Documentary, Other
Gene editing: should you be worried?
The EconomistJames Dale, Isla Mirada, Natalie Kofler, Emmanuelle Charpentier, Jennifer Doudna, Josh Lehrer, Denis Rebrikov, Theresa Blankmeyer-Burke, He Zhongkui, George Church
- New climate change mitigation approaches and genetic technologies are expected to fundamentally alter human-nature relationships, with climate change driving the need for drought-tolerant crops and a period of global flux over the next decade or two.
- CRISPR and gene editing are projected to become cheaper and more accessible, potentially benefitting 200 million people and transforming medicine immediately through sickle cell disease treatments, though regulatory systems face strain and global bans in the EU may contrast with availability in Japan and America.
- The TR4 disease is expected to wipe out the Cavendish banana variety economically, prompting expectations that gene-edited bananas could bypass field trial permissions to commercialize solutions, while other edits aim to create low-blood-pressure tomatoes and non-browning mushrooms.
- Genetically modified mosquito releases are anticipated to crash female mosquito populations within a few generations without harming pollinators, though community perception risks could damage tourism-based economies like that of Isla Mirada.
- De-extinction efforts, such as using mammoth DNA to create cold-tolerant elephants for Siberian permafrost preservation, are expected to potentially offset a gigaton of CO2 annually, though critics argue the overall climate impact may be minimal and risks diverting attention from pressing conservation issues.
- Significant ethical concerns are raised regarding the potential for bio-warfare, the creation of "designer humans" via editing conditions like deafness, and the permanent, multi-generational impacts of germline editing on future descendants.
- Public resistance and a lack of community engagement are expected to hinder beneficial crop development, potentially triggering a "GMO storm 3.0" characterized by distrust and barriers based on opposing principles that could expose people to unagreed-upon risks.
- The global moratorium following the 2018 incident may restrict research in Russia, while the scientific community faces risks of bad results from unregulated "wild experiments" if safety protocols and ethical oversight do not keep pace with rapid technological advancement.
- Future developments face a dilemma where rejecting technologies like gene editing may prevent solutions to climate change and agricultural crises, despite fears that these tools could be used for eugenics or that the technology will intensify social exclusion dynamics.
- Opportunities exist for animals to be gene-edited to curb global warming, yet the age of CRISPR also risks normalizing the elimination of genetic conditions like Down syndrome, setting precedents that could redefine concepts of belonging and human diversity.