It has been nearly eight years since a video on YouTube turned the scientific world upside down. You probably remember the headlines. A Chinese scientist named He Jiankui claimed he’d successfully "edited" the DNA of twin girls, Lulu and Nana, to make them resistant to HIV. People panicked. Scientists screamed "unethical" from the rooftops. Then, the news cycle moved on.
But for the girls, life didn't just stop when the cameras left.
Honestly, the most common question I get when discussing bioethics is: What actually happened to those kids? Are they okay? Are they even alive? In 2026, we finally have some clarity, even if it’s wrapped in layers of state secrecy and protective silence.
Growing Up Under a Microscope
Lulu and Nana are now seven years old. Think about that for a second. They aren't "embryos" or "data points" anymore; they are second-graders. They’re likely losing baby teeth, learning to ride bikes, and dealing with homework. According to He Jiankui—who was released from prison in 2022 and has been surprisingly chatty on social media and in interviews—the twins are living a "normal, peaceful, undisturbed life."
But "normal" is a relative term when your very existence is a global controversy.
The Chinese government has kept their identities under a literal lock and key. We don’t know their real names. We don’t know what city they live in. This isn't just about privacy; it's about protection. There is a very real fear that if their identities leaked, they’d be treated like circus acts or, worse, targeted by obsessed "transhumanist" fringe groups.
The Health Question Nobody Can Answer
He Jiankui claims they are "healthy," but the scientific community is... let's say, skeptical.
The big issue isn't what he did do, but what he messed up. When He used CRISPR-Cas9 to target the CCR5 gene, he didn't get a "clean" edit. In one of the twins (reportedly Lulu), only one copy of the gene was altered. This is called mosaicism. It basically means the edit didn't take in every cell. She might not even be resistant to HIV at all.
There's also the "off-target" effect. CRISPR is like a pair of genetic scissors, but sometimes those scissors slip and snip something they shouldn't. We won't know if that happened—potentially causing cancer or immune issues—until they are much older.
The Scientist's Second Act
While Lulu and Nana now live in the shadows, their "creator" is trying to walk back into the light. Since getting out of jail, He Jiankui has set up a new lab in Beijing. He’s shifted his focus to "affordable gene therapy" for rare diseases like Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
It’s a weird vibe.
He recently tried to get a work visa for Hong Kong, but they shot him down pretty fast because he "lied" on the application about his criminal record. He seems to think he's a misunderstood pioneer, recently telling reporters he acted "too quickly" but not necessarily admitting the whole thing was a disaster. He even mentioned starting a charity to pay for the girls' medical insurance, because—get this—no insurance company would cover them after the scandal.
What about the third baby?
Most people forget there’s a third child. A year after Lulu and Nana were born, a third gene-edited baby (sometimes called Amy) arrived. She’s currently about six years old. Just like the twins, her status is a "state secret," though reports suggest she is also living with her parents in China.
Why This Still Matters in 2026
You might think this is just old news, but the "Lulu and Nana" saga changed how we handle human DNA forever.
- The Global Ban (Sorta): Most countries have slammed the door on "germline" editing (edits that can be passed to your kids).
- The "Designer Baby" Fear: It’s no longer a sci-fi movie plot. We know it’s possible, which makes the ethical guardrails more important than ever.
- Genetic Inequality: If we ever do perfect this, who gets it? Only the rich? That’s the real nightmare scenario.
The Actionable Reality
If you’re following this because you’re worried about the future of genetics or considering gene therapy for a health condition, here is the ground truth:
- Somatic vs. Germline: Understand the difference. Somatic gene therapy (treating a sick person’s cells) is safe, legal, and saving lives right now. Germline editing (changing an embryo) is still a massive "no-go" for almost every reputable scientist on Earth.
- Watch the World Health Organization: The WHO has established a global registry to track all human genome editing research. If you want to see where the real science is happening, that’s your source.
- Support Regulation: The story of Lulu and Nana is a cautionary tale about what happens when "moving fast and breaking things" meets human biology. We need strict international laws so that children aren't treated like software updates.
Lulu and Nana didn't ask to be part of an experiment. They are just kids. The best thing the world can do for them now is let them grow up in peace while we make sure no one else repeats the mistakes of 2018.