The Pace of Scientific Advancement

The pace with which scientific and technological advances are happening is astounding. In 2014/2015, researchers had just begun to grasp the potential of the CRISPR/Cas9 system to edit genomes (see my previous blog here). The technology allows scientists to cut out pieces of DNA and replace the displaced DNA with a novel strand. This can be used to stop a gene from working or to correct its function. Now, researchers report that they have modified the CRISPR/Cas 9 and Cas 13 systems such that DNA is not cut but changed one base-pair at a time.

The principle in this case is that CRISPR systems can be used to guide other molecular enzymes to a location within the genome. Researchers can remove the cutting mechanism of CRISPR systems and add an enzyme that can convert the base-pair mutations one at a time. The technology is still not perfect, as the journals report that the efficiency of such systems may be only as much as 50% in the targeted areas. However, the procedure is seen as potentially safer than DNA cutting technologies that occasionally cut in the wrong place, potentially disrupting other genes.

CRISPR technology is our best hope yet for successful gene therapy. Although specificity and efficiency issues need to be resolved, this technology has the potential to repair cancer-causing mutations, correct single-base mutations that cause genetic diseases, seek out and disable HIV viruses lying dormant in human cells, repair mitochondria that have lost function due to a deletion or mutation, and many more beneficial effects. CRISPR could also be used to change such fundamental characteristics as eye-colour, skin-tone, propensity for a certain height or weight, and even some hard-wired behavioural traits. On the one hand, if possible, why would we not want to correct a propensity toward Autism, Alzheimers, or Huntingtons Chorea? On the other hand, how will we feel about genetic tinkering that allows one to choose whether or not a child will be born with an epicanthic fold, blond hair, or a small nose? How might we respond to research that created oversized or undersized humans or animals?  (Just imagine how many mini-humans you could fit on a West Jet economy flight; or the economic value of low-fat pigs for CRISPR bacon.) (Insert smile and groan here.) Such research is being conducted in animal models, once again proving that our scientific capabilities are exceeding our philosophical and ethical conversations on these subjects.

CRISPR technology is a contemporary “genie in a bottle” much like the atomic research of the previous century. It has been released from the bottle in which it was contained for many millennia. We cannot put it back; nor do we wish to put it back into the bottle. We must consider how we will use this precious gift of God’s science as we seek to live out God’s image in humanity on this fragile lifeboat planet.

AI and NT: What makes us human?

Two recent developments in science could leave us asking the question, “What does it mean to be human?” First, the October 19 edition of the journal Nature reports on a remarkable computer program that taught itself how to play the ancient game called Go. Programmers set up the algorithms which included the structure and rules of the game and then turned the Artificial Intelligence (AI) program loose on playing the game against itself. In a matter of days, the computer had become skilled enough to beat human champions and other computers. This is unique because all previous AI programs have learned the game by studying the moves of expert human players. AlphaGo Zero, as this latest program is called, achieved mastery of the game without human training. The implications of this program go far beyond the world of gaming. Might we one day be able to give an algorithm a list of circumstances and resources and set it off to find the best solutions to complex mathematical, engineering, and biological health questions? Might artificial intelligences one day solve such problems as how to build a better airplane, how to solve famine in places of high need, how to understand gravity and its complex relationship with time and space, or might AIs one day give us world-wide peace?

We will come back to the significance of the AlphaGo Zero accomplishment in a minute; now let’s turn to another remarkable report from the October 5 edition of the journal Science. Researchers at the Max Planck Institute have discovered that “about 1.8 to 2.6 percent of DNA in non-Africans is from … ancient human-Neandertal interbreeding.” That is approximately “10 to 20 percent more Neandertal ancestry” than previously estimated. The researchers went on to discuss human behavior and health risks which may be mediated by this significant amount of Neanderthal (NT) DNA.

Both papers bear closer reading and are significant in a number of ways; however, today, I would like to focus on the one question disclosed in the title of this article: “What makes humans human?” If artificial intelligence programs can, “on their own,” learn to play human games and master them better than the best human players, and if we humans of European descent are an interesting admixture of human and non-human (Neanderthal) DNA, what is it that truly sets us apart as human?

This will become a more and more critical question as we consider ethical questions of the future. Are AI programs conscious? What happens when we turn off or destroy AI hardware? If humans add to or subtract from DNA in the human genome using CRISPR technology, are the resulting humans still human? What if we were to add animal DNA or plant DNA to the human genome? How far would we have to go before people began to question the humanity of the resulting persons?

For years, philosophers, scientists, and theologians have discussed, argued about, and looked for answers to questions about the nature of the Imago Dei, the image of God in humans. Science starts with pieces of scientific data and assumptions about the limits of human understanding relying only on empirical data. Philosophers allow for the influence of ideas beyond scientific datum that flow out of the consciousness of humans. Theologians welcome scientific, philosophic, and revelatory information and believe that God speaks through the book of Nature and the book of the Bible.

As AI programs become more and more sophisticated, and we learn more and more about the nature of our humanity, it will be important to remember the ancient words of God found in the Bible. Christians and theologians will certainly wish to make this a starting point for any discussions on the nature of humanity:

So God created human beings in his own image.
In the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. – Genesis 1:27 (NLT)

In the midst of great change, in a time when the foundations of humanity seem unstable, these words provide an anchor point for the discussions to come.

JCVI-syn3.0

At a biological level, what is the minimal number of genes needed to sustain life in an organism? That is a question that is being asked by a group of scientists who have been engineering the genome of the bacteria known as Mycoplasma mycoides. For a few years, the team has been taking genes out and rearranging the order of the genome within this bacterium. In 2010, they engineered a strain called JCVI-syn1.0 which contained only 901 genes. That is a relatively small genome considering that a typical strain of Escherichia coli (E. coli) has approximately 5400 genes; but JCVI-syn1.0 was not yet minimal. A new strain, created in 2016, called JCVI-syn3.0 has been developed that contains only 473 genes. The bacteria continue to live, thrive, and reproduce with only these genes. This strain may be pointing to the basic building blocks of life and the minimum genes necessary to sustain life and reproduction.

It is an interesting philosophical question: “What is life?” What are the basic components necessary to make something alive versus inanimate? These 473 genes may define life. An interesting side-bar is that 65 of these genes are known to be necessary for life, but it is not known what they are doing in the cell. Further research into the function of these 65 genes will be a key area of future research.

Another fascinating aspect of this research is that the researchers have been organizing the genes into little modules and keeping genes of similar function together in the genome. Evolutionary change has put genes in a certain order, but these scientists have found that they can change that order and make it more convenient for their work without detrimental consequences to the bacteria. CRISPR technology has made the whole process simpler and led to the recent rapid developments.

This brings science a few steps closer to creating synthetic life. Of course, at this stage, researchers are simply reassembling the components supplied by the Creator to build a synthetic cell. How far might humans be able to go in building other cell structures beyond these artificial genomes? Whatever one thinks of such biological engineering, it is important to be aware of the directions in which science is moving. There are philosophical, theological, and ethical implications of such research. We must be ready to discuss and give guidance in these areas as technology continues to push boundaries. 

CRISPR

CRISPR is a relatively new term that describes new discoveries and new technology in the world of genetics. CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats and refers to short repetitions of base pair sequences in bacterial genomes which naturally occur as part of bacterial genetic defence mechanisms against invading viruses. These CRISPR sequences are used by bacteria to store genetic memories of past viral invasions that might otherwise lead to the destruction of the bacterial cell. Next to a CRISPR sequence is a segment of DNA that represents part of a viral genome from a previous encounter with that virus. It is like the bacteria store a photo of all of the viruses that previously tried to kill them and then recognize that virus when it shows up again. Cas9 enzymes search through the cell for these potentially dangerous pieces of DNA and then make RNA copies that will guide the Cas9 enzyme to the dangerous viral DNA and cut it in two so that the virus is defeated. If a new virus shows up, Cas9 first makes a copy of the new viral genome and inserts it in between the CRISPR sequences so that it is ready for the next time this virus tries to invade.

This biological system within the cells of bacteria has been exploited and used by genetic scientists to create a tool that can be used to edit the genome of humans and other research subjects. So, you may also hear people refer to CRISPR technology as it is used for gene editing in medicine and research. Cas9 and other CRISPR enzymes recognize strings of DNA about 20 base-pairs in length and can therefore be engineered to be very specific and targeted. This has allowed researchers to load Cas9 with a specific sequence that can then target where they would like to cut out a piece of DNA, say to knock out a gene and determine what that gene does, knock out a rogue gene that is malfunctioning, or to cut out a defective gene and replace it with a properly functioning gene. Recently, scientists in China used this technology to engineer cells to potentially treat lung cancer. In this case, CRISPR technology was used on immune cells taken from the patients and a gene was disabled. The protein, PD-1, normally slows down or ends an immune response (something that is normally needed but exploited by cancer cells) and so researchers inactivated it so that the body might continue to mount an immune response against the cancer cells in the lungs. This represents the first time CRISPR technology has been used in such a way in human trials.

As one can readily see, this technology has vast implications and has the potential to solve many medical problems. CRISPR could repair the mutation that causes Cystic-Fibrosis in a family’s genetic makeup, or repair the gene that causes genetic forms of colon cancer such as Adenomatous Polyposis Coli (APC). It also brings with it the possibility of ethical challenges. It could be used to substitute the gene for blue eyes in place of the gene for brown eyes (or the opposite exchange); or it could be used to substitute a gene that codes for average height for a gene that codes for exceptional height (really handy if you are trying to build an Olympic basketball team). Taken to logical conclusions, CRISPR technology could be used to build a super-race of humans and even create genetic enhancements that cannot yet be imagined (think real life X-Men mutants). Scientists in China have already published data showing that they had successfully modified the DNA on nonviable human embryos. They could have just as easily been working on viable embryos.

In a future where diseases can be eradicated and enhancements can be made, what becomes of the average person with defects or no enhancements? Should we concern ourselves with this? A few years ago, the movie Gattaca attempted to engage audiences in questions related to such issues. Now, nearly 20 years later, genetic technology has advanced to nearly the point predicted in that movie. What will another 10 years of medical and technological advance look like in our world? How might we prepare now for the ethical questions yet to come?

For further explanation and discussion, read this article on the modification of DNA in nonviable human embryos.