Canadian Scientist Wants to Create Genetically Engineered Human Beings

AI gets most of the attention, but biotechnology may be even more impactful on the human future. Indeed, I think it is the most powerful technology since the splitting of the atom — perhaps even in history, as it has the potential to literally alter the human race or any cell/organism — which could cure diseases or unleash an unstoppable pandemic. Attention must be paid.

Some biotechnologists are intent on pursuing radical biotechnologies — whether to eliminate disease, or as I expect to become the bigger, more remunerative draw, to create designer babies enhanced to be smarter, more beautiful, or otherwise made to order — regardless of the ethical questions.

A long piece in The Guardian illustrates the stakes we face. The profile focuses on Kathie Tie, a Canadian entrepreneurial biotechnologist who brags that she is going to learn how to genetically engineer human babies with the CRISPR method–regardless of what anyone thinks.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

And, she intends to engage in germ-line engineering that will pass down the generations. From the profile:

Gene editing has the power to alter the trajectory of human evolution forever; the direction it takes will depend on who wields the editing tools. “There is no public funding available for researchers in the space,” Tie explains. “Everything is privately funded.” It’s up to entrepreneurs to demonstrate the potential benefits for humankind, she says, so regulators may soften their hardline stance and allow them to rewrite human DNA. That’s why the use of germline gene editing for reproductive purposes (rather than research) is banned in the UK, the US and China, and there is widespread international agreement that no research should be conducted on embryos that could grow to term and be born as babies.

Biotechnology companies and researchers are playing a game of “hide the ball” here. They agree to ban or voluntarily refrain from doing that which can’t yet be done but conduct the very experiments necessary to learn how to do it.

This is precisely what they did during the embryonic stem cell debate by promoting the so-called 14-Day Rule that prohibited maintaining embryos being experimented upon beyond two weeks. The thing is: They couldn’t then maintain embryos longer than that outside of a woman’s body. Once they experimented to the point that they could, the 14-Day rule was scuttled. Today, there are no time limits regulating experimentation on nascent human life.

The profile lays out the stakes in this discussion quite clearly:

Gene editing has the power to alter the trajectory of human evolution forever; the direction it takes will depend on who wields the editing tools.

CRISPR, like most biotechnologies, is a double-edged sword. It can be used therapeutically to treat disease-causing genes, or it can be deployed eugenically to “enhance” babies subjectively — to manipulate them as mere products — designed (theoretically) to order. In other words, a new regime of eugenics, but this time with near limitless capabilities.

Eugenics means “better in birth.” It is the path to establishing invidious distinctions among people, opening the door to massive oppression–just as the original eugenics movement did with involuntary sterilization and infanticide.

Some — like He Jiankui — who gene-edited embryos and brought them to birth in China — could not care less about the morality of using CRISPR for eugenics. He has even stated that there are no limits to his hubristic intent to seize control of human evolution (ironically, through intelligent design):

Since He was released from jail in 2022, China’s Dr Frankenstein has emerged as an unlikely social media star, with close to 150,000 followers on X. His posts over the past year have been unrepentant, but also – intriguingly – uncensored by the Chinese government. “Silicon Valley this and that – you are not the only country in the world that has investors,” he wrote in August, followed by, “Designer babies, super smart or super good-looking, are inevitable.” At the same time, China’s biotechnology ambitions have rapidly expanded. On 12 September, premier Li Qiang announced new draft regulations on biomedical technologies that emphasised “the need to promote innovative development” and “accelerate R&D and commercialization”.

“Welcome to the dawn of the biological arms race,” Tie posted on X in response to Li’s announcement

This is the road to biotechnological anarchy. Are we going to allow these researchers to manipulate human embryos — and later, fetuses — like so much potter’s clay?

I fear so. Western society has little stomach for limiting rogue actors, as we saw back in the 90s with Jack Kevorkian’s illegal assisted suicide campaign. Also, China is the country where ethics go to die.

Moreover, I don’t recall President Trump ever mentioning the need to steer biotechnology toward proper ethical interventions and away from immoral pursuits. I don’t think he gives a damn one way or the other. Or, perhaps he saw the grief to which President George W. Bush was subjected for minor federal funding restrictions of embryonic stem cell research and wants no part of such a controversy.

Another point raised in the story is that therapeutic gene editing doesn’t have to be done in a way that passes down the generations, i.e., “germ cell” CRISPR on embryos or gametes. It can also be accomplished somatically post early embryo stage, including on adults, alterations that will not become heritable but which have great healing potential. Indeed, one somatic CRISPR product has been approved by the FDA for treatment of sickle cell anemia. To me, this is the ethical way to go.

Despite this potential, Tie says that there is no stopping this research in all its permutations:

Biology is a double-edged sword – it can be used for good, to heal people, or it can be used for bad,” Tie continues. “Stopping this research will only drive bad actors to do it secretively. There is no way to stop this. This is inevitable. The only way to proceed is to do it openly and transparently.

That’s true only if we lack the will to properly regulate it. We are discussing the proper rules for the development of AI. We effectively set proper parameters on the use of atomic energy. So why not also corral powerful biotechnologies like CRISPR?

We had better hop to it. Imagine what could happen as AI is applied to biotechnological research. If that ongoing reality doesn’t raise goosebumps, I don’t know what will.