De-extinction debate: Can we bring back lost species?

Can science truly revive extinct species—or is it just a distraction?

A US company has made headlines for its controversial work on reviving extinct species. Colossal, valued at $10 billion, claims to have 'restored' a long-lost animal—but experts say the reality is far more complicated. The story even made the cover of Time magazine, sparking fresh debate over de-extinction versus traditional conservation.

The company modified modern grey wolves with DNA from the ancient dire wolf, a creature made famous by Game of Thrones. While social media buzzes with images of fluffy wolf puppies, scientists question whether this approach truly helps biodiversity or simply distracts from real conservation efforts. Colossal's project centres on genetic editing rather than true resurrection. Instead of bringing back the dire wolf, researchers blended its DNA with that of living grey wolves. The result is a hybrid animal, not an authentic revival of an extinct species. Despite this, the company promotes its work as a breakthrough in 'restoring' lost wildlife.

Critics, including University of Maine paleoecologist Jacquelyn Gill, argue that such high-profile experiments overshadow more practical conservation work. Europe, for instance, focuses on rewilding existing species and protecting habitats rather than pursuing de-extinction. The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) recently expanded protections for 40 species, including cheetahs and hammerhead sharks, by safeguarding migration routes and ecosystems.

Meanwhile, Colossal has bigger plans. The company aims to recreate other extinct animals, such as the dodo, Tasmanian tiger, and woolly mammoth. Yet conservationists warn that these projects risk diverting attention from urgent threats. According to the IUCN Red List, over 48,600 species face extinction today—nearly a quarter of all assessed species. Current extinction rates are up to 1,000 times higher than natural levels, with one million species at risk.

While some startups use technology to restore nature without hype, Colossal's bold claims continue to draw both fascination and scepticism. The debate highlights a growing divide: should resources go toward reviving the past or saving what remains of the present? The controversy over Colossal's work puts a spotlight on competing conservation strategies. Europe's focus on habitat protection and rewilding contrasts sharply with the US push for de-extinction. With extinction rates soaring, the question remains whether high-tech revivals or proven conservation methods offer the best hope for biodiversity.

For now, the dire wolf hybrids exist as a symbol of scientific ambition—and a reminder of the challenges ahead.