SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the just-because-we-can-doesn't-mean-that-we-should dept.
One of CRISPR's inventors has called for controls on gene-editing technology
Regulators need to pay more attention to controlling CRISPR, the revolutionary gene-editing tool, says Jennifer Doudna.[*]
The anniversary is that of the announcement by a Chinese scientist, He Jiankui, that he had created gene-edited twin girls. That was a medical felony as far as Doudna is concerned, an unnecessary experiment that violated the doctor’s rule to avoid causing harm and ignored calls not to proceed.
“I believe that moratoria are no longer strong enough countermeasures,” she writes, adding that there are “moments in the history of every disruptive technology that can make or break its public perception and acceptance.”
But the same advances mean that “the temptation to tinker with the human germline” is not going to go away, Doudna says. That language—tinkering and temptation—makes it clear she thinks designer babies are a Pandora’s box we might not want to open.
Doudna specifically calls out Russia, since a scientist there is bidding to use the technology again to make babies.
[*] Wikipedia entry on Jennifer Doudna.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Immerman on Monday November 18 2019, @06:47PM (4 children)
I've got to say that, as a science enthusiast, I often find myself in the somewhat uncomfortable position of arguing for holding scientists feet to the fire for the consequences of their discoveries.
The warning to not let a genie out of its bottle because you can't put it back in again is old - probably far older than the legend of Pandora. And I see far too many scientists that pursue their research without considering the long-term consequences, or worse, absolving themselves of responsibility because they just made the tool, they can't control how people use it.
I've got to say that's total B.S. Sure, maybe someone comes up with a terrible unexpected use for your technology - okay, I'll let you off the hook. But when they use it for the very things that it was designed to do, and that human nature will obviously end up pushing people to use it for? That's on your head. That's not a "risk", it's a near certainty. And if you decided that the value of your technology to the world (and yourself) was greater than the dangers of the ways it would obviously be abused? Well then I hope you can make peace with the results, because that genie is totally your responsibility, and there's no putting it back in the bottle.
And if you never even took the time to ask the question while developing it? Well then it's *still* your responsibility, but I don't wish you peace. In fact I hope the consequences of your exceptionally poor judgment torment you for the rest of your days and serve as a reminder to other scientists that living in an ivory tower may protect you from dealing with "the masses", but it doesn't protect the masses from you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @07:42PM
Tech-hate was the dumbest idea then, did not get any smarter in two centuries since.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18 2019, @08:06PM
Each discovery is coming anyway,
Look at evolution, Darwin sat on it for a decade and published because Wallace was going to beat him to it.
Even that most obtuse of discoveries Relatively was close to being discovered by others like Hilbert.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Monday November 18 2019, @10:39PM (1 child)
It's ivory tower scientists like Jennifer Doudna who want to restrict this technology. I don't wish them peace. Fortunately, we have individuals and countries that are willing to seek progress and work around whatever Western institutions get suckered in to standing in the way.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday November 19 2019, @12:41AM
She's a Berkeley bitch, so she's fine with letting bums shit and piss in public for humanitarian reasons, she voted for Hillary, and she's also totally fine with beating up people who believe in free speech and participates in Antifa marches afterwards retreating to her hilltop home in Clairmont or Piedmont for a post-protest glass of wine with her fellow "I'm old but still hip" cat-lady wine-aunts.
The only people worse than academics are Berkeley academics. They will be the first to hang on the day of the rope.