What is the big story of our time? Trump? Caitlin Jenner? ISIS? Probably not. Five years, fifty years from now history will probably elevate to prominence something we are now overlooking. A lot of smart people seem to be nominating CRISPR/Cas9 as a likely contender.
If you haven’t heard of it you may be thinking with dread that CRISPR is the acronym of some newer, crazier, deadlier terror group. But no. If fact, there is already Nobel talk for the four scientists who contributed to the development of CRISPR, though the rules of the prize restrict winners to three per category per year. Actually CRISPR is a tool, which sounds dull when put that way.
We forger that most of the progress in the world has come about as the result of better tools. Things that now seem trivial once changed the world – the grindstone, the scythe, the plow, the loom. The microscope and telescope, simple tubes with lenses on each end, opened up vistas large and small previously unimagined.
It took decades or generations using levers and pulleys, horse and man power to build a gothic cathedral of pyramid. Using the steam shovel, the jack hammer, the pile driver, the rivet gun, it took just one year and 45 days to build the Empire State Building.
CRISPR is a tool to edit and engineer DNA. There have been gene splicing techniques for some time but they have been cumbersome, imprecise and slow. CRISPR allows a single targeted section of DNA to be edited with precise snips quickly, easily, inexpensively by thousands of labs that once would have found the process beyond their capabilities.
Starry-eyed prognosticators suggest the possibility of greatly accelerated research into treatments and cures of numerous diseases with identified genetic signatures. Anyone who has been sideswiped by diseases with a genetic cause or component like some cancers, Tay-Sachs, Alzheimer’s, cystic fibrosis, Duchenne muscular dystrophy can only pray CRISPR comes to the rescue.
The tool could also theoretically be used to alter the germlines of plants, animals and humans to improve the species in question. Not surprisingly the notion of mucking around with human DNA in such a way as to alter the offspring of the race has sent a tremor through some members of the cognoscenti. The possible dark side of this promising technology caused a conclave of wizards to be convened last December, the International Summit on Human Gene Editing. Its purpose was to discuss the ethical ramifications of alterations to human germ cells. It concluded by proposing a moratorium on such a step pending further study. Only America, China and Britain were represented, so the rest of the world’s scientists may be proceeding apace.
Though I am far from competent to discuss this complex subject, it seems obvious that changing the DNA of living things in ways that would be heritable might produce unintended consequences. The mutation that produces sickle cell anemia also offers some protection from malaria, so curing the unfortunate effect of the mutation may also erase the good that comes with it.
Many other human and animal traits may also be part of a complicated good-news/bad news equation that we are not yet able to fully appreciate. This suggests the wisdom of proceeding with caution. One scientist has noted that people who lose their memories to Alzheimer’s seem to have had superior memories before the disease afflicted them.
What if a little genetic fix to prevent Alzheimer’s late in life had the unwanted side effect of degrading the quality of one’s memory for decades before? Would people make such a bargain? And what if the fix or another like it were made before the ramifications became clear and the altered genetics were passed along so that future generations paid the price? Creepy.
It is easy to imagine CRISPR optimists saying, “Why worry? If a snip now has unforeseen consequences, well then, snip we’ll fix it later.” Realists may suspect life doesn’t work so neatly. But for the moment it appears there is a new powerful tool that may allow us to investigate living things more deeply, to improve crops, cure diseases and alter life on this planet for the better.
I’m all for progress. I think we are better off having indoor plumbing, electric light, central heating and the machine on which I am typing these words. I don’t miss Wite Out. On the other hand, humans being human — that is, fallible, hubristic, savage creatures — it isn’t hard to imagine some gene-splicing nihilist deciding to use CRISPR to mess with microbes to make them more deadly or kill our staple crops rather than improve them.
It is probably just as well that the scientific community is beginning to consider the downside of this amazing development. Of course, as the cliché goes, the genie is out of the bottle. And genies seem to be fonder of getting up to no good than to good. The internet already offers hobbyists the chance to order CRISPR kits online.
Though CRISPR has been discussed on the back pages of magazines and newspapers, on Colbert’s late night show and on Diane Rehm, it is off the radar for most people. Though utopia or Armageddon may be just around the corner, the vast majority of people are fixated on the daily grind, Kardashians, Trumps, killing sprees, and sports. ‘Twas ever thus.
In his great poem, “Musee de Beaux Arts,” Auden is bemused by how often the Old Masters depicted “the miraculous birth” or ”the dreadful martyrdom” almost disregarded in a corner of the canvas. Such things as Icarus falling into the sea seem to take place “while someone else is eating or opening a window or just walking dully along.”
Just so. We may well be living in an age of miracles, but if we aren’t in the lab where the genetic knitting and purling is under way, we will probably not know much about it until the ramifications come to knock at our door, clad in angel wings or carrying a scythe.