You might have noticed that scientists had some ethical concerns about a new gene editing technique (CRISPR/Cas9) that had been used to modify human embryos in China.
In our view, genome editing in human embryos using current technologies could have unpredictable effects on future generations. This makes it dangerous and ethically unacceptable. Such research could be exploited for non-therapeutic modifications. We are concerned that a public outcry about such an ethical breach could hinder a promising area of therapeutic development, namely making genetic changes that cannot be inherited.
At this early stage, scientists should agree not to modify the DNA of human reproductive cells.
- E. Lanphier, et al Don’t edit the human germ line
And the technology has been made even more powerful than that. By including the gene for CRISPR inside the DNA to be inserted, something called gene drive is created. Gene drive can, over time, force an entire species population to have the mutation in CRISPR.
The CRISPR gene drive is a powerful piece of technology that all but guarantees an engineered trait is passed on to every single offspring. Within months or years, it has the ability to alter an entire population of a sexually reproducing species.
Some people
did this little stunt on some fruit flies. Right, fruit flies, with wings. (There are mutational variant flies that have no wings.) The biocontainment procedures were pretty stringent, but the risks being taken are incalculable.
----
It is socially good that there are some scientists who think about ethics. Unfortunately, there are other scientists, usually funded by some country's military who think about weapons.
With that in mind, over the orange double helix, we will consider the implications of a paper published this week in Nature.
Here we utilize CRISPR/Cas9 technology for targeted gene modification of four of the most commonly mutated colorectal cancer genes (APC, P53 (also known as TP53), KRAS and SMAD4) in cultured human intestinal stem cells...Quadruple mutants grow independently of all stem-cell-niche factors and tolerate the presence of the P53 stabilizer nutlin-3. Upon xenotransplantation into mice, quadruple mutants grow as tumours with features of invasive carcinoma. Finally, combined loss of APC and P53 is sufficient for the appearance of extensive aneuploidy, a hallmark of tumour progression.
Sequential cancer mutations in cultured human intestinal stem cells
Let me translate that for layfolk. With commonly available technology (CRISPR), we deliberately turned human cells into metastatic human cancer cells - and published the method of how to do that. (BTW - nutlin-3 is an anti-cancer drug that operates in the P53 pathway. Basically, it doesn't work on these mutated cells.)
What could possibly go wrong?
Well, let's see, here's something that comes to mind. If there is some politician I want to get rid of, all I need are some of his skin cells - you know about the amount you would need to do one of those DNA analysis kits, like 23andme. I take the cells of that politician and turn them into what looks like a cancer that "just happened" to develop in that person. The final step is to scratch the victim with a needle/syringe loaded with the metastatic cancer cells derived from his own body. It's like the perfect crime. "He died of cancer; how unfortunate."
-----
We live in a country where basic facts like climate change and evolution are denied by large segments of the population, who have been manipulated by phalanxes of bought-and-paid-for rightwing nutjobs. If we cannot comprehend obvious stuff, how are we going to deal with a technology that is "nuclear" in its ability to help or hurt?
Just asking.
Did I mention that they have found ways to insert the CRISPR construct into adenovirus (i.e., the common cold) in order to target lung cells? Who wants to run out the scenario that turns that into lung cancer?
On the other side of the coin, as in the opening quote, scientists who want to improve your health are terrified of exactly the scenarios I have been spinning. They fear it will be the end of genetic science if these stories of microbiological Frankensteins become a boogeyman to the anti-science crowd.
-----
Bottom line: we are deep in Sorcerer's Apprentice territory here. The scientists have created stuff that society really needs to give a thorough ethical and risk analysis. Too bad our society has been lobotomized and our scientists have been demonized. So, corporate actors and MIC actors have no obstacle towards weaponizing this technology.
And, if we learned anything from history, its that every time there is a new technology, everyone will try to weaponize it.
Good night and good luck.