Man is on the verge of a new era, which will be determined not only by artificial intelligence, but to a large extent by genetic engineering, says the author of the article in Süddeutsch, Katrin Zinkant. She writes about the controversy surrounding the experiments of a Chinese scientist with the genetic modification of human embryos. Some scholars take the side of the Chinese, others strongly oppose.
When the distant ancestors of today's man roamed Africa almost four million years ago, history could have taken on a completely different development. These were defenseless, endangered monkeys. In Arthur Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Pithecanthropus grabs a rock after a space meteorite falls. An animal that has not yet been a man begins to hunt, eat meat, defend itself from dangers and its relatives. It emancipated itself from its natural environment, from fate.
Clark's book gained worldwide fame thanks to the adaptation of Stanley Kubrick in 1968. It is a masterpiece of science fiction. Not so often mentioned is the fact that the space odyssey also tells about the history of human evolution - allegedly controlled by aliens who, through the monoliths, take decisive steps in the formation of man.
An extraterrestrial monolith almost four weeks ago could not fall in Hong Kong. However, it became known that one Chinese scientist, in his own words, purposefully carried out the genetic modification of human embryos during artificial insemination. They were born, children were born, who must pass on their modified material to all subsequent generations. Nobody saw these children even weeks after their birth; there are doubts that this experiment took place at all.
It doesn't matter if what scientist He Yankui has told the world is true, it is clear that biotechnology provides such an opportunity today. It became feasible. Thanks to modern genetic engineering, humans are able to control their evolution. He can purposefully do what has so far been left to chance and natural selection; he can, when he wants, add positive properties and eliminate unwanted traits directly in the genetic material. The tool for doing this is CRISPR / Cas9 technology, often called CRISPR for short. We are talking about a group of molecules made from bacteria, which is much older than humans, it is a product of evolution, created to protect against viruses that attack and destroy bacteria.
Like the stone in the hands of Pithecanthropus Clarke, CRISPR in the hands of modern homo sapiens is a vehicle for the development of his evolutionary status quo. From the reaction to He Yankui's experiment, it became clear that there were ethical reservations. Yet the technology is new, it has not been fully studied. At the same time, the Chinese chose a trait to interfere with the genetic material that is of little importance for the continuation of the human race. He wanted to reduce or eliminate the vulnerability of children to HIV infection. However, infection can be avoided in other ways as well.
A scenario for a possible use case for the new super-tool was developed three years ago. Then the Nobel Prize in Medicine Craig Mellow said that he could imagine "that the modified development of the embryo will protect humanity from cancer, diabetes and other age-related diseases."
Promotional video:
People have long been struggling with disease, poverty and hunger in an unnatural way
Who doesn't want this - a better, healthier and lasting future for human existence? For thousands of years, he has been fighting disease, poverty and hunger, problems during pregnancy and childbirth in an unnatural way. It interferes with genetics by breeding edible plants and animals, resulting in new species that would never have emerged through simple evolution.
He created science-based medicine that can treat health-threatening illnesses and reduce infant mortality. In addition, people adapt the world around them to their own needs. They drive a car, they heat their homes, they have created an ideal food supply system that has nothing to do with nature anymore, because it has nothing to do with randomness.
From this point of view, man has long taken evolution into his own hands. Many scientists believe the same. For example, Harvard Feinberg, a former Harvard professor of health research, talked about neoevolution at a TED before the invention of CRISPR. According to him, a person does not have so many opportunities for development. One option is to stay at current levels along with disease and limited life expectancy. Another option is a "beckoning, magical and frightening opportunity" - a self-determined evolution in which "we, individuals, lead and decide."
Those who did not stand a chance in the struggle to survive are put in good shape
Feinberg is not referring to designer babies, who are viewed as “nightmarish options,” although such overly planned babies are biologically impossible. The expert talks about what drives him as a medic. "I came to the conclusion that as a physician I am working on a goal that is different from the goal of evolution - it does not necessarily contradict it, but it is different." Those who, in general, did not have a chance in the struggle for survival, it is they who are put in good shape.
Another concept considers man rather as a priceless unique specimen in the palette of evolutionary types, an incredible living creature that needs to be protected from itself. Israeli historian Yuval Harari considered genetic modification already in his first book, A Brief History of Humanity, which also appeared before the CRISPR revolution. "Genetic engineering, although not necessarily killing us, can get to the point that the person will no longer be recognized," - writes Harari. This fear is shared by many. Meanwhile, there are discussions in politics about whether it is worth using CRISPR technology on humans.
Just that week, when He Yankui spoke about children using CRISPR technology, the topic was discussed in the Bundestag until midnight. The FDP has come forward with a proposal to pay more attention to the odds than to the risks, and to provide political support for new genetic engineering. But the matter did not go beyond this statement in the debate. This is all the more sad because all the speakers were well informed. They knew the differences between individual gene therapy and inherited interference with the development of the fetus, they knew about the events in Hong Kong. But the decisive question about the use of opportunities was omitted by the deputies, pointing to the unanimous scientific opinion that such experiments on humans are unacceptable.
But this is not the case. The question for most scientists is only in the right moment, and those who are engaged in CRISPR technology and its capabilities know what is in store for humanity. This can be cursed or welcomed. But even without the influence of the cosmic monolith, man is on the verge of a new era, which will be determined not only by artificial intelligence, but to a large extent by genetic engineering. It takes human will to take this step. Or, to put it in the words of Hariri: "The main question of humanity is not" what can we not? ", But" who we want to become."
Kathrin Zinkant