Designer Babies for Depression?

A startup now markets an embryo test for depression, promising parents a lower-risk child before pregnancy begins.

Story Snapshot

Herasight launched a polygenic test to rank embryos by predicted depression risk, validated on large datasets.
The company says the score explains about 9% of depression liability and works within families, not just populations.
Professional guidance says polygenic embryo screening is unproven and not ready for routine clinical care.
Critics warn the practice echoes eugenic thinking and could fuel stigma about mental illness.

What Herasight Says the New Test Can Do

Herasight introduced a depression-focused embryo screen called MDD-PGT. The company says it built and tested the predictor using the United Kingdom Biobank and the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. Herasight reports the score predicted depression about as well for siblings as it did in the general population, which matters for choosing among embryos from the same family. Fortune previously noted the firm shared methods and data for review, though validation came from the company itself.

Herasight claims the test explains 9.1% of depression liability after correcting for noise in United Kingdom Biobank data, higher than a widely used benchmark score. The company also modeled how risk might differ among embryos from the same in vitro fertilization cycle. In one example, it estimated a daughter’s lifetime depression risk could range from 13% to 27% across five embryos. These are modeled expectations, not tracked outcomes in children.

Limits, Unknowns, and What Is Not Proven Yet

Depression risk comes from many factors, including family life, stress, trauma, and biology. A score that explains about 9% leaves most variation unexplained. Herasight acknowledges polygenic scores capture correlations, not exact causes. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine says polygenic embryo screening is not ready as a clinical service and should be studied under research oversight. It also warns the lowest-risk embryo may not implant or lead to a live birth.

Independent, long-term proof is missing. There is no prospective study showing that parents who select embryos with lower depression scores actually have children with fewer diagnoses or better mental health over time. Reviewers stress that current evidence comes from retrospective datasets and simulations, not direct clinical benefit. That gap is common in genetic risk tools: prediction often arrives before proof that using it improves life outcomes.

Ethical Fault Lines and Fears of a Slippery Slope

Ethics reviews warn that screening embryos for psychiatric conditions may reinforce stigma and revive eugenic ideas. Critics argue that ranking embryos by predicted mental health risk can teach society to judge people by genes. Some describe polygenic embryo screening as a form of “liberal eugenics,” driven by parental choice rather than the state, but still shaping which lives are valued. Reviews emphasize that scores change odds, not destinies.

Herasight is selling embryo screening for depression. Its preprint: the score explains ~9% of depression liability, and holds in siblings.

For a daughter, 5 embryos: expected lifetime risk 13% best, 27% worst. Best vs worst, not vs a random pick.

Real signal. Still a preprint.

— Yaron Goikhman (@YaronMD) November 3, 2026

Another concern is uneven performance across groups and labs. Commentators report that companies may rate the same embryo differently because algorithms and datasets are not standardized. That can give an illusion of control and push families to see embryos as products. For many Americans already wary of elites making health rules, opaque scoring systems that steer life itself can deepen distrust across the political spectrum.

What Families Should Watch For Next

Experts call for independent replication of Herasight’s findings, with full data, code, and clear standards. They also want a registry that follows children born after embryo selection, tracking mental health, development, and family context over many years. Clear reports by ancestry, sex, and income level would help families and clinicians judge real-world value. Until then, clinics face guidance that urges caution, and parents face marketing that may overpromise.