Editing Mankind: Humanity in the Age of CRISPR and Gene Editing

by Kevin Davies

One of the world's leading experts on genetics unravels one of the most important breakthroughs in modern science and medicine. 

If our genes are, to a great extent, destiny, then what would happen if mankind could engineer and alter the very essence of our DNA coding? Millions might be spared the devastating effects of hereditary disease or the challenges of disability. But this power to “play God” also raises major ethical questions and poses threats for potential misuse. For decades, these questions have lived exclusively in the realm of science fiction, but as Davies powerfully reveals in his new book, this is all about to change.

Engrossing and page-turning, Editing Mankind takes readers inside the fascinating world of a new gene editing technology called CRISPR, a high-powered genetic toolkit that enables scientists to not only engineer but to edit the DNA of any organism down to the individual building blocks of the genetic code. Davies introduces readers to arguably the most profound scientific breakthrough of our time. He tracks the scientists on the front lines of its research to the patients whose powerful stories bring the narrative movingly to human scale. In so doing, Davies sheds light on the implications that this new technology will have on our everyday lives and in the lives of generations to come.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Biology, Genetics, Technology, Nature, Audiobook

336 pages, Kindle Edition

Published April 7, 2020

About the author

Born and raised in London, Kevin Davies studied at Oxford University and moved to the U.S. in 1987 after earning his PhD in genetics. He endured two years at the bench before seeking refuge in the editorial office of Nature magazine. He was the founding editor of the journal Nature Genetics and has also worked at Cell Press and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. He is currently the editor of Bio-IT World magazine, based in Boston.

The $1,000 Genome is Kevin's third book, and second for the Free Press. He published Cracking the Genome, about the race for the Human Genome Project, in 2000. His first book, Breakthrough, co-authored with Michael White, was about the race to identify the "breast cancer gene" in the mid-'90s.

Reviews

[Elentarri · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting and thought provoking look at gene editing in general, CRISPR in particular. Davies covers both the history and future of gene editing and includes biographical details about the scientists involved in any research related to CRISPR. I much preferred the sections that provide detail on the technology (not detailed enough for my taste) and the current/future uses of such technology (again, more specifics would have been wonderful). The ethics sections didn't provide anything that hasn't been discussed elsewhere, but provides a decent overview for those not familiar with the subject.

In short, a nicely written overview of CRISPR technology - how it was developed, who made various incremental but important discoveries, how it works, its uses and hazards (so far) and the ethics of its use/misuse.

[David Cook · Rating 4 out of 5]

A few months ago, our son who is a Bio Statistician/Data Scientist recommended a movie on CRISPER technology. Shortly after watching the movie I saw a review of this book in the NY Times. Normally, I am not a consumer of science books since the topics are above my Political Science BA pay grade. I’m just a cave man lawyer trying to figure out the world. But that’s off topic. This book was fascinating, scarry and mind blowing. Kevin Davies is one of the world's leading experts on genetics. He unravels one of the most important breakthroughs in modern science and medicine in language that even a cave man lawyer can understand.

CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats. Repetitive DNA sequences, called CRISPR, were observed in bacteria with “spacer” DNA sequences in between the repeats that exactly match viral sequences. Yeah, I don’t understand that either. So, in “low IQ person” (thank you DJT for inserting that phrase into our lexicon) terms, CRISPR is the science of gene editing. The moral dilemma presented by gene editing is how far does it go? If our genes are, to a great extent, our destiny, then what would happen if mankind could engineer and alter the very essence of our DNA coding? Millions might be spared the devastating effects of hereditary disease or the challenges of disability, such as sickle-cell anemia or Huntington’s disease. Both of which have been edited out of test individual's DNA. No longer theory, but reality!

The ethical dilemma is does this given man the ability to “play God?” The book explores the major ethical questions and poses threats for potential misuse. We are no longer dealing with science fiction but scientific reality. The power to eradicate disease caused by insects or to genetically modify food to reduce crop failure and starvation are truly benefits to mankind. But what about editing desirable traits in babies to the whim of the parents, from physical characteristics or intellectual ability. CRISPR, a high-powered genetic toolkit that enables scientists to not only engineer but to edit the DNA of any organism down to the individual building blocks of the genetic code.

Davies introduces readers to arguably the most profound scientific breakthrough of our time. He tracks the scientists on the front lines of its research to the patients whose stories bring the narrative to human scale. “CRISPR babies” have already been engineered and born in China. Putin has raised the possibility of engineered super soldiers. Now that is spooky. What will the future hold? What will the role of government be? Davies explores the implications that this new technology can have on our everyday lives and in the lives of generations to come.

[Robin Tierney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Notes from this sassy report on the history, status and future of gene editing tools, specifically CRISPR. Insight into the competitive world of scientific research related to tinkering with DNA.

Editing Mankind: Humanity in the Age of CRISPR and Gene Editing
by Kevin Davies

To play God

End pollution, genetic disease, hunger potential.

CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats.
Repetitive DNA sequences, called CRISPR, were observed in bacteria with “spacer” DNA sequences in between the repeats that exactly match viral sequences. Bacterial enzyme vehicle.

2000 first cracked the code of the human genome.

Rampage movie weaponized to mutate animals.

Correct typos in our genetic code to prevent diseases.

The swashbuckling pace at which scientists were publishing.

I am a GMO (blood patient)

Beagle legs restore function

Balancing commercial and scientific achievement potential with ethics.
Merits and dangers.

Moratoriums, bans.

Superbabies.

The voice of Mephistopheles (Faust demon featured in German folklore). - EO Wilson
Frank Church, Harvard rockstar genetics on conflicts of interests. He has various companies. Organ transplant advances. Pig organs gene transplants to monkeys. Woolly mammoth de-extinction project. Involves captive elephants. Shapiro sees little point in applying heroic measures to bring back extinct species only to place these creatures in a zoo or a park named after a geological epoch.

In 1933, zoologist David Fleay filmed Benjamin, the last Tasmanian tiger in captivity in Hobart, Australia. The grainy black-and-white film captured the Last male white rhino euthanized 2018.

Gene drives to eradicate mosquitoes.
1960s Florida released millions of irradiated sterile male flies to halt screw worms that bore into scalp etc.

Weigh the impact of eradicating a species, so far mosquitoes serve no real purpose anymore.

The good news is that a CRISPR gene drive is relatively slow, spreading through generations, and easily detectable.

Genome editing heart treatment to replace use of statins.
Bioweapon to cause pandemic, but nature does too- Covid 19.

GMO
In 1798, English political economist Thomas Malthus published a famous treatise in which he showed that human population growth was outstripping the increase in agricultural productivity.

DNA instruction manual
DNA a self-replicating material that is present in nearly all living organisms as the main constituent of chromosomes. It is the carrier of genetic information.

The fundamental and distinctive characteristics or qualities of someone or something, especially when regarded as unchangeable.

Deletes the miscoded part of the cell.

Deoxyribonucleic acid is a molecule composed of two polynucleotide chains that coil around each other to form a double helix carrying genetic instructions for the development, functioning, growth and reproduction of all known organisms and many viruses. DNA and ribonucleic acid are nucleic acids.
ribonucleic acid, a nucleic acid present in all living cells. Its principal role is to act as a messenger carrying instructions from DNA for controlling the synthesis of proteins, although in some viruses RNA rather than DNA carries the genetic information.

Stephen Hawking: heading towards self-designed evolution.

Superhumans with enhanced DNA will be politically at odds with unimproved humans.

Craig Venter launched a hostile takeover of the human genome project. Overmatched the DNA mavericks.
The moonshot of biology.

Editing
Scarlett O’Hara originally Pansy.
Pride and Prejudice originally titled First Impressions.

Like removing a typo.

2 female scientists Doudna and Charpentier
Playtex bras 1966 contest design NASA spacesuits.

Haloferax a third domain of life.

Every organism has a purpose so scientists study them.

used in food for Dupont pizza cheese

Phage
Cas9 is the swiss army knife of immunity

Arno pro font suggested Feng Zhang
serif type family created by Robert Slimbach at Adob. The name refers to the river that runs through Florence, a centre of the Italian Renaissance. Arno is an old-style serif font, drawing inspiration from a variety of 15th and 16th century typefaces.

Publish in journals.
Prize fight.

2018 He Jiankui (JK) china scientist , first woman carrying a genetically edited fetus. Twins. To protect vs hiv. China proud then deleted article due to public condemnation for going rogue and human guinea pigs. Went into hiding. Accused of ignoring the medical mantra do no harm. Framed as mutated not edited. Scandal, outrage over his transgression. Mosaic formation.

Can precisely target the gene but not precisely edit.

The unthinkable became the conceivable.
(Nobel prize or ostracized from the scientific community.)

Designer babies, rogue usage.
Then in 2017, change in attitude, journals even open to genetic editing for enhancement, not just thwarting disease.

Yeast, drosophila,

Patent disputes, stock market

BRCA1 gene testing
Villains to heroes, charlatans to chiefs. Vanguard or insanity’s edge or mercenary. Perception
IVF Louise Brown 1978? Oocyte donor hollowed out for mother’s genetic material.

The discovery in 1953 of the double helix, the twisted-ladder structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), by James Watson and Francis Crick marked a milestone in the history of science and gave rise to modern molecular biology, which is largely concerned with understanding how genes control the chemical processes within. Odile Crick wife illustrated it.

1999 jesse gensiler teen died undergoing experimental gene therapy for rare deadly disorder.
23 chromosomes, each 20,000 genes.

Ethics: compassion, for disease not vanity, access despite wealth.

Such as immunize babies against HIV.

Huxley even advocated eugenics, so his book contained no warnings about genetic manipulation.
The upper castes in Brave New World were smarter than the remainder not because they were enhanced but because the lower castes were deliberately subjected to impairment.

Margaret Atwood: Oryx and Crake, a brilliant geneticist named Crake usurps natural selection to conceive and create a superspecies adapted to thrive in a post-pandemic society, on a planet ravaged by climate change. They replaced socially normal mating customs with features beneficial to procreation and survival. The Crakers had beautiful skin of many colors resistant to sun damage and able to repel insect bites and infection. They also had bovine-like digestive systems requiring only nutrients provided by ubiquitous weeds.

Marvel creator Stan Lee made an entire television series devoted to real superhuman genetic outliers—echolocation, extreme endurance, temperature resistance, mathematical wizards, and people with eidetic or photographic memories.

Eidectic retained visual after looking away. After-image

Humans have been seeking to enhance the quality of life for years. We take Ritalin to improve concentration, hormones to improve vitality, and undergo Lasik surgery to dispense with spectacles. We perform IVF, prenatal diagnosis, and PGT, what some term liberal eugenics.
George Church is somewhat agnostic about germline editing but supports using the protective effects of known gene variants to aid human health and longevity. gene on chromosome 19—APOE4—is associated with a roughly tenfold increased risk of developing Alzheimer’s.

evidence that elevated levels of a protein called Klotho, sometimes dubbed the longevity gene, can improve cognition and protect against Alzheimer’s—at least in mice.

Super soldiers

Polygenic traits shaped by combined influence of many, not solitary, genes
choosing embryos by likelihood of intelligence not far off, although editing for intelligence is still sci fi.
genomic Prediction is Stephen Hsu company.

10,000 genes, roughly half of the human genome, influence intelligence

Steven Pinker moral code should be Get out of the way.

Dolly the sheep
IVF was boo’ed but now accepted.

There is no one perfect genome or human.
Sports will open a Pandora’s box.
Advantages - genetically enhanced.

Access.

What about deleting fetuses with Down s or dwarfism?

Thorny questions.

sliding to a dystopian “fully synthesized natural world where nothing exists outside human intentionality.”

In 2005, a French woman named Isabelle Dinoire who was disfigured when she was bitten by Tanya, her golden retriever, became the first person to undergo a face transplant (the donor had committed s...

Still a long ways til technically safe and ethically sound.

Covid 19 - CRISPR diagnostic. Also use CRISPR to vanquish coronavirus RNA and bacteriophages, which are viruses bacteria have to fight to survive. A bacteriophage is a type of virus that infects bacteria. In fact, the word "bacteriophage" literally means "bacteria eater," because bacteriophages destroy their host cells.


If our genes are, to a great extent, destiny, then what would happen if mankind could engineer and alter the very essence of our DNA coding? Millions might be spared the devastating effects of hereditary disease or the challenges of disability. But this power to “play God” also raises major ethical questions and poses threats for potential misuse. For decades, these questions have lived exclusively in the realm of science fiction, but as Davies powerfully reveals in his new book, this is all about to change.

Engrossing and page-turning, Editing Mankind takes readers inside the fascinating world of a new gene editing technology called CRISPR, a high-powered genetic toolkit that enables scientists to not only engineer but to edit the DNA of any organism down to the individual building blocks of the genetic code. Davies introduces readers to arguably the most profound scientific breakthrough of our time. He tracks the scientists on the front lines of its research to the patients whose powerful stories bring the narrative movingly to human scale. In so doing, Davies sheds light on the implications that this new technology will have on our everyday lives and in the lives of generations to come.

CRISPR is a family of DNA sequences found in the genomes of prokaryotic organisms such as bacteria and archaea. These sequences are derived from DNA fragments of bacteriophages that had previously infected the prokaryote. They are used to detect and destroy DNA from similar bacteriophages during subsequent infections.

CRISPR is a powerful DNA or gene-editing tool whose origin lies in the natural adaptive immunity of bacteria. It enables DNA to be cut at precise locations, allowing for its accurate and targeted renewal or replacement.

[Irene Rozenberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

‼️Sarepta Mentioned‼️ Anyway, I really enjoyed the chapters on gene therapy, He Jiankui, and base and prime editing!

[Julia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably a 4.5/5. The book is super informative on CRISPR-CAS9 but also the different Cas systems and more. He's also good at distilling harder concepts such as virology and vector usage so the layman can understand.

This book is well researched and packed with a lot of information. Also, I appreciate Kevin Davies' attention to nuances versus distilling complex ethical problems within the field of gene editing into black and white. I also appreciate that he can also accurately detail the different mechanistic steps of how many different forms of gene editing mechanisms work along their pros and cons.

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

(4.5 stars) An excellent history of the future of medicine and, perhaps, humanity itself. I picked this up out of a curiosity regarding the science involved, because the idea of germline and somatic editing is WILD. It's something that I'm conflicted about as a person with a disability (though my own is not genetic) for reasons that are addressed summarily near the end, but relate to the idea of editing a certain type of person out of society (grading it .5 stars down because I subjectively would have preferred more detail on that ethical quandary). Davies does a remarkable job of covering the larger issue of the last decade of gene editing, and the long story leading up to it, from a variety of viewpoints and stylistic approaches, varying from the bonkers true crime mad scientist tale of He Jiankui and the gene edited twins to an accessible textbook-like explanation of the Cas enzyme and all its wonders. I suppose I'd recommend this to people with a moderate science background, simply because it would bore you tears if reading about DNA and RNA and proteins isn't something you've done beyond general education requirements.

[Fraser Kinnear · Rating 3 out of 5]

There’s an interesting, very basic primer on how CRISPR / Cas-9, followed by a long discussion of how it was discovered, and the high-stakes patent disputes in assigning credit to what is already proving to be an enormously lucrative technology.

I think a combination of Wikipedia and some youtube videos together do a better job of explaining CRISPR, but I did really appreciate some of the context Davies provides. In particular, just how quickly these small machines work. Cas 9 is able to interrogate hundreds of millions of nucleotides in the matter of hours in finding a stretch of DNA to cut. To do so, it only spends about 20 milliseconds at every prospective site along a double helix! Davies doesn’t bother to put this into context, but a cursory web search suggests regular DNA transcription is 40-80 nucleotides/second (link), or 4,000x slower!

CRISPR is already paying dividends in agriculture. There are virtually no industrial-scale cheese products that aren’t manufactured in part with a CRISPR enabled starter culture. It sounds like our last hope against Citrus greening disease, which risks eradicating all US citrus crops in the same way the Panama disease pushed the Gros Michel banana into virtual extinction.

Of course, the most interesting (or darkest) ethical questions rest in human germline engineering. The US has effectively banned this practice since 2016, when the FDA was banned “from funding clinical trial applications of gene editing of human embryos.” But there appears to be an appetite for applying this technology to the human germ line in other countries. While it’s too early to point to concrete examples
of adopting this technique in an effort to develop “designer babies”, Davies can point to some striking examples of countries who have accepted practices that are further down that path than the US. In particular, Davies points out how the number of babies born with down syndrome in Iceland and Denmark are now in the single digits every year! Reading into this further on Wikipedia, 92% of pregnancies diagnosed with down syndrome in Europe are terminated (link). George Church puts it more plainly how the cost of drug therapy is not scalable, vs the cost of using CRISPR for detection and termination after fertilization:

”5% of live births have a Mendelian [inherited] genetic disorder, the long tail of thousands of rare or orphan diseases. We’re not going to be spending $2 million [the cost of drug development] on 5% of births.” Church says. He estimates that the total cost, including opportunity loses and caregiver costs, is a catastrophic $1 trillion world-wide per year. Not to mention the collective pain and suffering.

Perhaps because it would take a much longer book to do so successfully, Davies does not so much take a position on these questions, but instead point them out as problems that are fast approaching.

When science moves faster than moral understanding,” Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel in 2004, “men and women struggle to articulate their own unease.” The genomic revolution has induced a kind of moral vertigo.

[Lynda Engler · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a fascinating look at our progress in understanding, and yes sometimes manipulating human genetics. As a layperson with an interest in genetics, but without a science background, I was able to get through this fairly quickly, and better yet, understand it all. Written clearly, though not often concisely, sometimes there was just a bit too much time spent on names and dates, the story of editing the human genome was well told.

[Anca · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply put, one of the more impressive and important books I've ever read. I had borrowed it from the library, but this is a book much too important not to own. My personal copy is arriving in the mail, and I look forward to re-visit it, and to follow these humanity-changing achievements in science news and follow-up publications.

[Gus Hebblewhite · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting subject matter. The inevitable moral controversies were evenhandedly explored (even where I felt there was one side with the clear philosophical upper hand). Sometimes a little long and self indulgent.

[Laurie · Rating 5 out of 5]

fun read; great storytelling. Not a CRISPR researcher so I can’t attest to the science, but Davies demonstrates a command of explaining the scientific concepts while doing this great balancing act of managing all the major characters both here and abroad, both pre- and post- gene editing revolution

[Afreen Aftab · Rating 5 out of 5]

[CRISPR} “is a remarkable technology with many great uses,” said Broad Institute director Eric Lander. “But if you are going to do anything as fateful as rewriting the germline, you’d better be able to tell me there is a strong reason to do it. And you’d better be able to say that society made a choice to do this—that unless there’s broad agreement, it is not going to happen."(it happened though)

Wow as someone in the field of genetics this book was just wow. I've always read about the technology of CRISPR but never in detail all the politics, the humans, and all the shenanigans going on behind the scene. It's all of the hijinks that go on in STEM academia but turned up to a 100. For a nonfiction science book this has all of the action and drama; renegade scientists, campaigners, patent lawsuits, authorship drama, and backbiting but also all of the genius discoveries, and wild innovations that leave you debating endlessly with yourself. CRISPR is such a technology that's both overhyped and underhyped, with major flaws as well as endless potential.

As someone who published articles, it disheartens me how many people get their discoveries 'scooped' from them just because they are smart but not shrewd enough or quick enough. or how some people have never been credited rightly for their major contributions, like Rosalind franklin for her DNA x-ray crystallography 'photograph 51', or Watson's sister, Elizabeth writing the famed report or for Crick's wife, Odile sketching the first DNA diagram.

Throughout the CRISPR and DNA journey, there were many such people snubbed by the Nobel prize, publishers, and the scientific community in general. , like Matthaei cracking the genetic code, Mojica and the repetitive sequences in the bacterial genome that kickstarted the CRISPR frenzy, Lederberg's wife Esther regarding horizontal gene transfer, Banfield who emailed Doudna about CRISPR, Lin Shuai Liang in Zhang's lab, Marraffini using CRISPR on mammalian cells and so many more.

There's also the issue of ethics, regulations differing within countries, and the double standards when it came to the USA and Europe vs the rest of the developing countries, especially Asia. Also how He Jiankui shouldn't have been the only person incriminated in his heinous experiments. There should have been an oversight and ethics committee involved especially since he was funded and worked at reputed institutions. The government and collaborators that condemned him when the world discovered his experiments should have stopped him much earlier and not waited to see if it was a success just for their selfish race.

I liked that this book didn't just focus on one pov, or one side of the story, and it also provided the scope of CRISPR beyond just medical. Like how most 'all-natural' foods are genetically modified at some point in history and CRISPR could be put to great use in the agriculture industry but is roadblocked by the stigma of GMOs.
Sometimes though I felt like the description of CRISPR became repetitive with analogies and metaphors used many times. I also couldn't keep track of so many names but thankfully there's an index.

Also as revolutionary a technology as CRISPR is, it's not always necessary especially in cases like embryo editing when there are more sound technologies like PGT available that could be improved upon just as much with fewer side effects. Like Lander says "If we truly care about preventing needless genetic disease, we should be empowering genetic diagnostics for families, not editing embryos". Because right now CRISPR technology is still chock full of risks and even when those risks are dealt with it's a slippery slope to designer babies. This is sad because it could really help those who are afflicted with hereditary genetic disorders who want to have children but are afraid of passing on such fatal and debilitating disorders to the next generation.

And then there's also the consequence of increasing stigma towards disabled individuals; like scientist Ethan Weiss, whose daughter has albinism said, "I did imagine that genetic engineering could someday help kids who were diagnosed right after birth but I focused instead on just moving on and supporting the child I had, and not the one I wished I had. The world will be less kind, less compassionate, less patient, when or if there are no more children like Ruthie."
But then again no technology is perfect and choices vary from person to person whether they'd have wanted the germline editing despite the risks and the ethical repercussions for the sake of a more simple life.

p.s in chapter 23 it says [...dressed in a t-shirt and torn genes Nathan Treff] which I don't know if it's done on purpose or an editing miss lol

[Basab Pradhan · Rating 5 out of 5]

CRISPR is destined to be one of the greatest inventions of this century. There were tools for gene editing before CRISPR, but none of them have the precision and versatility that CRISPR offers. This year’s Nobel prize in Chemistry went to Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier for first demonstrating in 2012 that CRISPR, a naturally occurring system in bacteria could be used as a purpose-built gene editing system. Since then, in a short 8 years, a multitude of applications have been developed using CRISPR, including human gene editing.

Kevin Davies is the Executive Editor and founder of CRISPR Journal. As such he has had a ring side seat to the development of CRISPR as well as easy access to leading scientists. Editing Humanity is written for anyone with a basic understanding of cell biology.

The first half of the book is part thriller, part science explainer. The science of CRISPR is explained early on in a brief and accessible manner. It was fascinating the way a series of discoveries around the world led up to Doudna and Charpentier’s 2012 paper. It goes to show how scientific discovery today is less about flashes of individual brilliance and more the brick by brick building of an edifice. It’s a pity that the Nobel can only be given to a maximum of three people. Strangely, in the patent battle for CRISPR, Feng Shang and Broad Institute seem to have prevailed over Doudna and Charpentier’s claims. Feng Shang, who first demonstrated that CRISPR can work in mammalian embryos, was overlooked by the Nobel committee.

The drama around the birth of the first babies from CRISPR edited human embryos is quite gripping. In 2015, He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist, edited the CCR5 gene in the embryos of twin girls in China. This was the first time germ-line editing (inheritable changes to the human genome) had been attempted in human beings. The furore that followed resulted in the imprisonment of He Jiankui by the Chinese government and a broad moratorium on germ-line editing by most countries around the world.

In the second half, the book does a nice round up of the state of the art of CRISPR. Its applications range from better crop plants to cheap and accurate Covid tests. Therapies for genetic diseases like Sickle Cell Disease, where there is so much hope, are moving slowly because of understandable caution when it comes to applying new kinds of therapies to human beings.

In the last two chapters, Davies lays threadbare the ethical and regulatory issues involved with CRISPR. Should we allow germ-line editing for monogenic hereditary diseases like Sickle Cell Disease? Especially since it is a lot more efficient and effective (fewer cells to edit) in the embryo stage. Should we discourage the consumption of CRISPR based foods by calling them GMO? After all, selective breeding of crops has been going on for millennia. Should we let people edit their offspring’s genes for greater intelligence (very hard)? How about eye color (easier)? How long can you stop them from not trying?

Editing Humanity, is rich in detail and highly engaging. Sooner or later, all of us will hear and learn about CRISPR. This is a great book to start that journey.

[Paul · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a frustrating book, because it is so much more sympathetic to the knee-jerk ludditism around gene line editing than I think the luddites deserve. Davies spends ages talking about how it was awful what He Jiankui did with only intermittent mentions that there are people out there who think that we should be much less conservative about gene line editing. Over the course of the book, I did come to generally believe that Jiankui's particular choice of experiment to perform was not ideal from a PR point of view, but most of the hand-wringing about the affair seemed completely overblown.

The big issue here is that the precautionary principle is taken as some sort of dogma, as if it's a good thing that we want to eschew cost-benefit analyses entirely in favor of a utility function that basically says that even if some intervention has, a priori a massively positive expected value, any specific example of negative consequences should be treated as grounds for basically malpractice. Everyone in this book is given a total pass on completely ignoring opportunity cost in favor of a bland attachment to the Precautionary Principle. Behind the veil of ignorance, I am pretty sure most of us would rather be born into a world where we're fervently trying to use gene line editing to make human life way better, even at the cost that some people early on in the process will be made much worse off by such experimentation.

That said, I am not even entirely convinced that the rah rah biohacker crowd is right. The knee-jerk luddites have incredibly stupid arguments, but reversed stupidity is not intelligence. It is quite possibly true that conservatism is warranted if we're not too far off from having much finer control of gene edits, much greater ability to predict the consequences of these things and if experimenting on humans now won't speed up timelines too much. I suspect that in this area more than others there's reason for conservatism, mainly because evolution is an optimizer, so we're in a situation where any random change is more likely than not to be deleterious.

Yet still, we're not really talking about just randomly inserting DNA into human gene lines. We're talking about picking genes that already exist in real people and instead of making people out of random combinations of these genes, deliberately deciding to avoid some that we know are strongly associated with what we'd consider negative attributes, and deliberately adding in some that we know are strongly associated with what we'd consider positive attributes. This seems very likely to be net positive expected value.

[Firsh · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was generally okay. I expected a little bit better based on the amazing cover and the premise. CRISPR is something that I'm already familiar with, and I can't wait to have it enter mainstream. However, the book ventured too much into the morals and ethics, and around half of it was fluff that I would describe it as "who did what". I'm more interested in practical applications - what could it be useful for? What's coming? Also, I don't think any book has ever provided me with a general ELI5 understanding of what this technology is.

Thankfully, there was a big section on designer babies. However, it was painted in a bad light. There was this dude who decided to go rogue and create a few genetically modified babies, went to prison for it. I don't understand the problem. I mean, this technology should be embraced and used, how else are we going to do that unless we actively try? How many people have to suffer because some slow-thinking decision makers decide that it is unethical to use it while we have the technology to eradicate hereditary diseases, possibly even cancer. As for me personally, the only way that I would even remotely consider having a kid is if I can influence its genetic makeup. Because I don't want to play the genetic lottery with it. (Once was enough: being born). I would rather go the deterministic route instead of the probabilistic, and leave it up to chance. I don't view a kid as a gift to be accepted how it is, but mind you that I'm childfree. See ya when we can "add to cart" bodily features.

[Lucy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’m usually OK with books that delve into technical details, but with this book there were times where I just let stuff float over my head - TMI. Davies covers the history of gene editing, who’s who, what’s possible today, what could/should be possible in the near future, and some of the ethical debates. When the first test tube baby was born there was shock and outrage. Today, in vitro fertilization is routine. It’s likely that the same will be true with genetic editing. If you could eliminate sickle cell disease, or other rarer debilitating genetic ailments, why wouldn’t we? But what about modifications to make “better” soldiers who need less sleep or feel pain less? There are no “laboratory police” so if something is possible then it’s likely that at some point someone will try to do it.

[Matthew Aujla]

‘A man has the opportunity to get into the genetic code created by either nature, or as religious people would say, by the God.

'All kinds of practical consequences may follow.

'One may imagine that a man can create a man not only theoretically but also practically.

'He can be a genius mathematician, a brilliant musician or a soldier, a man who can fight without fear, compassion, regret or pain.

'As you understand, humanity can enter, and most likely it will in the near future, a very difficult and very responsible period of its existence.

'What I have just described might be worse than a nuclear bomb.'

-Vladimir Putin, Russian President, 2017

[Wes R · Rating 3 out of 5]

A high level understanding of genetic science is needed to read this book. Read it for a college seminar course. Very interesting topic which includes genetic editing of the human DNA genome to fix issues that lead to inherited disease. CRISPR is a wonderful technology with the potential to change our dependence on nature. This author does not give his own opinion on whether the use of CRISPR is ethical or not, I wish he would have. However, both sides are compared to one another, mostly on what they worry about. Other than the ethics, this is a story of how humanity has entered into its next cycle of development and how it has possibly escaped the clutches of Nature's control.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

'Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.'

So yea, any moron with a diploma is qualified, although in this case it is not teaching like the proverb says, but rather preaching. Because, after all, we are in the 'new era' and my neighbour has three hands and the policeman is a centaur so he can run faster after the criminals. Sarcasm over, this is just about another ignoramus wanted to feel important.

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely enjoy reading substantially more technical detail of the CRISPR revolution than was in The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race by Walter Isaacson.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author assumes a base of knowledge I just don't have so a lot of information sailed over my head. Walter Isaacson's Code Breaker covers much of the same subject matter in a more carefully explained, accessible way. However, because this is more about the science than just Jennifer Doudna, it is a more thorough treatment of CRISPR and related topics.

[Bhavyesh Divecha · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic introduction to the cutting edge of innovation in Biotechnology. Helps to get a independent reporters view on the subject, rather than from an insider, which would inevitably entail some bais. Highly recommended for anyone wanting to understand history of CRISPR technology and key events and controversies during last 10 years.

[Emanuele Gemelli · Rating 3 out of 5]

Complex book for the topics and the language used; gmo, crisps, etc are technologies that need to be used for the benefit of the people. Like any transformative technology, the use of it is what will create the its own legacy

[Satheesh Kumar · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's like this book was written to be the pre-reading material for my PhD project. From the origins of CRISPR, the various Cas types and how they have been repurposed, gene therapy, the ethical dilemmas and the future directions, this book really covers everything so far regarding CRISPR.

[Alexander Feldman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best science book I’ve come across in a long time. Very engaging without dumbing down the content.

[Paiman Chen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Humans have already reached the point where they can edit the genes in a human embryo and in effect “rewrite the book of life”.

[Barbara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent science journalism.

[Greg Baird · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s fact not a question. Will be an interesting future.

[Brad · Rating 5 out of 5]

Required reading if you are interested in genomics.

[Natalie T · Rating 2 out of 5]

The concepts in this book are important and amazing. However, the book was technically challenging for me to read and I have a science background.