On Progress and Innovation

Progress. As a society, progress is prioritised and preached at every turn, from a very young age. China is notorious for this, and that's what I'll be covering in this blog post, whether or not this emphasis on innovation and moving forward is actually healthy for our society, with a bit of science sprinkled in for good effect.

Taking on a more well-known figure this week. Above is a picture of Chinese biophysics researcher He Jiankui, who has made waves in the scientific community with his work involving a technology known as CRISPR, which stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats. Probably meaningless to most of you, but the general idea is genome editing. His work involved the editing of the genes of two embryos for HIV resistance, as their father is HIV positive, and allowing for the embryos to then develop. The result? Twin girls Lulu and Nana, and worldwide outcry.

The concept of CRISPR and its usage in the editing of embryos is not new, scientist Junjiu Huang has repaired a defective gene for beta thalassaemia, a genetic disorder in which there is an absence of certain proteins in the affected's haemoglobin - the oxygen carrier of our blood. What makes this experiment different to He's is that the embryos used were clones, and they were not allowed to develop into foetuses, thus managing to avoid all ethical questioning.

In the case of Mr. Jiankui, since the edited embryos were allowed to develop, and the success of the process then broadcasted on YouTube and at conferences, he has elicited an uproar in scientific circles, and has been condemned by not only the university he works under, but also his own country. 

Other points opposing He's usage of CRISPR include the technology not being cleared for human use, and thus being unsafe, as well as the resistance for HIV that was implemented into the embryos being unnecessary, as there are other methods to prevent the children from having HIV. The possibility for side-effects has not been explored. In addition to this, who would regulate the usage of CRISPR? How would you go about doing it in an unbiased manner, with everyone’s best interests in mind?

He Jiankui is currently missing. If you truly wish to point the finger and assign blame for this occurrence, look no further than the country of China, with their Create in China campaign, in an attempt to remove and move past the stipulations that come with the phrase 'Made in China'. The points of emphasis, progress and innovation, which may very well be the reason why this happened in the first place, be it a good or a bad thing. 

Them giving such importance to innovations at any cost has not proven to be the greatest strategy employed in recent times. The phenomenon of 'Shenzhen Speed' comes to mind, where the city of Shenzhen in China was developed at an astounding rate, but at the cost of quality. 17 buildings have collapsed in Shenzhen over the past year. China is so focused on removing those stereotypes, and changing the world's perception of them that it's clouding their judgement, and thus their opinions on matters like these. They've seen the rest of the world's opinion on the matter, and are afraid to challenge it as it may worsen the perception of them. Would He have been condemned if he was from the USA or England? As a hypothetical scenario, it's quite interesting. I personally don't believe that the same response would have been given, rather we may be seeing a possible Nobel Prize in He's future, as opposed to this universal condemnation.

It may appear that I'm taking the side of He in what has been a one sided affair, make no mistake, I believe what was done is morally wrong on multiple levels, however I would like to look at these events from a perspective of scientific development, and what it could mean for the future of genetic engineering.

Now we come to the implications of this surgery, and what it means for us as a society. Currently, this is considered to be against all laws, regulations and medical ethics, but what if it turns out well? What if Lulu and Nana turn out to be two completely normal children, but are now safe from HIV, which they would have had to live with otherwise? You cannot deny the possibilities that this technology brings with it, the ability to completely remove the possibility for genetic defects, or eradicate multiple diseases from the human race, it all seems too good to be true, but is it within reach? Would we take this technology, and go too far with it? Would we commercialise it? 

Are we playing God?

I can't help but wonder if this could be viewed as a turning point in bioengineering in the future, and He Jiankui a misunderstood genius, who did what the world told him not to, à la Galileo and his feud with the church back in the 16th century. We could be witnessing history, or we could be seeing yet another scientific discovery get lost in the annals of history, only to be rediscovered later and the credit be given to someone else, an occurrence far too common in the scientific community.