Unless I am unaware of something, CRISPR is not yet ready for medical usage. Sure, it is an amazing research tool. But every gene editing trick built on the back of this incredibly useful protein (Cas9, that is) has "off-target" effects. These mean that not only do you mutate your target, you cause a whole bunch of other mutations. The future of human genome engineering is almost certainly going to feature CRISPR genes in some capacity, but we just don't have the precision, reliability, and ability to avoid other deleterious mutations yet to do so.<p>Also, as someone working with CRISPR, it isn't quite as easy as it is made to sound. It is relatively easy, but still a lot of work! I guess that is a footnote when it makes the impossible, possible though. We need to keep having these ethics conversations though, so we can use this tool wisely.<p>For further reading I would recommend Jennifer Doudna's "A crack in creation". She is one of the founders of CRISPR as a gene editing tool, and her book is good reading on the topic.
I suspect the only way humans will successfully colonize the solar system is with gene editing. Genetic modification can be used to reduce the life support requirements in various environments. For example, different gravities, different gas pressure, gas composition, tolerance of various chemicals, radiation, etc.
A more interesting question is how far will we go.<p>Based on human history, I am fairly sure the end of humanity is approaching. 100 to 150 years I'd guess. I don't mean we'll be gone, just that what we'll become will not be recognized as human by our ancestors.
Huh? I thought there's always been an obvious answer to this...<p>Cat girls<p>edit: ahh... I love the part of HN that can't enjoy even the lightest of humor. FWIW: I have a severe chronic/borderline terminal health condition that is near certain to leave me dead quite early, not to mention the hell it's brought upon my physical body. In 10 years or so (maybe even sooner) - it will probably be something that's editable out in vitro. Also... I'm young as it is.<p>Let me have fun with my dreams of cat girls. Maybe you'd end up enjoying them too. :)
> How far should we go?<p>If we don't go far enough, someone else will. Whether Iran or China or North Korea, someone else will eventually start producing superintelligent children that will outshine all western scientists and engineers[1]. If we don't start doing it too, we will become irrelevant, prehistoric tribes that have no place in the modern world.<p>If we decide to allow genetic enchancements, though, we need to ensure the society won't split into classes. Some parents will probably want the freedom to choose if their child is enchanced or not, but the unenchanced children will have no chance at anything in life. The only way forward is to require genetic enchancement, no matter the opposition from religious or other groups.<p>I am still shaken by that conclusion, but it seems inevitable. Irrelevance, inequality or force. Choose one, or they will choose for you.<p>[1] assuming science allows us to do this eventually
Let's say we can edit the human genome (CRISPR is not approved for human use), even then, there should extremely tight limits to our genomic editing, since for the majority of the genome by sequence, expressed regions, and possibly still coding regions, has largely unknown function.<p>We just don't understand so much of genomic function through evolutionary time from the simple fact that we cannot easily observe it, that making anything more than a SNP change is asking for major, unfixable problems at a population level down the line. If risk is (threat x vulnerability x consequence), we need to practice the utmost caution when that vulnerability period is the rest of our species existence!
Do we have a way to measure the "resolution" accuracy of techniques like CRISPR? I feel like we don't even know the actual "resolution" of the genome to begin with...
How far should we go?
The science might not be ready yet, but it seems likely that progress in field will enable us to change our own species.<p>We can't predict the outcome, even in out wildest dreams or worst nightmare, we'll always be wrong.<p>Are we afraid of uncertainties? Of course we are, evolution taught us to be.<p>Not doing everything we can would be in total contradiction with the behavior of humankind since the dawn of ages.<p>I am both an optimist and an atheist, there is no God and nothing is sacred.
Go far enough that the new humans are so different and superior that they think of themselves as a different species.<p>Go far enough that parents sue companies because their child doesn't match the designer baby form they have filled out.<p>Go far enough that there will be racial violence between the "natural" and genetically engineered humans.<p>Too much ambition will bring severe consequences... Please don't go beyond what is absolutely necessary.
How far? <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe8jJBoEmuY" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe8jJBoEmuY</a>
Gene editing is the surest path to dystopia that I can currently imagine. And I don’t see any way to avoid the inevitable arms race. If North Korea is engineering super intelligent kids it is almost certain that South Korea and/or China will do the same. Then it will just cascade from there.<p>Engineered vs not engineered could easily become the new class system where the rich-ish are able to produce “better” children and exponentially widen the gap.<p>Could also lose all semblance of uniqueness. Want your child to be a redhead with a 170 IQ? Okay, pay enough and it’s yours.<p>So I think the real question is not how far SHOULD we go, but instead how far WILL we go. And how quickly will we go there.