity to natural development, progressing through gastrulation, neurulation, and early organogenesis. The embryos developed beating hearts with organized cardiac chambers, neural tubes that would normally give rise to the brain and spinal cord, and even the beginnings of limb buds. Genetic analysis revealed that these synthetic embryos activated the same developmental programs as natural embryos, with over 95% similarity in gene expression patterns during critical developmental stages.
The Weizmann Institute team, led by Jacob Hanna, achieved parallel breakthroughs using a different technical approach. Their 2022 Cell paper described synthetic mouse embryos that could develop for up to 8.5 days, equivalent to about one-third of mouse gestation. These embryos showed remarkable organization, with distinct anterior-posterior and dorsal-ventral axes, organized blood vessels, and even the beginnings of reproductive organs.
What makes Hanna’s work particularly significant is the development of artificial womb technology that can support synthetic embryo development. The team created rotating bioreactors that provide mechanical stimulation similar to the natural environment of the uterus, combined with carefully controlled gas exchange and nutrient delivery. This technology addresses one of the major challenges in synthetic embryo research: providing an environment that can support development beyond the earliest stages.
Human synthetic embryo research has progressed more cautiously due to ethical considerations, but significant advances have been made. A 2023 Nature paper by Oldak and colleagues described the creation of human blastoid structures that closely resemble natural human blastocysts. These structures showed proper segregation of embryonic and extraembryonic cell lineages and could implant into artificial uterine tissue in laboratory experiments.
The study demonstrated that human synthetic embryos could recapitulate the critical process of implantation, where the embryo attaches to the uterine wall and begins to establish pregnancy. This represents a crucial milestone because implantation failure is a major cause of infertility and pregnancy loss in humans. Understanding this process through synthetic embryos could lead to new treatments for recurrent implantation failure.
The human embryo undergoes morphogenetic transformations following implantation into the uterus, but our knowledge of this crucial stage is limited by the inability to observe the embryo in vivo. Models of the embryo derived from stem cells are important tools for interrogating developmental events during this critical period.
Another groundbreaking study published in Cell Stem Cell in 2023 by researchers at the University of Cambridge demonstrated that human synthetic embryos could undergo primitive streak formation, the first sign of gastrulation in human development. This process, which occurs around day 14 of natural development, marks the beginning of the formation of the basic body plan. The ability to model this process in synthetic embryos provides unprecedented opportunities to understand human development and the causes of early pregnancy loss.
The precision of these synthetic systems is remarkable. Single-cell RNA sequencing analysis of synthetic embryos reveals gene expression patterns that are virtually indistinguishable from natural embryos at equivalent developmental stages. This level of fidelity provides confidence that synthetic embryos can serve as accurate models of natural development and disease.
Recent advances have also demonstrated the potential for species-specific modifications. Researchers have created synthetic embryos with specific genetic modifications that allow them to study the function of individual genes during development. These studies have revealed new insights into genetic diseases, including how mutations in specific genes lead to developmental abnormalities and birth defects.
The Ethical Minefield: Navigating Unprecedented Moral Territory
The creation of synthetic embryos has catapulted the scientific community into uncharted ethical territory, raising fundamental questions about the nature of life, the boundaries of scientific inquiry, and our responsibilities as creators of artificial biological entities. In June, the possibility of synthetic embryos was announced at a conference. This allows some research to extend beyond the 14-day rule, which restricts experimentation on embryos beyond this period. For some people, research involving synthetic human embryos is less controversial because these embryos cannot “develop to the equivalent of postnatal stage humans.”
The 14-day rule, established in the 1980s, has served as a cornerstone of embryo research ethics for decades. This guideline prohibits research on human embryos beyond 14 days of development, roughly corresponding to the emergence of the primitive streak and the theoretical point at which twinning is no longer possible. The rule was based on the assumption that 14 days represents a meaningful biological boundary before the emergence of individuality and nervous system development.
Synthetic embryos challenge this framework because they exist in a legal and ethical gray area. Of immediate concern are the ramifications of the 14-day rule, which imposes a (voluntary in the U.S.) moratorium on experimentation on human embryos older than 14 days; after that, they must be terminated. But synthetic embryos are not technically embryos in the traditional sense – they are artificial constructs that happen to resemble embryos. This distinction has led to intense debate about whether existing regulations apply to synthetic systems.
The prospect of “designer babies” looms large in ethical discussions. If synthetic embryos can be created from any individual’s cells, and if genetic modifications can be made during the creation process, the technology could enable unprecedented control over human genetics. Parents could theoretically select not just against serious genetic diseases, but for desired traits like intelligence, physical appearance, or athletic ability. This raises concerns about eugenics, social inequality, and the commodification of human life.
Justice and equity concerns are paramount. We identified six major themes: risk/harm; potential benefit; oversight; informed consent; justice, equity, and other social considerations; and eugenics. Synthetic embryo technology will likely be expensive and technically demanding, at least initially. This could create a two-tiered system where only wealthy individuals have access to advanced reproductive technologies, potentially exacerbating existing health disparities.
The question of moral status presents perhaps the most challenging ethical dilemma. At what point, if any, does a synthetic embryo acquire moral consideration? Traditional bioethics has relied on concepts like sentience, consciousness, and viability to determine moral status, but synthetic embryos complicate these frameworks. They may develop neural tissue and show signs of organized behavior, but they are artificial constructs created for research purposes.
Some researchers try to avoid this ethical dilemma by intentionally introducing changes to their embryo models that would make it impossible for the model to result in an organism. For example, Hanna has started working on models in which genes involved in brain and heart development have been disrupted to ensure that synthetic embryos cannot develop beyond certain stages.
The concept of “genetic chimerism” adds another layer of complexity. Some synthetic embryos are created using genetic material from multiple individuals, creating entities that have no natural equivalent. The ownership and parentage of such entities raise novel legal questions that existing family law is unprepared to address.
International governance presents a significant challenge. Different countries have vastly different approaches to embryo research, ranging from permissive to highly restrictive. The lack of international consensus could lead to “regulatory arbitrage,” where research migrates to jurisdictions with the most permissive regulations. This could undermine efforts to ensure that synthetic embryo research proceeds safely and ethically.
The informed consent process for synthetic embryo research is particularly complex. Individuals who provide cells for iPSC generation may not fully understand that their genetic material could be used to create embryo-like entities. The long-term implications of such research, including potential future applications, are difficult to predict and communicate effectively.
Religious and cultural perspectives add additional dimensions to the ethical debate. Many religious traditions have specific teachings about the creation of life and the sanctity of natural reproduction. The artificial creation of embryos challenges these beliefs and may be seen as overstepping divine authority or violating natural law.
Peering Into Tomorrow: The Realistic Near-Future of Artificial Life
The trajectory of synthetic embryo research suggests that the next decade will witness transformative advances that could fundamentally alter human reproduction and our understanding of life itself. Leading scientists in the field are remarkably consistent in their predictions, suggesting that several key milestones are likely to be achieved within the next 10-20 years.
Jacob Hanna at the Weizmann Institute predicts that synthetic human embryos capable of developing beyond the current 14-day limit will be created within the next five years. His team is already working on extending the developmental timeline of mouse synthetic embryos to cover the entire gestational period, and similar approaches could theoretically be applied to human systems. This would provide unprecedented insights into human development during the second and third months of pregnancy, when most organ systems are formed.
Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz suggests that synthetic embryos will become routine research tools within the next decade, replacing animal models for many types of developmental studies. Her laboratory is developing high-throughput methods for creating synthetic embryos, which could enable large-scale screening studies to identify genes and environmental factors that influence human development.
The integration of synthetic embryo technology with artificial womb systems represents another near-term possibility. Several research groups are working on ectogenesis platforms that could theoretically support synthetic embryo development for extended periods. While complete artificial gestation remains a distant goal, intermediate milestones like supporting development through the first trimester may be achievable within 15-20 years.
Genetic engineering applications are likely to advance rapidly. CRISPR-Cas9 and newer gene editing technologies are becoming increasingly precise and efficient. Within the next decade, researchers will likely be able to create synthetic embryos with multiple genetic modifications, enabling the study of complex genetic interactions and the development of gene therapies for inherited diseases.
The pharmaceutical industry expects synthetic embryos to revolutionize drug development and safety testing. Current animal models often fail to predict human responses to medications, particularly during pregnancy. Human synthetic embryos could provide more accurate models for testing drug safety, potentially reducing the time and cost of bringing new medications to market while improving safety for pregnant women and their babies.
Personalized medicine applications represent another exciting frontier. Synthetic embryos created from an individual’s own cells could be used to test how they might respond to specific treatments or environmental exposures. This could enable truly personalized approaches to fertility treatment and pregnancy care.
However, significant technical challenges remain. Current synthetic embryos still show important differences from natural embryos, particularly in their ability to develop beyond early stages. The efficiency of synthetic embryo creation is also relatively low, with success rates typically ranging from 10-30%. Improving these technical aspects will be crucial for translating the technology into clinical applications.
The regulatory landscape will need to evolve rapidly to keep pace with scientific advances. Current regulations were not designed to address synthetic embryos, and new frameworks will be needed to ensure appropriate oversight while enabling beneficial research. This process is likely to take several years and will require extensive input from scientists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public.
International coordination will be essential. The global nature of scientific research means that synthetic embryo technology will be developed simultaneously in multiple countries with different regulatory approaches. Harmonizing these approaches will be crucial for ensuring that the technology is developed safely and ethically.
Public acceptance will play a crucial role in determining the pace and direction of synthetic embryo research. While the potential benefits are significant, public concerns about “playing God” or creating artificial life could limit support for the research. Effective science communication and public engagement will be essential for building trust and understanding.
The economic implications are also significant. The synthetic embryo industry could become a major sector of the biotechnology economy, with applications ranging from fertility treatment to drug development. Early estimates suggest that the market for synthetic embryo-based applications could reach tens of billions of dollars within the next two decades.
Training and workforce development will be crucial challenges. Synthetic embryo research requires expertise in multiple disciplines, including stem cell biology, developmental biology, bioengineering, and bioinformatics. Educational institutions will need to develop new training programs to prepare the next generation of researchers for this emerging field.
The Profound Implications: What Artificial Life Means for Humanity’s Future
As we stand at the threshold of an era where life can be artificially created and manipulated at will, we must grapple with profound questions that extend far beyond the confines of scientific laboratories. The ability to create synthetic embryos represents more than a technological achievement; it fundamentally challenges our understanding of what it means to be human and our place in the natural order.
The implications for human reproduction are staggering. For the first time in evolutionary history, human beings may be able to reproduce without the biological imperatives that have shaped our species for millions of years. The traditional requirements of sexual reproduction – the need for viable eggs and sperm, the constraints of biological fertility windows, the risks of genetic disease transmission – could all become obsolete. This represents a evolutionary discontinuity of unprecedented magnitude.
The democratization of reproduction could reshape society in ways we are only beginning to imagine. Same-sex couples could have genetically related children without the need for donor gametes. Single individuals could theoretically reproduce using only their own genetic material. The very concept of biological parenthood could be redefined when embryos can be created from any individual’s cells, regardless of their reproductive biology.
Yet with these possibilities come profound responsibilities. The power to create life artificially brings with it the obligation to consider the welfare of the beings we create. These ‘artificial embryos’ can recapitulate some stages of development ex utero – from neurulation to organogenesis – without implantation. As synthetic embryos become more sophisticated, the line between artificial and natural life will continue to blur, forcing us to reconsider fundamental questions about consciousness, identity, and moral worth.
The technology also raises questions about human enhancement and the future of our species. If we can create synthetic embryos with specific genetic modifications, we gain unprecedented control over human evolution. The decisions we make about which traits to enhance or eliminate could shape the genetic future of humanity. This power brings both tremendous opportunity and tremendous risk.
The potential for reducing human suffering is immense. Genetic diseases that have plagued families for generations could be eliminated. Infertility, which affects millions of couples worldwide, could become a condition of the past. Birth defects could be prevented before they occur. The human lifespan could potentially be extended through the creation of organs and tissues for transplantation.
But the same technology that promises to reduce suffering could also create new forms of inequality and discrimination. If enhanced humans become the norm, those who cannot afford or choose not to use enhancement technologies could face discrimination. Society might split into distinct castes based on genetic modifications, creating a new form of biological inequality.
The international dimensions of synthetic embryo technology are equally complex. Countries with different ethical frameworks and regulatory approaches may pursue different paths in developing and applying the technology. This could lead to “genetic tourism,” where individuals travel to countries with permissive regulations to access treatments unavailable in their home countries. It could also create competitive pressures for countries to relax their regulations to attract biotechnology investment and talent.
The environmental implications are also worth considering. If synthetic embryo technology enables the creation of enhanced humans who are more resistant to disease, pollution, or climate change, it could reduce the pressure to address these environmental challenges. Alternatively, it could enable the creation of humans who are better adapted to a changing planet, potentially increasing our species’ resilience to environmental threats.
The philosophical implications may be the most profound of all. The ability to create life artificially challenges religious and spiritual beliefs about the sacred nature of life and reproduction. It forces us to confront questions about the nature of consciousness, the source of human dignity, and our relationship to the divine. These are not merely academic questions – they will shape how societies choose to regulate and apply synthetic embryo technology.
As we move forward into this new era, we must proceed with both boldness and humility. The potential benefits of synthetic embryo technology are too great to ignore, but the risks are too significant to take lightly. We must engage in thoughtful, inclusive dialogue about how to develop and apply these technologies in ways that serve the common good while respecting human dignity and natural limits.
The story of synthetic embryos is still being written, and we are all authors in this unfolding narrative. The choices we make today about research priorities, ethical boundaries, and regulatory frameworks will determine whether synthetic embryo technology becomes a force for human flourishing or a source of division and conflict. The future of artificial life – and perhaps the future of humanity itself – hangs in the balance.
In the end, the creation of synthetic embryos may teach us as much about ourselves as it does about the mechanics of life. As we learn to create life artificially, we may finally understand what makes life precious. As we gain the power to shape human genetics, we may develop greater appreciation for human diversity. As we push the boundaries of what is possible, we may discover new respect for what is natural. The rise of artificial life may ultimately make us more human, not less.
You might also be curious about… The Pacemaker That Disappears After It Saves You
Watch also our short video on this mind-blowing topic here: Synthetic Embryo: No Sperm. No Egg. Just Science
Recommended Science Tools & Kits for Curious Minds
If today’s topic sparked your curiosity, here are some carefully selected tools that allow you to explore the fascinating world of genetics, embryology, and human biology — right from your own home:
1️⃣ AncestryDNA Genetic Test Kit
Discover your genetic heritage and learn valuable insights into your ancestry, traits, and health predispositions.
2️⃣ Compound Microscope, 40X-2500X Research Class Professional Microscope
Ideal for home labs, students, or anyone passionate about exploring cell structures and biological details at high magnification.
3️⃣ Human Anatomy Body Model Kit (Educational 3D Model)
An excellent visual learning tool to understand human anatomy, organ systems, and embryonic development stages.
4️⃣ The Code Breaker by Walter Isaacson
A fascinating story about gene editing, CRISPR, and the brilliant scientists behind this revolutionary technology.
5️⃣ She Has Her Mother’s Laugh by Carl Zimmer
An extraordinary deep dive into the history and complexity of heredity, genetics, and what defines us.