Gene editing, race, and the social contract
Imagine Jennifer Doudna working in the lab overnight, her eyes sore, her head pulsing, and her mind swirling with an existential crisis. Utilizing a bacterial cell’s self-defense mechanism, the geneticist has mastered the ability to reproduce and guide gene-editing technology, otherwise known as CRISPR-Cas9. This technology could save countless lives, cure genetic diseases, and reverse the effects of cancer. But it could also advance efforts at human enhancement, leading to a revival of modern eugenics.
In December, the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine held a three-day summit on CRISPR technology. Participants considered the scientific, ethical, and governance issues associated with new and emerging gene-editing technologies such as recombinant DNA technology, stem cell research in human embryos, and human cloning. They discussed the scientific foundations that govern the clinical, ethical, legal, and social implications of gene editing in humans. The summit hosts created a gene-editing outline to provide researchers, clinicians, and policymakers with a comprehensive understanding of the rising concerns over human gene editing.
As towering scholars hypothesize our biofutures, many faculty and undergraduates in the life sciences are imagining the world to come. We ponder such miracles as curing genetic diseases. Yet we wonder if deliberations on CRISPR technology will establish a context for genetic enhancement and eugenics in our global neoliberal context.
