Cultivating threats to life
The DNA so dangerous it does not exist
Researchers are looking for DNA that is not present in any existing lifeforms. Such DNA sequences do not exist presumably because they are incompatible with life. Any organism that has this DNA will die and thus be selected against. Greg Hampikian, professor of genetics at Boise State University in Idaho, is leading the project. Did he at any point stop and think about how scary this project sounds? Didn’t it occur to him that the project screams “we are mad scientists looking for the ultimate biological weapon?”
From a purely academic standpoint, it is interesting to ask such questions as “What is the fastest way to kill a human?” or “What is the best way to dispose of a body?” Such questions were, in fact, of great importance for the Nazis when they were putting the Final Solution into practice.
From a human standpoint, however, some questions are better left unanswered. Scientists have a moral responsibility to ensure that their research is used only for the good of mankind. In practice, once a scientist’s results reach the wider world, this moral imperative is out its discoverer’s hands. Most scientific discoveries can be used for either good or evil, and it is difficult to predict the applications a discovery will lead to. The moral imperative thus passes onto those who use the discoveries.
Can anything good come out of a search for DNA that is incompatible with life? Certainly, there are harmless applications such as genetic tagging with harmless DNA. Hampikian, however, mentions the possibility of a “suicide gene.” Given that his research is funded by the US Department of Defense, some people clearly believe that this research has military applications. We seem to be on the road to a new arms race based on genetic rather than atomic or biochemical weapons.
I didn’t get ‘mad scientist’ from the article at all. Comparing this rather benign genetic research to the nuclear arms race is rather sensationalist.
Of course Prof. Hampikian is not a mad scientist. That bit was my attempt at humor. However, when I hear “DNA” and “dangerous to life” in the same sentence, alarm bells ring in my head.
I would not label this research “benign.” Prof. Hampikian himself suggests constructing a “suicide gene” to code deadly proteins. Such research could potentially be used to make deadlier weapons than existing biochemical weapons. Anytime military technology advances, this naturally leads to an arms race.
It is not my intention to be sensationalist. Rather, I urge caution in how such research is performed, used, and disseminated. Genetic and nano technologies are potentially dangerous enough by themselves, without us deliberately looking for deadly applications thereof.
He suggested constructing a ’suicide gene’ to take out dangerous genetically-altered organisms. Despite the name, that sounds like a ’safety release cord’ to me, not some super DNA that is going to kill entire populations of human beings.
I don’t see the link to ‘mad science,’ and certainly not atomic weapons or another nuclear arms race.
There’s nothing wrong urging caution. I just don’t see anything that rings my warning bell in this article.
I don’t know about you, but when I read about researchers developing “dangerous” DNA that is “not compatible with life,” “mad scientist” was the first thing that popped into my head. My mind automatically made the comparison because mad scientists are always developing deadly weapons in the movies.
If a “suicide gene” can take out GM organisms, it’s not much of a stretch to develop a “suicide gene” to take out humans. Even scarier, such a gene could be “activated to destroy them at a later date.” If such a gene is attached, for example, to the same E. Coli bacteria that inhabit our gut, then they could sit undetected indefinitely. No dissemination system is needed, as with bombs or biochemical weapons. The bacteria that live in our gut come from our surrounding environment. If GM bacteria are introduced into the environment and spread, we can do little to avoid ingesting them. We might not even know that we’ve ingested dangerous DNA, until one day we wake up and we’re all dead or dying.
Arms races are as old as arms themselves. Arms races lead to more and more advanced weaponry. With current technology, it is now becoming possible to genetically engineer weapons. This is indeed a new thing; previous attempts at biochemical warfare used pathogens and deadly chemicals. Now we can directly synthesize DNA that will produce deadly proteins to kill us. If the U.S. begins developing technology that will aid this process, then the enemies of the U.S. will naturally follow suit and develop genetic weapons of their own. This will indeed be a new arms race.
Alright Oppenheimer, I’m as fatalist as they come, but this research just does not qualify as mad science or arms racing, and even your E. Coli example is veiled around some very far-reaching assumptions.
I’m sure Americans would much rather have this form of science understood by the DoD so they can gauge any potential threat that may or may not exist to their safety rather than being blindsided by a potential enemy in the future. Ignorance certainly wouldn’t be bliss if someone really were to develop a genetic-weapon that the US wasn’t prepared to counter.