Gene Drive Organisms: Destructive and uncontrollable

Gene drive is a technology used to bypass the laws of heredity. With the help of CRISPR/Cas—whose inventors were awarded the Nobel Prize in 2020—modified genes can be passed on to almost all of an organism’s offspring, rather than just half. This makes it possible to manipulate, or even eradicate, entire populations and species within a few generations. It is a dangerous, destructive, uncontrollable, and irreversible technology.

The risks are disproportionate compared to the intended goals of fighting infectious diseases and eradicating pests or other harmful species. Breeding gene-drive organisms with wild populations triggers an uncontrollable chain reaction that can wipe out species, alter entire ecosystems, and decimate biodiversity.

Watch the video on gene drive:

This risk has also been recognized by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (United Nations). At COP14 (2018), COP15 (2022), and COP16 (2024), the need to strictly apply the precautionary principle was decided and reaffirmed. Consequently, a detailed risk assessment and the consent of local communities were mandatory before gene drive could be deployed.

However, there is no scientific basis for assessing the risks of gene drive. Back in 2019, three independent scientific organizations—Critical Scientists Switzerland (CSS), the European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER), and the Association of German Scientists (VDW)—showed that “there are considerable scientific uncertainties and many unrealistic expectations in genetic research.”

Today, there is still no globally standardized protocol to assess the impacts of a modification that spreads on its own in the wild.

The Target Malaria consortium, heavily funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, continues to view Africa as its primary laboratory. Despite significant pushback, the foundation has lobbied extensively to create “permissive” regulatory environments in developing nations.

• The Burkina Faso Precedent: Following the 2019 release of genetically modified (but non-drive) mosquitoes, the project faced a historic wave of opposition.
• 2025 Suspension: In a major turning point, the Burkina Faso farmers’ association (FENOP) and a broad alliance of civil society groups successfully advocated for a suspension of trials in several regions in 2025. They cited a lack of transparency and the “scarcity of information” provided to local residents, who feared speaking out against well-funded international interests.

Critics label this practice “ethics dumping”—testing high-risk technologies in regions with weaker biosafety controls and ethical safeguards—a practice the European Commission has repeatedly warned against.

Using the fight against malaria as an argument is an attempt to make gene drive techniques acceptable to the general public. Anyone praising this technology as a silver bullet in the fight against malaria overlooks the wealth of local knowledge on how to treat the disease. It ignores the socio-economic factors that cause so many people in Africa to still fall ill with malaria.

The scientific consensus among independent researchers is clear: the mode of operation of gene drives is not fully understood, and the ecological risks are disproportionate to the claimed benefits. Until and unless these risks can be fully contained and the long-term impacts on biodiversity are proven safe, all proposals for environmental release must be rejected.