Latest Articles

In this interview, Avery Cunningham discusses the creation of STEM, LGBTQ & You, his experiences as a queer person in STEMM and the barriers that face LGBTQ+ individuals in the field.

Technology Networks spoke to Dr. Steven Benner to learn more about what synthetic "alien" DNA can tell us about life on other planets and how this technology could be harnessed to improve disease diagnostics and treatment.

CRISPR gene editing has enabled scientists to rewrite the genetic code of living organisms and is revolutionizing medicine. Here, we highlight some of the latest applications of CRISPR gene editing in infectious disease research.

In this interview, Alex Freeman, the founder of Octopus, discusses the progress made since the platform's launch and the ongoing challenges of establishing a new paradigm in academic publishing.

Scientists have taken a fresh approach to finding a way to target neuroblastoma, the most common solid tumor of infancy. Their novel gene target could offer hope for finding alternative treatments with fewer long-term side effects.

This article tells the story of Victoria Gray, the first patient to receive a CRISPR cell-based gene therapy for sickle cell disease (SCD). We explore the struggles of SCD, the mistreatment of minorities in medical settings and the implications of gene therapy accessibility.

In this article, we explore how the latest advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have helped researchers explore areas of the genome that had previously been dismissed as uninformative.

This article explores some of the recent research where epigenetic approaches have advanced our understanding of disease.

Combining different types of omics data offers opportunities to gain a more comprehensive overview of cellular systems. This article will explore some of the latest advances in multiomics analysis that have opened up new frontiers in cell biology.

Trying to publish scientific research can be slow, demoralizing and put up barriers to progress. But what if there was another way, one that let authors take more control while making readers more informed about how their peers evaluate the study?