Support NeoGAF

[OraleeWey]

Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats

From Wikipedia

CRISPR, /ˈkrɪspər/, is a family of DNA sequences in bacteria that contains snippets of DNA from viruses that have attacked the bacterium. These snippets are used by the bacterium to detect and destroy DNA from further attacks by similar viruses. These sequences play a key role in a bacterial defence system,[2] and form the basis of a genome editing technology known as CRISPR/Cas9 that allows permanent modification of genes within organisms.[3]

I have nothing but opinions regarding this technology. I watched two videos on YouTube and that's how I came across CRISPR. If I understand correctly, In a nutshell, it can be used to destroy viruses. "CRISPR" will save a part of the genetic data of an attacker into an organisms own genetic information making it immune to its attacker (please note, it's more complicated than this explanation). So it can be used to cure things like HIV, AIDS, cancer, etc. Now this is totally and completely fine with me.

However, CRISPR can also be used to genetically modify any organism. Once that door has been opened, there is no going back. Theoretically speaking, you can have the perfect human being. A perfect army of perfect humans. Agile, smart, strong, emotionless, buff, the list goes on. Anything you want can be genetically modified as you wish. This is where I say I draw the line.

My whole reasoning behind me being against this for now, is that evolution makes the perfect organism through trial and error and a whole lot of time. A whole lot of it. Thousands, if not, millions of years. To be able to use this new technology, imo, which can basically change DNA from one day to the next is somewhat scary. For a lack of better words, this is doing God's work (I'm atheist btw, just using that for dramatic purposes).


They're already talking about using it on mosquitoes to eliminate malaria. By sending off genetically modified mosquitoes into the wild which cannot carry the virus. This is fine and all assuming that everything goes according to plan. But honestly, if you ask me, "life finds a way", it could potentially backfire into something destructive and unforeseen. It could cause more harm than good. I just don't think we are ready enough to try to mess with the natural balance.

I also don't have enough faith in humanity, it could also be weaponized. I just have so many concerns/thoughts/opinions regarding this.

One thing is for sure though, it's coming. CRISPR is on its early research stages, but the technology is very promising, cheaper than other alternatives and for now there is no stopping it. It'll be here sooner or later.

 

[gamz]

I thought this was going to be about refrigerator crispers. They are worthless in my experience.

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

I'm totally for it. Let's get rid of the gene that makes us racist.

 

[Air]

A lot of beautiful and horrific potential. Should exclusively be used in medicinal areas and other areas where diseases can be overcome with its use. I think if you stay on that course everything will be fine

 

[Dreadnought]

CRISPR is amazing technology hopefully it will allow us the decide the sex of a baby one day.

 

[Beartruck]

Could we use this technology to create human chimeras? I'd like to have grandkids with gills and webbing to survive the flooded, global warmed future.

I'm totally for it. Let's get rid of the gene that makes us racist.

Racism is a social phenomenon. You can't "breed it out", which is why we have 20 year old Nazi's marching around.

 

[OraleeWey]

CRISPR is amazing technology hopefully it will allow us the decide the sex of a baby one day.

^

My concerns exactly.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

I mean it's a technique, course it's gonna have negatives if it's used without foresight and oversight. We'll probably start slow with it, biosynthesis reasons, and if we use it dangerously, well, it's only one of the many things that could've spelled our doom.

 

[Lightning_Roller]

Like any tech, this could be used for good or ill. But I am worried about the ramifications of this tech for the future. Very worried.

 

[SpiceMelange]

Absolutely amazing breakthrough and I only hope to live long enough for me to see new treatments for genetic diseases like my psoriasis.

Edit: here's a good video that explain CRISPR and also addresses common concerns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAhjPd4uNFY

 

[jchap]

Forget making mosquitos not be able to carry malaria. They are talking about releasing mosquitoes which when they reproduce create only male mosquitoes which in a few generations (<1 year) make the mosquitos go extinct.

I say ethics be damned! Let's wipe out Mosquitoes and Ticks today!

 

[wandering]

The ethics of transhumanism is a new but growing area of interest in academia.

 

[Aurongel]

I think it's more existentially scary than realistically scary if we're talking about the next 20ish years. After that I think we need to collectively have a discussion about ethical boundaries around human editing.

The ability to definitively choose a child's gender for example is something that would be an ethical and sociological disaster in a place like China. That's the shit that scares me about it, there's the potential to further stratify the haves from the have nots in society.

But as I said, it's all nebulous at this point. What's important is we prepare ourselves for the inevitable conversation.

 

[Borgnine]

My whole reasoning behind me being against this for now, is that evolution makes the perfect organism through trial and error and a whole lot of time. A whole lot of it. Thousands, if not, millions of years. To be able to use this new technology, imo, which can basically change DNA from one day to the next is somewhat scary. For a lack of better words, this is doing God's work (I'm atheist btw, just using that for dramatic purposes).

Nature, or God, gives someone cancer, you're of the opinion that we should do nothing?

Also I don't think evolution makes a perfect anything, it just makes what it makes. Evolution has made us with our brains that are able to come up with these life saving techniques, how is it not part of the same continuum? Just because it doesn't happen in a jungle?

 

[Metroxed]

In the particular case of CRISPR and humans, it should be limited to preventing genetic diseases and other preventable genetic problems, as well as getting rid of current diseases like cancer (or just all the diseases). It should be highly regulated and should not be used for making "designer babies", as in choosing the sex of the baby, or any other physical traits.

 

[DrROBschiz]

In for eradicating all disease and being able to save existing lives (maybe even improve or cure serious conditions)

It does have some crazy implications in the long haul... If we are indeed successful in being able to tack every biological malady at the the genetic level... what would future generations of people look like?

 

[Epsilon-delta]

Paging Soka.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

what would future generations of people look like?

Large parts of society can't even deal with the superficial idea of a different skin colour. Exactly like they look now.

 

[Dreadnought]

My whole reasoning behind me being against this for now, is that evolution makes the perfect organism through trial and error and a whole lot of time. A whole lot of it. Thousands, if not, millions of years. To be able to use this new technology, imo, which can basically change DNA from one day to the next is somewhat scary. For a lack of better words, this is doing God's work (I'm atheist btw, just using that for dramatic purposes

That's not even what evolution is

 

[Makonero]

I think the curing diseases thing is a no broader and everyone is on board with it.

The crazier eugenics implications will be hampered by anti-science morons before the rest of us get a chance to debate the ethics anyways, similar to stem cells and human cloning.

So when Chine has a super-army because they also forwent the ethics discussion (in the opposite way) we will all pay the price.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Large parts of society can't even deal with the superficial idea of a different skin colour. Exactly like they look now.

Could help with certain things with regards to economic blight

Mainly lowering the burdens of obscene health care

Assuming that CRISPR tech and treatments remain as cheap as they claim them to be

 

[Geist-]

Crispr is an amazing advancement. Not quite perfect, but we're definitely getting closer to having total control over our own genes.

I think the major problem facing this technology is the squeamishness that people seem to have when it comes to discussing it. People don't want to think about the potential problems that can come from have that level of control over human genes. Do we restrict it only to genetic diseases? Or can we subsidize so that everyone's children can be "designed"? Will it just be another thing dividing the rich from the poor?

People don't want to think about it, so we're not going to know what to do until it's literally happening.

 

[cackhyena]

I'm totally for it. Let's get rid of the gene that makes us racist.

That's not...hmm.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

I don't really see humanity as is as being so magical that improving it is some crime against nature tbh.

Nature, or God, gives someone cancer, you're of the opinion that we should do nothing?

Also I don't think evolution makes a perfect anything, it just makes what it makes. Evolution has made us with our brains that are able to come up with these life saving techniques, how is it not part of the same continuum? Just because it doesn't happen in a jungle?

This too.

 

[broscientific]

So when Chine has a super-army because they also forwent the ethics discussion (in the opposite way) we will all pay the price.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Crispr is an amazing advancement. Not quite perfect, but we're definitely getting closer to having total control over our own genes.

I think the major problem facing this technology is the squeamishness that people seem to have when it comes to discussing it. People don't want to think about the potential problems that can come from have that level of control over human genes. Do we restrict it only to genetic diseases? Or can we subsidize so that everyone's children can be "designed"? Will it just be another thing dividing the rich from the poor?

People don't want to think about it, so we're not going to know what to do until it's literally happening.

People need to think about it and participate

And most of all educate

Because there is no closing the door on progress. Better to advance with people who care then let it be advanced by people that dont

 

[Laekon]

I believe this is the technology we used in a community college biology class to place sea anemone genes into E. coli bacteria to make it phosphorescent. It was cheap enough to be part of a class that cost about $400.

People should not be able to pick the sex of a child. Nothing good will come of it.

 

[Geist-]

I'm totally for it. Let's get rid of the gene that makes us racist.

Mandatory skin color randomization might work.

 

[cubicle47b]

I always see it and think about the data mining process before realizing it's something else.

 

[Jarsonot]

There's a good radiolab podcast on this.

In case you're not familiar, this can't really change an existing human's genes, you'd have to change the DNA in too many cells.

What it is more realistically capable of is altering the DNA in the really early embryo stages, where you can more likely get to all the cells (there just aren't many at this stage). You can basically rewrite the DNA to whatever you want.

It works, it's proven, it's cheap, and it's relatively easy to do.

Don't remember the exact details, but nations all agreed not to use it on humans, and then shortly thereafter china was testing it on human embryos, which wouldn't be brought to term. When people cried foul, China said it was just experimenting, they'd never ACTUALLY do it. So. Yeah. Just seeing if they could, but they never actually would, fam.

No need to worry.

 

[broscientific]

I believe this is the technology we used in a community college biology class to place sea anemone genes into E. coli bacteria to make it phosphorescent. It was cheap enough to be part of a class that cost about $400.

People should not be able to pick the sex of a child. Nothing good will come of it.

It isn't. You likely transformed the E. coli with plasmid DNA which is non-permanent. CRISPR stably integrates DNA into an organism's genome and is significantly more expensive than simply transforming bacteria. CRISPR takes months to perform and many rounds of selection and sequencing to ensure the gene is properly transferred where as bacterial transformation can be completed in about a day (as little as one hour if you've already got a stock of competent cells)

 

[SourCinnamon]

CRISPR technologies are a breakthrough in the sense that now we can introduce targeted DNA changes in a fast way. Several techniques for DNA modification have been used until CRISPR/Cas9 was studied and applied. However, they took a lot of time and money. And most of them were not even targeted: you could introduce a gene in your organism but it could be put anywhere in the genome. For example, in the middle of an important gene.

Now we can decide where to make the modifications. And most importantly, it is fast and (kind of) cheap. Something that could take months to be performed can be easily made in a couple of weeks.

The ethical dilemma is that because it is cheap and easy to perform (compared to what we had before), there will be a democratization of the technology. That means that it is going to be used more frequently. DNA modification technologies have existed since long time ago. The problema is that now it is fast and accessible.

I am a student of biotechnology so hit me with all the questions that you have and I will try to answer them in a clear way.

 

[Laekon]

It isn't. You likely transformed the E. coli with plasmid DNA which is non-permanent. CRISPR stably integrates DNA into an organism's genome and is significantly more expensive than simply transforming bacteria. CRISPR takes months to perform and many rounds of selection and sequencing to ensure the gene is properly transferred where as bacterial transformation can be completed in about a day (as little as one hour if you've already got a stock of competent cells)

Thanks. It was a few years ago and we probably covered both at the same time in lecture but only did plasmid in lab.

It just blows my mind how far our knowledge has come but still know so little.

 

[wandering]

There's a good radiolab podcast on this.

In case you're not familiar, this can't really change an existing human's genes, you'd have to change the DNA in too many cells.

What it is more realistically capable of is altering the DNA in the really early embryo stages, where you can more likely get to all the cells (there just aren't many at this stage). You can basically rewrite the DNA to whatever you want.

It works, it's proven, it's cheap, and it's relatively easy to do.

Don't remember the exact details, but nations all agreed not to use it on humans, and then shortly thereafter china was testing it on human embryos, which wouldn't be brought to term. When people cried foul, China said it was just experimenting, they'd never ACTUALLY do it. So. Yeah. Just seeing if they could, but they never actually would, fam.

No need to worry.

I feel like it's not just China that's doing experiments behind closed doors...

 

[PeskyToaster]

Sounds cool. I firmly believe in the human ability to engineer themselves into a predictable problem and then engineer a creative solution for it.

 

[BriGuy]

Not too big on it at the moment because my guide RNAs didn't work like I had hoped. Ended up wasting a bunch of time when shRNA would have been fine for my purposes.

 

[OraleeWey]

Nature, or God, gives someone cancer, you're of the opinion that we should do nothing?

Also I don't think evolution makes a perfect anything, it just makes what it makes. Evolution has made us with our brains that are able to come up with these life saving techniques, how is it not part of the same continuum? Just because it doesn't happen in a jungle?

If you were to uncoil your DNA, it would stretch past the sun, past Pluto and then some. Messing around with DNA should not be taken lightly. Nature has being trying to perfect you (us) for millions of years. I single modification that can make a genetic change in just a few hours, should not be taken lightly.

 

[Prezhulio]

There's a good radiolab podcast on this.

In case you're not familiar, this can't really change an existing human's genes, you'd have to change the DNA in too many cells.

What it is more realistically capable of is altering the DNA in the really early embryo stages, where you can more likely get to all the cells (there just aren't many at this stage). You can basically rewrite the DNA to whatever you want.

It works, it's proven, it's cheap, and it's relatively easy to do.

Don't remember the exact details, but nations all agreed not to use it on humans, and then shortly thereafter china was testing it on human embryos, which wouldn't be brought to term. When people cried foul, China said it was just experimenting, they'd never ACTUALLY do it. So. Yeah. Just seeing if they could, but they never actually would, fam.

No need to worry.

Crispr commercial treatments will be used in humans first for immunotherapy purposes like this (or other indications where targeted germline manipulation is possible), long before any "designer babies" or embryonic inherited disease treatment- http://www.nature.com/news/first-crispr-clinical-trial-gets-green-light-from-us-panel-1.20137

 

[rykomatsu]

To the OP -

Evolution does not make the perfect organism. It makes largely the most minimally adapted organism. There is no pressure to optimize...The changes are usually just "good enough"

 

[Alcoremortis]

I love it. It makes my job so much easier. I mainly use it for genetic screens in nematodes and it allows us to study things in months that would have taken decades previously.

But I don't think we need to worry about editing live humans anytime soon. It's a powerful technique but a long way from being accurate enough to do anything specific. Well nothing that couldn't more easily be done by selecting appropriate embryos for IVF.

 

[SourCinnamon]

If you were to uncoil your DNA, it would stretch past the sun, past Pluto and then some. Messing around with DNA should not be taken lightly. Nature has being trying to perfect you (us) for millions of years. I single modification that can make a genetic change in just a few hours, should not be taken lightly.

Nature does not drive for perfection. It drives for conditions that give an advantage over a selective pressure in the environment. There is no "perfection" idea in nature.

Also, it is not a matter of "just a few hours". It still requires effort, energy and some time. Genetic modifications happen all the time, for example mutations due to exposure to UV light and so forth.

Yes, human-made genetic modifications should not be taken lightly. But that is the reason there is a strong regulation based on predicting the possible outcomes of the introduced modifications.

 

[Alienous]

Intelligent design > Evolution. You can only get so far by stumbling blindly through the dark.

Bring it on.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

If you were to uncoil your DNA, it would stretch past the sun, past Pluto and then some. Messing around with DNA should not be taken lightly. Nature has being trying to perfect you (us) for millions of years. I single modification that can make a genetic change in just a few hours, should not be taken lightly.

OP I'm not really convinced you fully understand how evolution works.

Anyways the ethics of playing god has always been less interesting to me then the social and economic reprucussions of this technology. Since CRISPR is only at birth you really risk creating a genetically tiered society that will probably only amplify existing class gaps. If we ever get to that point, I think it's necessary for such a system's distribution to be nationalized and freely available.

 

[Perfect Blue]

OP watched two YouTube videos on it and suddenly thinks he's a scientist.

 

[kinoki]

CRISPR is amazing technology hopefully it will allow us the decide the sex of a baby one day.

We'd be happy if it's only a 10:1 ratio Man/Woman. In some parts of the world women will cease to exist. Which in turn will prompt the culling of man where we will re-write the human genome to produce twice as many women as men in order to restore balance. This change will then lead to balance in the force.

Crispr/cat9 is great for us. If we manage to harness it. Like getting rid of aging.

 

[OraleeWey]

OP watched two YouTube videos on it and suddenly thinks he's a scientist.

Fucking hell, it pisses me off how some people put words in my mouth. I went out of my way to say I watched two videos and I went out of my way to say that I have nothing but opinions. How you came to the conclusion that you think I'm a scientist is your claim not mine.

OP I'm not really convinced you fully understand how evolution works.

Anyways the ethics of playing god has always been less interesting to me then the social and economic reprucussions of this technology. Since CRISPR is only at birth you really risk creating a genetically tiered society that will probably only amplify existing class gaps. If we ever get to that point, I think it's necessary for such a system's distribution to be nationalized and freely available.

I was just trying to generalise evolution. I guess I failed to do that. I understand what evolution is, I probably shouldn't have used the word perfect. My bad. I'm just trying to get the point across, that I see potential for more than just curing illnesses. From genetically modifying humans/animals, to weaponization and for real world experiments to go wrong. That's mostly where my concern lie.

 

[Monochromaticx]

Not too big on it at the moment because my guide RNAs didn't work like I had hoped. Ended up wasting a bunch of time when shRNA would have been fine for my purposes.

More accurate too.

YouTube videos over hype the shit out of crispr like it's one step away from creating "perfect humans". Gotta use that click bait title for views!

 

[dramatis]

I feel like it's a silly idea to fear the "perfect human being".

Humans are imperfect not necessarily because of their genetic makeup. Unless gene editing can change personalities, change culture or society, there will never being a manufactured 'perfect human being'.

 

[AuthenticM]

Absolutely amazing breakthrough and I only hope to live long enough for me to see new treatments for genetic diseases like my psoriasis.

Edit: here's a good video that explain CRISPR and also addresses common concerns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAhjPd4uNFY

yep

It's amazing and we have to work with the tech, instead of fearing it.

 

[Noobcraft]

Not too big on it at the moment because my guide RNAs didn't work like I had hoped. Ended up wasting a bunch of time when shRNA would have been fine for my purposes.

I'm not a huge fan either. CRISPR is great and all, and is a good step towards individualized medicine, but it's not as good at gene editing as people are imagining.