|
|
| by Christopher
Spencer |
Former Senior
Advisor International Organizations,
Canadian Department of
Foreign Affairs and International Trade |
| Updated: 10 SEP
11 | |
On 26 Jun 00 two research teams, the publicly-funded UK-US Human Genome Project and the commercial
Celera Genomics Corporation, jointly announced success in “decoding” (actually, listing the sequence
of) the 3.1 billion bits of DNA(the”building blocks”)of human beings. This knowledge will enable our
species from now on to change its own structure and abilities in multiple ways. So, how we use and limit
this new power will be one of the global issues of the twenty-first century. That’s why these non-technical
articles on the question are specially high-lighted. The broadest (not the earliest) is the Survey by Geoffrey
Carr,”Life Story: The Human Genome”(1-16);supported by”The Genetic Starting-Line” (Editorial:21-2)in
The Economist 01 Jul 00:-genes, the“packages”of information [instructions] people inherit from their
parents and use to put together and run themselves, can be passed intact through generations. They are
composed of a chemical - DNA - which can”both encode [convert into extremely compact form] vast
quantities of information and replicate [make exact copies of] what it encodes”(3). Laboratories are
now“decoding”the DNA information for various species(30 complete; 100 nearly).“[U]nravelling... the full
sequence of the human genome - a list, in order, of the[3.1b]chemical bases that encode the information
needed to assemble and run a human body - is a scientific wonder. Knowing the sequence is really just
the beginning. The...benefits will come from...interpreting the data and coming up with uses for them”(21).
The Survey claims this accomplishment ”has brought the science of biology to a new threshold. And it
may well have brought medicine, agriculture, industry and even philosophy to a new threshold too”(3).
After a brief explanation of the biology involved, the Survey summarizes the probable impact
of“genomics”in each of those four broad areas. It concludes:”People now alive will witness the synthesis
of completely artificial life forms...and the creation of new species, not merely new varieties, of living
things. They will see the routine incorporation of biology into industrial processes [and into essential food
sources to feed a seriously undernourished and expanded world population]. They will see a revolution
in medicine for themselves, and the birth of people whose biology has been optimised from conception
to be resistant to disease and old age. They may even see a world where children are tailored to the
wishes of their parents”(16). Hence the globality of the scientific and ethical issues. The Economist 16
May 98”Genetic Warfare: A Private Genome Project” (111-2)-announces the beginning of the public-private
competition with the Celera project’s establishment, and offers pretty technical information on its new
approach. This is described as a new and rapid process for reading or"sequencing"the human genome,
the key in biotechnology for finding out what genetic messages pieces of DNA carry. Developed by two
private US companies, the technology refines existing ideas and may be able to provide from scratch a
complete sequence of the 3.1b genetic "letters"that constitute the human genome as soon as 2000, and
at a cost of $150-200m. This compares with the UK-US joint project, expected to take another seven years
(total 15), and costing $4 billion. Nicholas Wade,”After 10 Years’ Effort, Genome Mapping Team Achieves
Sequence of a Human Chromosome”in New York Times 02 Dec 99:-reports the UK-US Human Genome
Project had achieved a milestone by effectively decoding for the first time all key information in a human
chromosome, a total of 33.5m units of DNA. Although this is the second-smallest chromosome of the 23
pairs in a human cell, those involved feel it validates their approach:”A new era has dawned...as we now
have the essentially complete structure of the first human chromosome”. Understanding the human
genome is “expected to yield vast medical benefits, because almost every disease has a genetic
component...This is a phenomenal historical moment: to see a full chapter of the human instruction
book”. Consortium target year to decipher all human DNA was now given as 2005, so rivalry was clearly
affecting events. The Economist 04 Dec”Genomic Pronouncements”(77-8):-reports on the same
development, gives new detail about the two techniques, and urges the teams to work together. It admits,
however, that commercially-valuable patents are an increasingly serious dilemma in this field. Steve
Lohr,“IBM Plans Computer to Work at Speed of Life” NYT 06 Dec:-reports IBM’s decision to undertake a
five-year, $100 million program to build a super-computer that will run at 500 times the speed of the
world’s fastest computer. The multi-disciplinary paragon (named Blue Gene) is designed to simulate an
extremely common biological routine: the process by which amino acids in a living body intricately
“fold”themselves into proteins in less than a second. Blue Gene will still take a year to simulate folding
one protein, using the new“origami”guide already produced by the Human Genome Project. Full-fledged
proteins are the body’s “molecular work force”, doing chores ranging from metabolizing food to fighting
disease. Blue Gene would“help supply fundamental insights into the basic physics and chemistry of
biology, opening the door to a new understanding of diseases and more effective [gene-specific]drugs”.
Wade,”Rivals on Offensive as They Near End of Genome Race”NYT 07 May 00:-this is mainly a report on
the imminent climax of the competing and differing research programs being undertaken under increasing
pressure and at high cost by the academic consortium and the Maryland-based private company.
Although that news is inevitably short-lived, this substantial but non-technical article offers much useful
background material. It provides a survey of the reasons for both the research and the rivalry, and an
outline of their history. Above all, it describes as well the debate -found in many“public-good” areas of
research- over whether widely-useful knowledge should be made freely and globally available, or
whether/when patent rights should apply to encourage the often enormous investment in possibly-futile
research. Wade,”Rivals in the Race to Decode Human DNA Agree to Cooperate”NYT 22 Jun:-after much
heated negotiation, at the finish line”cooperation outweighed the attractions of laying claim to one of
science’s greatest prizes independently...Though Celera’s version[was] further advanced, it relied on the
consortium’s data to an extent that may turn out to have been essential”. Wade,”Now, the Hard Part:
Putting the Genome to Work”NYT 27 Jun:-as noted, on 26 Jun the former rival organizations announced
they had completed the first rough map of the human genetic code, a scientific milestone described as
biologically equivalent to landing on the moon. While very complex, the event is of great importance in
so many fields of human interest -health, physical/mental ability, creativity, emotion, longevity,
relationships, reproduction, potential, and even purpose - that both the US President and the British Prime
Minister made statements about it, and the more thoughtful media provided many analyses. This excellent
article, like The Economist Survey, describes the massive global implications for both science and ethics.
It therefore contains sections on: [Medical, Evolutionary Aspects]; Annotating the Genome; Proteins and
Cells; Tracking Human Variations; Ethical Implications. Associated Press,”Scientists Complete Rough
Draft of Human Genome” 26 Jun:-”Decoding the genome involves placing in correct order the 3.1b base
pairs, or sub-units that make up human DNA. Imbedded in this DNA are about 50,000 genes”. Kenneth
Chang,”Data From Genome Project Transforming Biology Research”NYT 26 Jun:-”This will allow you to
concentrate your effort into what is going to have the greatest impact on biomedical research” (Charles
Zuker, UCSD). AP”Genome Map May Spur Biotech Interest” 27 Jun:- “The bullish outlook for the biotech
industry reflects the expectation that scientists will be able to use the human genome research to develop
more effective drugs to treat some of the world’s most devastating diseases, such as cancer and
Alzheimer’s”. Andrew Pollack,”US Hopes to Stem Rush Toward Patenting of Genes”NYT 28 Jun:-”With
the technology in so much flux, gene patenting is likely to be the subject of numerous court battles and
might be revisited by Congress. For companies that have staked their futures on owning the rights to
genes, and for science in general, a lot is riding on the outcome”. AP ”Genes May Cause 25% of 3 Major
Cancers”13 Jul:-Nordic research concludes genes account for 42% of the risk for prostate cancer, 35%
for colorectal cancer and 27% for breast cancer, much more than was thought.”The rest of the cases are
caused by...smoking and diet, or what happens to [people]”. AP”Kenyan Mice Help Decode Genome”16
Jul:-”Mice and humans... have virtually identical sets of genes, but the sequences differ slightly....With
about 97% of the human genome sequenced, the equipment and resources involved...are now being
dedicated to the mouse”. Carol Kaesuk Yoon, ”Agriculture Takes Its Turn in the Genome Spotlight”NYT
18 Jul:-”In a scientific first,...a team of more than 200 researchers [in Brazil] has for the first time
deciphered the complete DNA sequence of an organism that causes a plant disease. [The bacterium,
xylella fastidiosa,] contains surprises, including[genes thought]to be peculiar to animal pathogens
[disease-producers]and a complete lack of some[thought]essential to plant disease organisms”. The
Economist 22 Jul:”Brazilian Science: Fruits of Cooperation” (79):-this more detailed account of the xylella
fastidiosa triumph(which directly relates to serious damage to orange groves -and California vineyards:
see p.71 of 12 Aug issue)praises Brazil’s very considerable ability and success in the field of genetics,
and emphasizes “there is no reason why countries such as Brazil cannot compete in leading-edge
science”. It reports that just after publishing this first-ever genome sequence of a plant pathogen, Sao
Paulo scientists announced another success:”the composition of 279,000 human expressed-sequence
tags [ESTs], small pieces of DNA that allow genes to be located along chromosomes” (information directly
relevant to cancer of the head and neck-unusually common in Brazil). Both events are of“global
significance”and have attracted international funding for other genetic projects. Pollack,”Company
Seeking Donors of DNA for a `Gene Trust’“NYT 01 Aug:- a new Web site DNA.com has been set up by a
California firm”DNA Sciences” to”recruit people to donate their DNA to help find genes that cause
disease”. It hopes to get 50,000-100,000 donors to contribute to its “gene trust” through altruism,
since:“The knowledge we gain...has the potential to change medicine forever”. The”trust”reflects the fact
that-with the human genome now decoded-“studies to link genes to disease are starting to be done on
an unparalleled scale, involving far more people than ever before”. Scientists must catalog hundreds of
thousands of differences in the genetic makeup of individuals in order to determine which contribute to
which disease or to the effectiveness of a particular drug, and many genes may contribute to common
ones like cancer, heart disease and diabetes. The thousands of patients/volunteers needed to do this will
have their data “anonymized”. Problems include inaccurate medical histories, too heterogeneous
samples, and cost. The Economist 05 Aug:"The Cholera Genome” (78):- the AIDS pandemic of the 19th
Century was cholera:“fearful, fatal and incurable”. Even given the accelerating rate at which full DNA
sequences are being published, now having that of El Tor,”one of the ugliest types of Vibrio cholerae”,
is particularly welcome. Unless treated quickly, the bacteria kill up to half the victims in days by
destroying their intestinal lining. Being able to exploit the El Tor sequence could aid vaccine-makers:
many of the”genes may encode completely novel proteins”. AP”Baltic State to Establish One of the
World’s First National Gene Banks” onhealth.com 9 Aug:-reports Estonia has given initial approval to
plans to set up a gene bank where detailed genetic codes of over 1m people would be stored. Even with
a total population of only 1.4m, the depository will take 5 years and $200m to complete. The only other
nation with such a project is Iceland, with a population of 270,000. Estonian participation is voluntary, but
90% have volunteered; the Icelanders are automatically included if they don’t specifically refuse. Access
to the bank would be limited to researchers, but Estonia hopes the program will”spur the growth of a
dynamic biotechnology sector”. Eric S. Lander,”After Deciphering the Map, the Next Task Is a Guidebook
for the Human Genome”NYT 12 Sep:-a very useful article by a scientist personally involved in the human
genome project. His own team’s next project is to try to “glean meaning from the breathtaking variations
in the chromosomal landscape...In effect, we’re preparing the first edition of a guidebook, describing the
landmarks of the human chromosomes, designed to shape the experience of generations of genome
travelers to come”. Lander stresses that his work is just one of many ways to“breathe meaning”into the
human genome; probing the social meaning of genetics alone involves such themes as genetic identity,
species boundaries, biotechnology, evolution and racism -and the ethics. The Economist 21 Oct:”Testing
Time: Genetic Testing and Insurance”(93-4):-a major ethical, financial/business, and health issue is
resulting from the expanding capacity to determine whether a human carries genes that threaten an early
and debilitating death. Any insurance company with this information could either refuse coverage or
demand much higher premiums from those found carrying such genes. This would also weight
companies’ normal“statistical gamble”heavily in their favour. However, most governments now restrict
or prohibit the use of genetic-test information by insurers. This tilts the odds in the opposite direction and
enable those with dangerous genes to take out huge policies and sell them to third parties. At the very
least, those with fore-knowledge of their health prospects could adjust the size and type of their policies
accordingly -and threaten the future of the insurance business. Hence compulsory disclosure seems
likely. Result: the”safe”buy no insurance; the“threatened”cannot get/afford it.“[G]enetic testing may
become the most potent argument for state-financed health care”. Matt Ridley Nature Via Nurture: Genes,
Experience, and What Makes Us Human(Toronto:HarperCollins 2003):- the already vast - and growing -
powers and frustrations now felt by the 6.5 billion people on earth makes intensive global cooperation
essential to human survival from unprecedented violence, avoidable deaths and planetary threats.
Unfortunately, many of the traditional ways homo sapiens has thought and acted must be persuaded to
change, so greater knowledge of how and why some relate to others will be essential. This book reports
on the basic sources. The Economist 10 Apr 03 "Evolutionary Biology: The Generation Game"(Review):-"New book travels to frontiers of science in attempt to resolve ongoing quarrel over genetics and
environment. Are human personalities in all their variety...essentially the result of nature, of the genes we
inherit from our parents? Or are we made by the worlds - social economic and familial - into which we are
born? According to Ridley,.. nature and nurture collaborate; they are partners, not competitors. Every
human characteristic depends both on the genetic package we inherit and on the world into which we are
born, no gene by itself makes anything. No environment makes a human mind without the collaboration
of human genes packaged into a human egg". Ridley writes in his Prologue: "I believe human behavior
has to be explained by both nature and nurture. I am not backing one side or the other. But that does not
mean I am taking a 'middle of the road' compromise... I intend to make the case that the genome has
indeed changed everything, not by closing the argument or winning the battle for one side or the other,
but by enriching the argument from both ends till they meet in the middle. Discovery of how genes
actually influence human behavior, and how human behavior influences genes, is about to recast the
debate entirely. No longer is it nature versus nurture but nature via nurture. Genes are designed to take
their cues from nurture... Stories from the deepest recesses of the genome show how the human brain
is built for nurture. My argument [is]: the more we lift the lid on the genome, the more vulnerable to
experience genes appear to be"; Economist 23 Dec 06"Liberalism And Neurology: Free To Choose?"(16-8):-official summary:"Modern neuroscience is eroding the idea of free will". Highlights:"Free will is one
of the trickiest concepts in philosophy, but also one of the most important. Without it, the idea of
responsibility for one's actions flies out the window, along with much of the glue that holds [societies]
together[, and] social relations would be very different. For millennia, question of free will was province
of philosophers and theologians, but it actually turns on how the brain works. [Now] possible to watch
the living human brain in action in a way that begins to show in detail what happens while it is happening.
[Issue offers major and globally important "Survey of the Brain"(1-12). Its six essays' titles/own summaries
are: "Who Do You Think You Are?":-"Modern neuroscience, says Geoffrey Carr, is groping towards
answer to the oldest question of all: who am I?"; "Captain Kirk's Revenge":-"Emotion is essential to
human survival"; "Brainbox":-"A history and geography of the brain"; "Dreamweavers":-"Perfect memory
is of everything and nothing"; "As Others See Us":-"Dealing with people changes our minds"; "I Think,
Therefore I Am, I Think":-"Consciousness awaits its Einstein".] This ability doing more than merely adding
to science's knowledge of brain's mechanism. Also emphasising to public that brain really is a just
mechanism, rather than a magician's box that is somehow outside the normal laws of cause and effect.
Science is not yet threatening free will's existence [but] will shrink the space in which free will can operate
by slowly exposing the mechanism of decision making. [Already seeking] to lock up people with
personality disorders thought [likely] to make them commit crimes, before any crime is committed. Such
disorders are serious pathologies... Nor is it only the criminal law where free will matters... Liberals say
individuals should be free to [drugs] or not. Erode free will, and you erode that argument. In fact, you
begin to erode all freedom. Without belief in free will, ideology of freedom is bizarre. Though it will not
happen quickly, shrinking the space in which free will can operate could have some uncomfortable
repercussions". On same subject is major essay by Dennis Overbye"Free Will: Now You Have It, Now You
Don't"NYT 02 Jan 07:-"A bevy of experiments in recent years suggests conscious mind is like a monkey
riding a tiger of subconscious decisions and actions in progress, frantically making up stories about
being in control. As result, physicists/neuroscientists/ computer scientists have joined heirs of Plato and
Aristotle in arguing about what free will is, whether we have it, and if not, why we ever thought we did in
first place"; Economist 16 Jun 07"The RNA Revolution: Biology's Big Bang"(Edit.13):-official sum:"What
physics was to the 20th century, biology will be to the 21st - and RNA will be a vital part of it". Highlights:-"For more than 50 years, fundamental story of living things has been tale of interplay between genes, in
the form of DNA, and proteins, which the genes encode and which [keep] living organisms living. Past
couple of years have seen rise of third type of molecule: RNA. [I]ts role had [earlier] seemed restricted to
fetching/carrying for DNA/proteins. Now RNA looks every bit as important[:] it may be main regulator of
what goes on in a cell i.e.operating system, as well as author of many other activities". See"Briefing: RNA:
Really New Advances"(87-9):-"Molecular biology undergoing its biggest shake-up in 50 years, as hitherto
little-regarded chemical called RNA acquires an unsuspected significance"; and "RNA-Based Drugs: Little
Hopes"(88):-official sum:"New classes of drugs that exploit new RNAs are in development". Edit.cont'd:
"Molecular biologists... barely a clue [yet of] what is going on [-] a sense of barely contained expectations
[-] a feeling of advancing into... exciting/mysterious... unknown. [T]here is a good chance that...
distinguishing feature of 21st century will be biological technology... Simple genetic engineering is now
routine; indeed, the first patent application for an artificial living organism has recently been filed".
See"Artificial Life: Patent Pending"(92-4):-"Craig Venter... 16 years ago attempted to patent parts of
several hundred genes. [Now] he is proposing to patent not merely a few genes, but life itself[, eventually
via] the synthetic bacterium[he's] been working on". Edit.cont'd:"The other driving force of technological
change - necessity - is also there. Many big problems facing humanity are biological, or susceptible to
biological intervention[:] how to deal with ageing population[;] climate change, intimately bound up with
biology[;] risk of a new, lethal infection suddenly [biological] pandemic as result of modern transport".
See"The World Health Organization: Preventing Pandemics"(67-8):-official sum:"The new powers vested
in [WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan] should, in theory, cut the risk of killer diseases raging round
the world". Edit.cont'd:"Biology more than describes humanity's place in universe. It describes humanity
itself, and... RNA may be an important part of that... Traditional genes not as important as proponents of
human nature had suspected, nor as proponents of nurture feared. Instead, solution seems to lie in RNA
operating system of the cells. This gets bigger with each advance in complexity, and noticeably different
in a human from that in brain of a chimpanzee. If RNA is controlling the complexity of the whole organism,
suggests operating system of each cell is not only running cell in question, but linking up with those of
other cells when creature developing. Organs such as the brain are the result of a biological internet,
[and] the search for the essence of humanity has been looking in the wrong genetic direction.
[E]ventually, the truth will out"; David Sloan Wilson Evolution For Everyone: How Darwin's Theory Can
Change the Way We Think About Our Lives(New York: Delacorte Press 07):-initial paragraph, that offers
the author's own summary of the 400 pages:"This is a book of tall claims about evolution: that it can
become uncontroversial; that the basic principles are easy to learn; that everyone should want to learn
them, once their implications are understood; that evolution and religion, those old enemies who currently
occupy opposite corners of human thought, can be brought harmoniously together". The dustcover
includes: "With stories that entertain as much as they inform, Wilson outlines the basic principles of
evolution and shows how, properly understood, they can illuminate the length and breadth of creation,
from the origin of life to the nature of religion. Now everyone can move beyond the sterile debates about
creationism and intelligent design to share Darwin's panoramic view of animal and human life, seamlessly
connected to each other. [B]asic evolutionary principles are... foundation for humanity's capacity for
symbolic thought, culture, and morality". While Wilson is not specifically critical of religions, he is clearly
concerned that: "According to the most recent Harris Poll, 54% of US adults believe that humans did not
develop from earlier species"(2).Natalie Angier(New York Times review 08 Apr 07)writes:"a sprightly,
absorbing and charmingly earnest book that manages a minor miracle, the near-complete emulsifying of
science and the 'real world', ingredients too often kept stubbornly, senselessly apart"; Bill Bryson A Short
History of Nearly Everything(New York: Broadway Books 03):-pre-bestseller author of many/widely-varied
books, undertook "informative journey into world of science,.. his greatest challenge yet: to understand -
and, if possible, answer - oldest, biggest questions... about the universe and ourselves... Result is a
sometimes profound, sometimes funny, and always supremely clear/entertaining adventure in the realms
of human knowledge"(publisher). Even new "lavishly illustrated" Nov 05 hardcover edition of 624pp
available from Barnes & Noble to all @US$28.00. Favourable Ed Regis NYT review(18 May
03)states:"Bryson achieved exactly what he'd set out to do, and, moreover, [did] it in stylish, efficient,
colloquial and stunningly accurate prose... The basic facts of physics, chemistry, biology, botany,
climatology, geology - all these and many more are presented with exceptional clarity and skill". My own
reaction is that this easily available/readable reference on all not-personally-specialised scientific subjects
should ideally be read - or at least be used for topic-reference - by all in this very unstable world;
Economist 29 Sep 07"Civil Liberties: Surveillance and Privacy: Learning to Live With Big Brother"(62-4):-official sum:"[L]ooks at the new technologies for collecting personal information, and the dangers of
abuse". Highlights:"[S]marter technology... that has been designed to fight 21st century war is being used
in the fight against crime [-] police are experimenting with use of miniature remote-controlled drone
aircraft, fitted with video cameras and infra-red night vision, to detect 'suspicious' behaviour in crowds...
Most of the time, convenience of electronic technology, and perceived need to fight the bad guys, seems
to outweigh any worries about where it could lead. [R]adio-frequency identification (REID) microchips
implanted in human beings to... keep track of old people/give employees access to high-security area...
Some want everyone implanted with REIDs as answer to identify theft. [E]lectronic devices already being
used to keep tabs on ordinary citizens as never before... The more data collected/stored, greater the
potential for 'data mining'... to discover patterns/predict future behaviour. [On] 11 Sep 01, it became widely
accepted that against deadly/globally networked enemy, every stratagem was needed [and that]
processing personal information... suddenly seemed indispensable. [US] FBI could soon access 20b
pieces of information, all churned/sorted/analysed to predict who might one day turn into terrorist. New
version, STAR, using information drawn from both private/public databases... In age of global terror, when
governments desperately trying to pre-empt future attacks, such profiling has become a favourite tool.
But... inaccurate when comes to individuals [and] unreliable when sniffing out terrorist plots, which
uncommon/rarely well-defined profile. [M]istakes are rife... Another worry: information on people used to
be gathered selectively.,. now indiscriminately. [C]ameras less important issue than emergence of
'database state'[:] personal records of citizens encoded/too easily accessible. DNA also increasingly
popular tool to help detect terrorists/solve crime. [P]roposed best way to prevent discrimination is to
include whole population in DNA database... But DNA less reliable as a crime detection tool than most
people think... More disturbing for most [US citizens] are greatly expanded powers government has given
itself over 6 years to spy on [them]. [After legal debate,] ordinary will continue to be spied on without need
for warrants - now legal. [In Britain, seems] to worry people[:] sheer volume of information now being kept
on them and degree to which accessible to an ever wider group of individuals/agencies... Most democratic
countries now have comprehensive data-protection and/or privacy laws[:] strict rules for
collection/storage/use of personal data. Intelligence agencies... usually exempt [and] no data ever really
secure. [E]rosion of individual privacy has accelerated enormously since [01] but security say many
terrorist plots foiled and lives saved. Privacy is a modern 'right' [though] few outside civil-liberties
community seem really worried about its loss now [and] the potential for abuse is huge and the
safeguards paltry". Economist 18 Apr 09"Technology and Medicine: Fixing Health Care"(Edit.13-4):-off.sum: "Technology has been a culprit behind runaway health costs. It might now help tame them".
Highlights:"[D]emand for health care will only grow [globally, and rich and poor] governments are already
having to adjust. The snag is the cost[, with two reasons] repeatedly: distorted payment systems.,.and
a lack of proper competition. Medical device manufacturers often expect reimbursement for expensive
new equipment on [strange] 'cost plus' basis, and drug companies enjoy temporary monopolies on new
pills." Editorial then recommends: "Special Report on Health Care and Technology" (SR pages 1-18). Its
chapters' titles and official summaries are as follows:"Medicine Goes Digital"(SR 3-4):-"The convergence
of biology and engineering is turning health care into an information industry. Will be disruptive, says
Vijay Vaitheewaran, but also hugely beneficial to patients". "HIT or Miss"(SR 4-6):-"Health reformers have
long wanted to digitise medical records. They are getting closer". "Flying Blind"(SR 6-8):-"Digital medicine
will improve medical care - and it may possibly revive drug discovery". "Getting Personal"(SR 9-11):-"The
promise of quick and cheap genome sequencing". "A Doctor in Your Pocket"(SR 11-4):-"Developing
countries are using mobile phones as a way of leapfrogging to personalised medicine". "Fantastic
Journey"(SR 15-7):-"Medical technology is making medicine more portable, precise and personal". "Health
2.0"(SR 17-8):-"The arrival of digital medicine is already empowering patients - but will it also lead to
better health?" Editorial again: "[Change is] finally under way, prompted by a host of
information/communication technologies that should make health care much more portable, precise and
personal. Spread of electronic medical records and emergence of a 'smart grid' for [medical information]
should bring more transparency... Personal medical monitors and other devices should make it easier to
treat expensive chronic diseases... Change is also being prompted by the willingness of
doctors/politicians, especially in poorer countries, to apply at least some economic tests to medical
spending". See: Health Care in China: Will Patients be Rewarded?"(45):-"The government's plans are still
something of a mystery". "Dialysis in China: Free for Now"(45):-"How to embarrass government into
providing health care". "Health Care in India: Lessons from a Frugal Innovator"(67-8):-"The rich world's
bloated health-care systems can learn from India's entrepreneurs". Back to Edit:-"Britain... has
championed use of basic economic appraisals[, and] Obama wants to expand comparative effectiveness
studies and health technology assessments... Arrival of digital medicine promises to shake medical
establishment to its roots,[handing] much more information over to patients themselves. But biggest
savings will [come] from application of basic economics". Economist 22 May 10 "Synthetic Biology: And
Man Made Life"(Edit.11):-off.sum:"Artificial life, the stuff of dreams and nightmares, has arrived".
Highlights:-"Craig Venter and Hamilton Smith, the two US biologists who unravelled first DNA in 95, have
made a bacterium that has an artificial genome - creating a living creature with no ancestor. [Details in
"Briefing: Artificial Lifeforms: Genesis Redux"(81-3):-off.sum:"A new form of life has been created in a
laboratory, and the era of synthetic biology is dawning". Edit.again:] It is now possible to conceive of a
world in which new bacteria (and eventually new animals and plants) are designed on a computer and
then grown to order. That ability would prove mankind's mastery over nature in a way profound...
Synthetic biology... promises much. In the short term it promises better drugs, less thirsty crops [See
"Water: The World's Most Valuable Stuff"(Edit.14-6):-off.sum:"Mostly because of farming, water is
increasingly scarce. Managing it better could help"; and "A Special Report on Water"], greener fuels, and
even a rejuvenated chemical industry... On the face of it, then, artificial life looks like a wonderful thing.
Yet... have scientists got too big?.. What horrors creeping out?.. The new biological science does have
the potential to do great harm. [A] while yet before lifeforms routinely designed[, but] this will come. The
past decade... has seen two related developments. First: extraordinary rise in the speed, and fall in the
cost, of analysing the DNA sequences that encode the natural 'software' of life... Databases are filling up
with genomes of everything from tiniest virus to tallest tree. [G]enomes are raw material for synthetic
biology - a warehouse that can be raided for whatever part is required. Second: faster and cheaper DNA
synthesis. [S]oon possible for almost anybody to make DNA to order, and dabble in synthetic biology.
That is good, up to a point. [I]nevitably, some of those ideas will be malicious, and the problem with
malicious biological inventions... is that, once released, they can breed by themselves... What if a
synthetic-biology club were acidentally to launch a real virus or bacterium? What if a terrorist were to do
the same deliberately? Risk of accidentally creating something bad is probably low. Most bacteria...
doesn't fight back... Creating something bad deliberately... is a different matter. We will soon find out,
though. And hard to know how to address this threat... Ubiquity of computer viruses shows what can
happen when technology gets distributed. [B]est way to oppose the villains is to have lots of heroes on
your side. Then,.. answer can be found quickly. [O]pen-source biology would encourage white-hat
geneticists. Regulation - and, especially, vigilance - will still be needed... Monitoring needs to be
redoubled and co-ordinated". The Economist 19 Jun 10"The Human-Genome Project: Turning-Point”
(Edit.15-6):-“Self-knowledge is often hardest to learn and least welcome, but brutal truth is best... Jun 26
marks tenth anniversary of the reading of the human genome - the 3-billion-letter-long message that
promises self-knowledge to humanity. Each letter... accumulated over the 3.8b years life existed on Earth.
[E]volution of something as complex as human being not such an incredible journey - yet amazing. [T]he
bit that [makes] sense can be read but not yet understood. But... humanity’s foibles will be laid bare.
Species’s history, from tentative beginning in north-east Africa to [global] dominion, has already been
revealed, just through [reading] genome. [N]ow possible to compare Homo sapiens with closest relative[:]
extinct Neanderthal. [G]enome will answer age-old question of original sin. By showing what is nature,
it will reveal what is nurture - and thus how flexible/perfectible human animal really is... Genome project
[first] motivated by medical considerations. [Results:] diseases understood better/new targets for drugs
[see “A Special Report on the Human Genome” with essays/official summaries:-“Biology 2.0”(SR 3-5):“A
decade after the human-genome project, writes Geoffrey Carr, biological science is poised on the edge
of something wonderful”. “Marathon Man”(SR 5-10): “Genomics has not yet delivered the drugs”. “Where
are They Now”(SR 6):“The big beasts of genomics”. “It’s Personal”(SR 9):“Individualised genomics has
yet to take off”. “The Dragon’s DNA”(SR 10-1):“The next advances in genomics may happen in China”.
“Inhuman Genomes”(SR 11-3):“Every genome on the planet is now up for grabs, including those that do
not yet exist”. “The Soul of an Old Machine”(SR 13-5):“Genomics is raising a mirror to humanity,
producing some surprising reflections”. “No Hiding Place”(SR 15-6):“Everyday genomics is coming, ready
or not”.] Industrialisation of genomic knowledge as better crops and clever ways of using micro-organisms to make chemicals also developed. [S]ynthetic life itself is within humanity’s grasp... All great
advances - but perhaps not as great as threat/promise of self-knowledge. Genomics may reveal that
humans really are brothers/sisters. Species is young, so little time for differences to evolve. Politically,
good news. May turn out, however, some differences between/within groups are quite marked[, and] real
trouble could ensue. Must be prepared for this, and ready to resist excesses of racialism, nationalism,
eugenics. Liberal answer: respect people as individuals, regardless of their genetic hand. Genetic
knowledge, however awkward, does not change that”.
|