Connect with us

Technologies

Woolly mammoths could again walk the Earth in just a few years

Colossal lands $15 million to restore the woolly mammoth to the Arctic. The CRIPSR startup thinks it can birth calves in four to six years.

You’ve heard of startups building computer chips, delivery drones and social networks. One called Colossal has a very different goal: bring the woolly mammoth back from extinction by 2027 using CRISPR, a revolutionary gene-editing technology.

The plan isn’t to re-create true woolly mammoths, but instead to bring their cold-adapted genetic traits, which include small ears and more body fat, to their elephant cousins, creating a hybrid that can wander the tundra where mammoths haven’t been seen for 10,000 years. Colossal’s co-founders are Chief Executive Ben Lamm, who started five companies before this, and George Church, a Harvard Medical School professor with deep CRISPR expertise.

«Our true North Star is a successful restoration of the woolly mammoth, but also its successful rewilding into interbreeding herds in the Arctic,» Lamm said. «We’re now focusing on having our first calves in the next four to six years.»

It’s an interesting illustration of an imperative sweeping the tech world: Don’t just make money, help the planet, too. Tesla’s mission is to electrify transport to get rid of fossil fuels that hurt Earth. Bolt Threads wants to replace leather with a fungal fiber-based equivalent that’s easier on the environment than animal agriculture. Colossal hopes its work will draw attention to biodiversity problems and ultimately help fix them.

Colossal has raised $15 million so far, led by investment firm Tulco. The startup’s 19 employees work at its Dallas headquarters and in offices in Boston and Austin, Texas, and it’s using its funds to hire more.

Artificial wombs and other technology spinoffs

Church said he expects spinoffs from the company’s biotechnology and genetics work.

«The pipeline of large scale genome engineering techniques can be applied to many other applications beyond de-extinction, and therefore [are] most promising for commercialization,» he said.

One technology ripe for commercialization is multiplex genome engineering, a technique Church helped develop that speeds genetic editing by making multiple changes to DNA at once.

Colossal also hopes to develop artificial wombs to grow its mammoth embryos. Just growing 10 woolly mammoths with surrogate elephant mothers isn’t enough to get to the large-scale herds the company envisions.

At the foundation of Colossal’s work is CRISPR. This technology, adapted from a method bacteria evolved to identify attacking viruses and chop up their DNA, is now a mainstay of genetic engineering, and Church has been involved since CRISPR’s earliest days.

There are other ways Colossal hopes to help. Its gene editing technology could artificially add genetic diversity to species with only small surviving populations, Lamm said.

Jurassic Park-style tourism? Nope

Selling or licensing spinoff technology is a somewhat indirect way of running a business. A more direct option is selling tickets to tourists. After all, humans already pay lots of money to see charismatic megafauna like lions, elephants and giraffes on African safaris. Seeing a creature that’s been gone for 10,000 years could add to the excitement.

But that’s not Colossal’s game plan. «Our focus is on species preservation and protection of biodiversity right now, not in putting them in zoos,» Lamm said. By re-creating woolly mammoths, Colossal can preserve the genetic legacy of Asian elephants that now are endangered.

Another candidate species Colossal wants to re-create is the woolly rhinoceros, a relative to the critically endangered Sumatran rhino.

Although Colossal doesn’t plan to build a tourist destination, it does have a woolly mammoth rewilding site in mind that sounds awfully close to Jurassic Park: Pleistocene Park. This area of about 60 square miles in northern Russia, named after the geologic period that ended with the last ice age, is where researchers Sergey and Nikita Zimov are trying to test their theories about the ecological and climatic effects of rewilding.

One Zimov idea is that woolly mammoths will trample snow and knock down trees. That, in turn, will restore grasslands that reflect more of the sun’s warming rays and eliminate insulating snow and forests so the ground cools more. And that means the ground will stay frozen instead of releasing its current store of carbon dioxide and methane greenhouse gases. About 260 billion to 300 billion metric tons of carbon could be released from thawing permafrost by 2300, scientists calculate, exacerbating the weather extremes and other problems caused by climate change.

Is species de-extinction a good idea?

There’s an appeal to the idea of de-extinction. Humans have dramatically altered the planet, and the United Nations estimates we threaten 1 million species with extinction as a result.

Colossal hopes its work will raise more attention to the biodiversity collapse. And it also plans to create detailed genetic descriptions of many endangered species «so we have the recipe if that species does go extinct,» Lamm said.

But is that really the best use of our resources to help the planet? No, some researchers believe.

Resurrecting species could have some benefits, but money would be better spent protecting ones that are still around, a group of biologists argued in one paper published in Nature Ecology & Evolution. «Potential sacrifices in conservation of extant species should be a crucial consideration in deciding whether to invest in de-extinction or focus our efforts on extant species,» the researchers wrote.

But this isn’t government money Colossal is talking about, and Lamm argues that his startup’s work complements other conservation efforts. And, he argues, startups can move faster than government-funded work.

In a world dominated by climate crisis headlines, a startup that makes money with an ecosystem-improvement focus has special appeal. One investor, Zack Lynch of Jazz Venture Partners, is excited by software, hardware and biotech he expects Colossal will create.

At the same time, «these breakthroughs will help address issues such as land degradation, animal pollinator loss and other negative biodiversity trends,» Lynch said. Given how big our environmental problems are, you can see why an investor might be interested.

Technologies

RFK Jr. Announces All Americans Need Health Tracking Devices: Here Are the Pros and Cons

The US Health Secretary plans a huge campaign to encourage health wearables: CNET knows exactly the kind of devices he’s talking about, and why accuracy may be a problem.

Many Americans already track health statistics like heart rate and sleep cycles on app-connected accessories. Now the federal government wants to jump in. On June 24, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced «one of the largest HHS campaigns in history» to encourage the use of wearables to track health conditions, a trend CNET has recently covered.

Kennedy is referring to the many different bands, watches and even clothes that use technology to track human vital signs. CNET’s reviewers have spent years testing devices like these, seeing how rings monitor health signs, straps track your heart health and the right devices lead to better sleep.

The latest version of the Apple Watch, for example, has sensors designed to detect heart rate, heart rhythm issues, falls, sleep health, sleep apnea, temperature, breathing rate and more. The newest Oura Ring can track sleep patterns, menstrual cycles, temperature, heart rate and other health details.

«We think that wearables are a key to the MAHA agenda, Making America Healthy Again ,» Kennedy told the Subcommittee on Health during its budget meeting. «My vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years … they can see what food is doing to their glucose levels, their heart rates and a number of other metrics as they eat it.» 

Kennedy also tweeted that «wearables put the power of health back in the hands of the American people.» 

«Wearables,» however, is a broad term encompassing everything from fitness devices that count steps to sleep trackers you wear at night. And consumer devices can’t easily replace monitoring solutions offered by medical professionals. 

For example, CNET has covered research indicating that even the best-in-class Apple Watch struggles with accuracy from metrics like steps to heart rate. Another study from California State Polytechnic University has shown that fitness-related Fitbit trackers show high inaccuracies as well. In fact, that research was used in a related Fitbit lawsuit.

Speaking of glucose monitors, Kennedy isn’t the only White House official with an interest in such health sensors. The administration’s nominee for surgeon general, Dr. Casey Means, co-founded glucose-monitoring company Levels and sells a monitoring app as well as other wellness products.

Finally, CNET wellness experts remind everyone that wearables aren’t always a good fit. Those suffering from eating disorders or body image issues should always talk to an expert before using wearables, as they can exacerbate certain issues or lead to a unhelpful outlook. 

The US Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

What’s Included in Xbox Game Pass? Here’s Everything You Need to Know

Check out the pros and cons of each Game Pass tier, and how much each costs.

Editors’ Note: Xbox Game Pass Ultimate offers a slew of benefits, including a massive game library, diverse device support and both PC and console games. Nifty features like the ability to play on smart TVs, phones, tablets and PCs — not just consoles — make this a convenient gaming subscription service for a wide range of people. Xbox Game Pass Ultimate costs less than the price of a new game each month, yet gives access to hundreds of titles, which is why it earned a CNET Editors’ Choice Award. The original article follows.

New AAA video games used to cost $50 apiece, but it’s not unusual to see a similar game cost $70 now. That price might make you pause before you buy the game, but with an Xbox Game Pass subscription, you could play a brand-new game, and others, for a fraction of the price.

Microsoft launched Game Pass in 2017, and since then, the gaming service has grown to be one of the best values for gamers. All Game Pass plans offer member discounts for non-Game Pass titles and other perks, but figuring out which plan is right for you can be difficult.

That choice can be especially tough after Microsoft removed its Game Pass Console plan and replaced it with Game Pass Standard. The company also increased the price of Game Pass Ultimate from $17 to $20 a month.

I’ve covered the service in the past, including future releases and whether Game Pass Ultimate will save you money compared with buying single games. And with all the new titles Microsoft announced would be joining the service as Day 1 releases, like the upcoming Doom: The Dark Ages, you might be wondering what the difference is between different Game Pass plans.

Here’s what you need to know about the Game Pass plans so you can decide which one is right for your needs.

Xbox Game Pass tiers

Game Pass Core Game Pass PC Game Pass Standard Game Pass Ultimate
Day 1 releases No Yes No Yes
PC games No Yes No Yes
Online multiplayer Yes Yes Yes Yes
EA Play No Yes No Yes
Cloud Gaming No Yes (select games via GeForce Now Ultimate) No Yes (via Xbox Cloud Gaming and select games via GeForce Now Ultimate)
Monthly price $10 $12 $15 $20

For more on Xbox, here’s what was announced at Gamescom, some titles available on Game Pass Ultimate right now and everything to know about that gaming service.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Xbox Game Pass Ultimate Review: The Best Content Deal in Gaming

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media