In the mid-90s, I wrote a novel titled The Recombinant Theory. The story centers on a scientist who discovers CRISPR technology and uses it on himself to fast-track its approval. He ignores protocol so he can save his dying son from cancer. When the CIA and Russia figure out they can create genetic super soldiers, both governments race to capture him. Only his newfound abilities keep him one step ahead.
A literary agency read it. They liked it. Then they passed.
Their reason? The concept seemed implausible. They also mentioned that no one could ever hack into a mainframe computer, but that conversation can wait for another day.
Fast forward to the present.
Hacking computer systems happens constantly, so that point needs no further argument. More to the point, genetic editing no longer sits at the edge of possibility. It moved into mainstream medicine and now points at something far bigger: a future where the human genome becomes a design space instead of a fixed inheritance.
CRISPR Already Rewrites Biology
CRISPR, and newer tools built on the same foundation, can cut and rewrite DNA with a precision that would have counted as fantasy a generation ago. Today, that power targets brutal diseases, from sickle cell anemia to certain cancers, with onetime treatments that reset a patient’s biology instead of managing symptoms for life. The FDA approved the first CRISPR-based therapy, Casgevy, in late 2023, and clinical trials continue to expand in 2026. That is not science fiction. That is medicine.
Tomorrow, those same tools will sit inside a much broader question. If science can fix broken genes, how long before it starts “improving” the ones that already work?
The Line Between Therapy and Enhancement
That line will blur. The same platform restoring lost muscle strength in a degenerative disease could, with different targets and settings, boost performance in people who already feel healthy. Designer eyes. Stronger muscles. Better hearing. Personally, I’d like my hair back.
The point is that science does not care about labels. People do.
The second wave will run through reproduction. Embryo screening already lets clinics select among IVF embryos based on risk scores. As prediction tools sharpen and editing technology grows safer, pressure will rise to correct serious mutations before birth, not after. That argument starts with prevention, a case difficult to refuse. Once embryo editing becomes technically routine, the temptation to adjust non-lethal traits follows. Height. Disease risk profiles. Cognitive markers. Bit by bit, choice turns into expectation. Parents who do not “optimize” their children may feel negligent, even without a law forcing their hand.
A Genetic Divide in the Making
Across borders, the future looks uneven. Wealthy families, or entire nations, could reach for systematic genetic advantages long before the rest of the world catches up. Edited lineages might collect health benefits, resilience to new pandemics, or physical traits tuned for specific environments and jobs. The gap between haves and have-nots would deepen into a genetic underclass versus the enhanced. Developed over generations, it would not take long for the new branch of humanity to stop seeing the others as fully equal.
Science Fiction Already Asked This Question
What kind of species does humanity intend to become once it holds the tools to revise itself? Who gets to write the rules for that edit?
Those questions sit at the heart of The Recombinant Theory, written decades before the science caught up. They also run through Future’s Dark Past and Future Unfolds, where technology and human ambition collide at the worst possible moment for everyone involved.
Maybe a new novel about this is in order. Then again, it already exists.
Future’s Dark Past is available now. Future Unfolds releases September 1st, 2026. Find both on our website. www.JLYarrow.com