Human genetic engineering is coming. We must discuss the social and political implica

[Peter1469]

An interesting article about scientific ethics and whether it will save us from ourselves. The article is about a scientist working in an autocratic nation who edited human genes with the goal of creating HIV resistant humans. He edited genes and implanted twins in a mother. After they were born, he asked a film team (lead by the author who also edits genes) to tell his story- except the story he wanted to tell was as if this was just the planning phase. His goal was to help shape public opinion about gene editing.

Long story short, he got caught after his experiment went really bad. The governments and fellow scientists who knew what he was doing now publicly said such research was bad. He got tossed in prison for unethical medical practice.

But the interesting issue isn't this guy's story. What about the next time? There are rumors that both China and Russia have been experimenting with gene editing for military purposes. This is an area of scientific research that has man playing God, and who knows how far it can be taken.


Human genetic engineering is coming. We must discuss the social and political implications now

In October, 2018, I was invited to a secret meeting in Guangzhou, China. I was there because of my work as a genetic scientist who uses the CRISPR technology to cut and splice DNA, an approach to genetic engineering that has come to the forefront over the past decade. I don’t think it’s an overstatement to say that CRISPR, a precise and efficient tool that allows us to “edit” genes, is on the verge of altering the course of human history to an extent far greater than the recent “disruptions” catalyzed by internet technology. If you think digital surveillance tools are frightening in the hands of autocracy, consider the power to bend the human genome to one’s will. CRISPR provides that power. To use another analogy, the ability to edit genes with surgical precision is a scientific discovery on par with nuclear fission – while there may be beneficial applications, it is by nature seductive to our darkest impulses.

Because of CRISPR’s unknown risks, its use has been limited to certain applications by longstanding consensus within the scientific community, and to a lesser extent by regulatory agencies. We’ve experimented extensively in petri dishes and increasingly on live animals. There’s been limited experimentation on human embryos in the lab, but a firm line has been drawn: Edited embryos are not to be implanted in women’s bodies.


The man I met with in the lobby of the Westin hotel in Guangzhou had crossed that line. His name is He Jiankui, and his story has since been told. This is the first time I’m telling my version.



I was in Guangzhou, a hotbed of biotech research, making a film that looks at all sides of this god-like power. I’m as interested in the ethical implications of my work as I am in the technology itself, and have long worked at the intersections of science, art and society. Dr. He, known to his international colleagues as JK, was seeking a messenger, someone who could translate his work to the world in a way that would elicit sympathy, rather than horror. He seemed to think this was his chance.


Needless to say, our meeting changed the course of the film. It also changed the course of his life, and not for the better – he spent the next three years in prison after being convicted of “illegal medical practice.” He was released in April.

[FindersKeepers]

GMO humans.

I'm going to guess that this is already taking place on a more widespread (but quiet) basis than we're aware.

Where are the CRISPR twins now? They should be 3-4 years old. Are they hiding them out? Experimenting on them?

[Peter1469]

GMO humans.

I'm going to guess that this is already taking place on a more widespread (but quiet) basis than we're aware.

Where are the CRISPR twins now? They should be 3-4 years old. Are they hiding them out? Experimenting on them?

Don't know where they are. I am more interesting in the implications of the article rather than the specific story.

[Dr. Who]

An interesting article about scientific ethics and whether it will save us from ourselves. The article is about a scientist working in an autocratic nation who edited human genes with the goal of creating HIV resistant humans. He edited genes and implanted twins in a mother. After they were born, he asked a film team (lead by the author who also edits genes) to tell his story- except the story he wanted to tell was as if this was just the planning phase. His goal was to help shape public opinion about gene editing.

Long story short, he got caught after his experiment went really bad. The governments and fellow scientists who knew what he was doing now publicly said such research was bad. He got tossed in prison for unethical medical practice.

But the interesting issue isn't this guy's story. What about the next time? There are rumors that both China and Russia have been experimenting with gene editing for military purposes. This is an area of scientific research that has man playing God, and who knows how far it can be taken.


Human genetic engineering is coming. We must discuss the social and political implications now

Every major scientific advance seems to carry with it the potential for good and evil. We know instinctively what applications would be truly evil but in identifying that which is good, comes the problem of not knowing whether something that appears to be good will remain good i.e. the unforeseen consequences that may stem directly or indirectly from applying this technology. Our knowledge is always imperfect in that respect and as they say, the road to perdition is paved with good intentions.

[Common]

I am flat out against any genetically manipulated human beings...scientists will never leave nature alone, because nature doesnt get them any grants and subsidies to get huge paychecks

[Dr. Who]

GMO humans.

I'm going to guess that this is already taking place on a more widespread (but quiet) basis than we're aware.

Where are the CRISPR twins now? They should be 3-4 years old. Are they hiding them out? Experimenting on them?

It's not hard to find countries in which to set up labs, where they don't ask questions if you have money to spend.

[Dr. Who]

I am flat out against any genetically manipulated human beings...scientists will never leave nature alone, because nature doesnt get them any grants and subsidies to get huge paychecks

I think there is a world of difference between editing the genes of an individual to prevent the onset of say Lou Gehrig's disease, where that edit cannot be passed to that person's children and making changes that implicate future generations.

[FindersKeepers]

It's not hard to find countries in which to set up labs, where they don't ask questions if you have money to spend.

I think having enough money to fly under the radar is a good point.

I have to wonder if the gene modifications will stick, or if offspring will revert back to the original genes. In some hybrid plants, seeds will revert back to the parent plant. But in GMO wheat, the seeds are still different, which has lead to GMO manufacturers insisting farmers do not keep seeds from their crops. They've even come in and tested fields to see if some of the seeds are theirs.

[Peter1469]

I think having enough money to fly under the radar is a good point.

I have to wonder if the gene modifications will stick, or if offspring will revert back to the original genes. In some hybrid plants, seeds will revert back to the parent plant. But in GMO wheat, the seeds are still different, which has lead to GMO manufacturers insisting farmers do not keep seeds from their crops. They've even come in and tested fields to see if some of the seeds are theirs.

I think with CRISPR it depends on whether you are only adding code versus cutting and pasting it.

[Dr. Who]

I think having enough money to fly under the radar is a good point.

I have to wonder if the gene modifications will stick, or if offspring will revert back to the original genes. In some hybrid plants, seeds will revert back to the parent plant. But in GMO wheat, the seeds are still different, which has lead to GMO manufacturers insisting farmers do not keep seeds from their crops. They've even come in and tested fields to see if some of the seeds are theirs.

The Monsanto debacle! I suspect they don't want farmers to keep seeds because of pollination. Wheat is pollinated by wind, so there is no accounting for the genetic material that has been introduced into the next generation of seeds. However, Monsanto had the unmitigated gall to try to capitalize on the genetic material from their crops being carried by the wind and affecting the seeds in neighbors crops, claiming those farmers owed money to Monsanto for the genetic 'improvement'.