by 8/29/20 (Understanding S, T, and S)
It is a peaceful Sunday morning, you walk outside and pet your wooly mammoth, and remember that you don’t have to water your plants, they generate water themselves! You turn on the television to find a new race of human has been created, how exciting! This year’s variety of man-made human genetics includes perfect eyesight, 3 legs and self-whitening teeth!
In reality, we are not far from a society with a structure which is as bizarre as this short plot sounds. Although it is in early works, theoretically this can all be made possible with CRISPR technology, a cutting edge scientific tool used to edit genomes. Although its capabilities are not yet fully understood, remarkable discoveries have been made showing its use in fighting HIV, glow in the dark plants, and many more. It is truly thought provoking how a form of technology this powerful and full of potential has not seen more attention outside of the world of science. Karl Popper, a philosopher of science known for his work in the early 1900’s, preached the importance of the “problem of demarcation”, or the act of drawing the line between pseudo-science and real science. His teachings still hold immense value and importance today, especially regarding the debate addressing the use of CRISPR technologies. In truth, more international precautions should be taken to prevent the use of CRISPR in malicious intent. A line must be drawn to prevent the use of CRISPR as a common technology, due to its alarming power and its potential to induce social conflict.
CRISPR has found its way into the hands of different research backgrounds, many of which are using it for the bettering of the planet. Although the project has not progressed very far, a group of researchers at Revive & Restore, a project working towards bringing back long- extinct animals, are using biotechnology to revive species which can be helpful to the preservation of earth. One of the animals currently being researched is the Woolly Mammoth, a creature that has been extinct for nearly 4000 years, which used to roam the lands of North America and Siberia. According to doctor Sergey Zimov, the presence of Woolly Mammoths can help revert areas of Tundra back to grasslands, renewing nutrient cycles in the area and fighting the progress of climate change. While this sounds very promising, the act of de-extinction has its caveats. Can the Woolly Mammoths really adapt to a completely different ecosystem which has changed over 4000 years? Is a hybrid elephant embryo with mammoth traits really a Woolly Mammoth? Is it acceptable to endanger the life of an already threatened species of elephant through scientific trials and inbreeding within captivity? These types of questions are put to the wayside when the promise of powerful new technologies are at hand. Although the potential of CRISPR gene-editing technology is encouraging, we as people need to contemplate the risks, and whether or not this technology should be labeled as a science.
(https://reviverestore.org/projects/woolly-mammoth/)
In 2019 a ground-breaking leap in science was made when Chinese scientist He Jiankui reportedly announced the birth of twin girls with edited genomes. It was stated his study successfully edited the DNA in human embryos to turn them less susceptible to HIV. Jiankui was sentenced to 3 years in prison for his research, but this did not change the impact his work had on the scientific community. Theoretically, the altering of the genome would be passed down to later generations, making the discovery very controversial. The time is upon us to ask the question of what kind of world humanity should live in. What is stopping the use of this simple technology by powerful people for vengeful logic? If this technology is only accessible to the wealthy and upper class parts of the world, what will society turn into? As of today, there are little to no international regulations on the use of CRISPR for gene editing purposes, it is merely up to each country to make a stand against it. For every positive theory or hypothesis formulated regarding the use of CRISPR, there is a negative world-changing idea waiting to be sought out. The scientific community of the 21st century needs to take an official stand in the idea of demarcation, CRISPR should not be considered a pursuable science until an international consensus is met concerning its range of use.
I would love to save energy with glow in the dark plants, or only eat a ripe juicy pear for the rest of my life, or have a dog that is intelligent enough to fill its own food bowl. But all revolutionary science comes with a caveat, when has it gone too far? The lack of action regarding the use of CRISPR within the scientific community has been drawn out for too long. The responsibility is upon all of us to pursue the concept of demarcation, and separate CRISPR from contemporary sciences until clear international guidelines are put into place.