The ethical dilemma of designer babies | Paul Knoepfler

Summary

このスクリプトは、2030年に遺伝子組み換え技術CRISPRを用いた「デザインベビー」が現実のものになるかもしれないというシナリオを描いています。デザインされた子供たちは、健康で、知能や容姿、運動能力などが優れており、社会的な差別や健康問題が生じる可能性があると示唆されています。科学者である話者は、この技術の進歩とその危険性、そして倫理的な懸念を提起し、一時停止を求めるべきだと主張しています。

Takeaways

• 🧬 CRISPR技術は、遺伝子編集を簡単かつ安価にすることができる革新的な技術であり、科学界に大きな影響を与えている。
• 👶 将来、遺伝子編集によって「デザインベビー」が生まれる可能性があり、これは人間の進化や社会構造に大きな変化をもたらす可能性がある。
• 📈 CRISPR技術は、GMO食品の開発に使用される技術と似ていますが、はるかに高効率で、より迅速かつコスト効率的である。
• 🚫 現在、多くの国では遺伝子編集された人間の作成が法的に禁止されていないため、デザインベビーの作成が可能である。
• 🔍 遺伝子編集された子供たちは、健康問題や遺伝性疾病に対する免疫を持つ一方で、攻撃性やナルシシズムなどの問題を示唆している研究結果がある。
• 🏫 デザインベビーは、特別な学校に通うことになるかもしれないが、これは非遺伝子編集された子供たちと教育的・社会的に分離を生じさせる可能性がある。
• 🌐 CRISPR技術は、数千の研究ラボで使用されており、人間の疾病や科学の重要な要素を研究するための重要なツールとして役立っている。
• 🧐 デザインベビーの作成は、倫理的な問題を引き起こす可能性があり、社会的な不平等や新しいユーゲニクス運動の可能性をもたらす。
• 👨‍👧 親がデザインベビーを選ぶことで、子供たちが社会で直面する可能性のある偏見や差別に直面する可能性がある。
• 🔮 将来、遺伝子編集された人間の数が増えることで、彼らの存在が社会の構造や価値観にどのような影響を与えるかを考える必要がある。
• ⚠️ 遺伝子編集技術の進歩と普及は、科学者や政策立案者、そして一般大衆にとっても、重大な倫理的・社会的課題を提起している。

Q & A

2030年に想定される「自然児」とは何ですか？

2030年に想定される「自然児」とは遺伝子修飾を受けていない子どもたちを指します。彼らは遺伝子モディファイケーション技術を用いて改良された「デザインベビー」に対して比べて、自然な形で生まれたとされています。

CRISPR技術とはどのようなものですか？

CRISPRは遺伝子修飾技術のことで、DNAを簡単に編集できるツールです。この技術を使うと、特定の遺伝子を特定し、その部分をカットしたり、書き換えたりすることができます。CRISPRは比較的新しい技術で、2013年に開発されました。

ジェンナというデザインベビーはどのような特徴を持っていますか？

ジェンナはCRISPR技術を用いて遺伝子修飾されたデザインベビーです。彼女は非常に賢く、健康で、美しい外見を持ち、運動能力も高いです。また、HIV/AIDSや遺伝性疾病などに対して免疫となっています。

デザインベビーに対する社会的懸念は何ですか？

デザインベビーに対する社会的懸念としては、個々の自由や平等の原則が脅かされること、または遺伝子修飾によって生じるかもしれない未知の健康リスクがあります。また、デザインベビーの存在が社会の階層化を深める可能性もあります。

デザインベビーの教育環境はどのようになっていますか？

デザインベビーは通常の子どもたちと異なる教育環境を受けることがあります。例えば、ジェンナは特別な学校に通うことになり、彼女の友人マリアンヌとは異なる教育を受けることになります。

遺伝子修飾技術がもたらす可能性と危険性についてどう考えていますか？

遺伝子修飾技術は人類の健康や能力を向上させる可能性がありますが、同時に未知のリスクや倫理的な問題も生じる可能性があります。技術の進歩は素晴らしく、科学的に興味深いものですが、適切な規制が必要であると話者は述べています。

CRISPR技術が科学界でどのような影響を与えていますか？

CRISPR技術は科学界で非常に注目されており、遺伝子研究や疾病治療など様々な分野で応用されています。しかし、この技術の普及はデザインベビーの作成など、倫理的に問題のある使用にもつながる可能性があります。

遺伝子修飾技術を規制する必要があると思いますか？

話者は遺伝子修飾技術の使用を一時停止し、規制するべきだと述べています。技術の進歩は素晴らしいものですが、そのリスクと不確実性から、適切な規制が必要です。

デザインベビーの未来についてどのような展望がありますか？

デザインベビーの未来はまだ不透明ですが、技術の進歩により、将来的には遺伝子修飾された子どもたちがより一般的になるかもしれません。しかし、その影響はまだわかっておらず、倫理的な議論が続くでしょう。

遺伝子修飾技術の使用に関する国際的な議論はどのような状況ですか？

遺伝子修飾技術の使用に関する国際的な議論は活発であり、特にデザインベビーの作成について各国で異なる規制が存在しています。例えば、中国では遺伝子修飾された人間の胚胎の作成が報告されており、英国では特定の遺伝性疾病を防ぐために遺伝子修飾された人間の作成が認められています。

Outlines

00:00

🚀 未来の「デザインベビー」を想像する

2030年の想像を通じて、遺伝子編集技術CRISPRを用いたデザインベビーの可能性とそれに伴う社会的な問題について語る。自然な子とデザインベビーの差異、社会的な見方、さらにはデザインベビーの能力や健康状態について触れる。また、CRISPR技術の簡単さとその潜在的な危険性、科学者としての話者によるデザインベビーに対する懸念を示唆している。

05:02

🏛 遺伝子編集技術の現状と法律

CRISPR技術の概要とその簡単さを説明し、GMO食品の技術と比較して理解を深める。また、遺伝子編集に関する法律状況を各国で比較し、特に米国やUKでの法律の変更を紹介。デザインベビーの道開けとなるCRISPR技術の進歩と、科学者たちへの興奮と懸念を共有している。

10:05

🤔 デザインベビーの倫理的懸念

デザインベビーの倫理的な問題に焦点を当て、過去のユーゲニクスと比較。話者自身の家族のユーゲニクスに関連する体験を通じて、遺伝子編集技術の潜在的な危険性と、新しいユーゲニクスがもたらす可能性について警告する。また、個々のリスクや、遺伝子編集研究全体への影響についても触れている。

15:05

🛑 遺伝子編集のmoratoriumを求める

デザインベビーの誕生がもたらす可能性とそれに伴う倫理的・社会的な問題を再び提起。科学者としての立場から、遺伝子編集による人間の変更を一時停止すべきだと主張し、その重要性と緊急性を強調。さらに、公衆の意見を会議に反映させ、この問題に対する公的な議論を促すことの必要性を示唆している。

Keywords

💡デザイナーベビー

「デザイナーベビー」とは、遺伝子組み換え技術を用いて、特定の特性や能力を持った子供を生み出すことを目的とした概念です。このビデオでは、2030年に設定された架空の物語の中で、デザイナーベビーと自然な子供の間に差が生じることについて触れられています。デザイナーベビーは、より健康で、より賢い、より美しいなどの特性を持っているとされています。しかし、その一方で、彼らが持つ潜在的なリスクや倫理的な問題も提示されています。

💡CRISPR

CRISPRは、特定の遺伝子を編集するための革新的な技術です。ビデオでは、CRISPR技術を使って人間の胚を組み換え、デザイナーベビーを生み出すプロセスについて説明されています。CRISPRは、DNAを簡単に編集できる「遺伝子のスイスアーミーナイフ」と比喩され、その潜在的な力と危険性についても議論されています。

💡遺伝子組み換え

「遺伝子組み換え」とは、生物の遺伝子を直接操作することで、その特性や能力を変化させる技術です。ビデオでは、この技術がデザイナーベビーを生み出すための手段として使用されており、その影響力と倫理的な問題が議論されています。また、遺伝子組み換え技術は、CRISPRを通じてより簡単に、より安価に、より迅速に行われるように進化しています。

💡倫理

「倫理」とは、人間の行動や決断が正しいかどうかを判断する基準や原則のことです。ビデオでは、デザイナーベビーを生み出す行為の倫理的な問題について触れられており、その行為が社会や個人にどのような影響を与えるかが問われています。また、遺伝子組み換え技術の進歩がもたらす倫理的な問題も、ビデオの重要なテーマの一つとなっています。

💡モラトリアム

「モラトリアム」とは、特定の活動や行為を一時停止することを意味する言葉です。ビデオでは、遺伝子組み換え技術を用いたデザイナーベビーの生み出しについて、モラトリアムを提案しています。これは、技術の進歩がもたらす潜在的なリスクや倫理的な問題を考慮して、一時停止することが必要であるという意見を示しています。

💡社会darwinism

「社会darwinism」とは、自然淘汰の原理を社会や経済の領域に応用しようとする考え方です。ビデオでは、遺伝子組み換え技術が進歩することで、社会darwinismのような現象が起こる可能性について触れられています。特に、デザイナーベビーの生み出しが、より優れた遺伝子を持つ人々が優位になる可能性があるという点に注目されています。

💡ユーゲニクス

「ユーゲニクス」とは、人種改良を目的とした理論や運動です。ビデオでは、過去のユーゲニクス運動と比較して、現代の遺伝子組み換え技術がもたらす新しいユーゲニクスの可能性について議論されています。また、ユーゲニクスが持つ倫理的な問題や、それが社会に与える影響についても触れられています。

💡遺伝子疾病

「遺伝子疾病」とは、遺伝子の異常が原因で発症する疾病のことです。ビデオでは、遺伝子組み換え技術を使って、遺伝子疾病を予防することができるという視点から、その技術の潜在的な利点について触れられています。しかし、同時に、技術の誤用やリスクにも言及されています。

💡中国

ビデオでは、中国の研究者が遺伝子組み換え技術を用いて、人間の胚を変更したという過去の出来事について触れられています。これは、遺伝子組み換え技術の進歩がもたらす可能性と、それに伴う倫理的な問題を示す例として挙げられています。また、中国での遺伝子組み換え技術の使用が、国際的な議論を引き起こしていることも示しています。

💡イギリス

ビデオでは、イギリスが遺伝子組み換え技術の使用に関する法規を変更したという出来事について触れられています。イギリスは、過去には遺伝子組み換え技術の使用が厳しく規制されていた国でしたが、特定の遺伝子疾病を予防するために、その規制を緩和したとされています。この変更は、遺伝子組み換え技術の使用に対する国際的な態度がどのように変化しているかを示す例として挙げられています。

Highlights

设想2030年，未经过基因编辑的自然出生儿童将被视为少数。

基因编辑技术CRISPR允许科学家对人类胚胎进行基因增强。

基因编辑儿童可能在智力、外貌、体能等方面超越常人。

基因编辑儿童可能面临社会偏见和孤立。

基因编辑儿童可能具有更低的医疗成本和对某些疾病的免疫力。

公众可能对基因编辑儿童有不安和担忧。

基因编辑可能带来未知的心理健康问题，如攻击性和自恋倾向。

基因编辑技术CRISPR的快速发展和普及可能引发伦理问题。

中国科学家使用CRISPR技术首次编辑人类胚胎。

英国修改法律，允许在防止遗传病的框架内进行人类基因编辑。

CRISPR技术被比喻为基因的瑞士军刀，具有定位、剪切和重写功能。

基因编辑技术可能被用于非科学目的，如意识形态或利润追求。

基因编辑可能引发新的优生学讨论和潜在的负面后果。

基因编辑技术可能被政府用于人口控制和健康成本降低。

基因编辑可能受到社交媒体和流行文化的影响，成为时尚。

基因编辑技术的发展可能超出我们的控制，带来未知风险。

作者呼吁对人类基因编辑实施暂停，以避免不可预测的危险。

提议通过公共讨论和教育提高公众对基因编辑问题的认识。

基因编辑决策对未来几代人将产生深远影响，需慎重考虑。

Transcripts

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Joanna Pietrulewicz

So what if I could make for you

a designer baby?

What if you as a parent-to-be

and I as a scientist decided to go down that road together?

What if we didn't?

What if we thought, "That's a bad idea,"

but many of our family, friends and coworkers

did make that decision?

Let's fast-forward just 15 years from now.

Let's pretend it's the year 2030,

and you're a parent.

You have your daughter, Marianne, next to you,

and in 2030, she is what we call a natural

because she has no genetic modifications.

And because you and your partner consciously made that decision,

many in your social circle, they kind of look down on you.

They think you're, like, a Luddite or a technophobe.

Marianne's best friend Jenna, who lives right next door,

is a very different story.

She was born a genetically modified designer baby with numerous upgrades.

Yeah. Upgrades.

And these enhancements were introduced

using a new genetic modification technology

that goes by the funny name CRISPR,

you know, like something's crisp,

this is CRISPR.

The scientist that Jenna's parents hired to do this

for several million dollars

introduced CRISPR into a whole panel of human embryos.

And then they used genetic testing,

and they predicted that that little tiny embryo, Jenna's embryo,

would be the best of the bunch.

And now, Jenna is an actual, real person.

She's sitting on the carpet in your living room

playing with your daughter Marianne.

And your families have known each other for years now,

and it's become very clear to you

that Jenna is extraordinary.

She's incredibly intelligent.

If you're honest with yourself, she's smarter than you,

and she's five years old.

She's beautiful, tall, athletic,

and the list goes on and on.

And in fact, there's a whole new generation

of these GM kids like Jenna.

And so far it looks like

they're healthier than their parents' generation,

than your generation.

And they have lower health care costs.

They're immune to a host of health conditions,

including HIV/AIDS and genetic diseases.

It all sounds so great,

but you can't help but have this sort of unsettling feeling,

a gut feeling, that there's something just not quite right about Jenna,

and you've had the same feeling about other GM kids that you've met.

You were also reading in the newspaper earlier this week

that a study of these children who were born as designer babies

indicates they may have some issues,

like increased aggressiveness and narcissism.

But more immediately on your mind

is some news that you just got from Jenna's family.

She's so smart,

she's now going to be going to a special school,

a different school than your daughter Marianne,

and this is kind of throwing your family into a disarray.

Marianne's been crying,

and last night when you took her to bed to kiss her goodnight,

she said, "Daddy, will Jenna even be my friend anymore?"

So now, as I've been telling you this imagined 2030 story,

I have a feeling that I may have put some of you

into this sci-fi frame of reference. Right?

You think you're reading a sci-fi book.

Or maybe, like, in Halloween mode of thinking.

But this is really a possible reality for us,

just 15 years from now.

I'm a stem cell and genetics researcher

and I can see this new CRISPR technology

and its potential impact.

And we may find ourselves in that reality,

and a lot will depend on what we decide to do today.

And if you're still kind of thinking in sci-fi mode,

consider that the world of science had a huge shock earlier this year,

and the public largely doesn't even know about it.

Researchers in China just a few months ago

reported the creation of genetically modified human embryos.

This was the first time in history.

And they did it using this new CRISPR technology.

It didn't work perfectly,

but I still think they sort of cracked the door ajar

on a Pandora's box here.

And I think some people are going to run with this technology

and try to make designer babies.

Now, before I go on, some of you may hold up your hands and say,

"Stop, Paul, wait a minute.

Wouldn't that be illegal?

You can't just go off and create a designer baby."

And in fact, to some extent, you're right.

In some countries, you couldn't do that.

But in many other countries, including my country, the US,

there's actually no law on this, so in theory, you could do it.

And there was another development this year that resonates in this area,

and that happened not so far from here over in the UK.

And the UK traditionally has been the strictest country

when it comes to human genetic modification.

It was illegal there,

but just a few months ago,

they carved out an exception to that rule.

They passed a new law

allowing the creation of genetically modified humans

with the noble goal of trying to prevent a rare kind of genetic disease.

But still I think in combination these events are pushing us

further towards an acceptance

of human genetic modification.

So I've been talking about this CRISPR technology.

What actually is CRISPR?

So if you think about the GMOs that we're all more familiar with,

like GMO tomatoes and wheat

and things like that,

this technology is similar to the technologies

that were used to make those,

but it's dramatically better,

cheaper and faster.

So what is it?

It's actually like a genetic Swiss army knife.

We can pretend this is a Swiss army knife

with different tools in it,

and one of the tools is kind of like a magnifying glass

or a GPS for our DNA,

so it can home in on a certain spot.

And the next tool is like scissors

that can cut the DNA right in that spot.

And finally we have a pen

where we can literally rewrite the genetic code in that location.

It's really that simple.

And this technology, which came on the scene just three years ago,

has taken science by storm.

It's evolving so fast, and it's so freaking exciting to scientists,

and I admit I'm fascinated by it and we use it in my own lab,

that I think someone is going to go that extra step

and continue the GM human embryo work

and maybe make designer babies.

This is so ubiquitous now.

It just came on the scene three years ago.

Thousands of labs literally have this in hand today,

and they're doing important research.

Most of them are not interested in designer babies.

They're studying human disease

and other important elements of science.

So there's a lot of good research going on with CRISPR.

And the fact that we can now do genetic modifications

that used to take years and cost millions of dollars

in a few weeks for a couple thousand bucks,

to me as a scientist that's fantastic,

but again, at the same time,

it opens the door to people going too far.

And I think for some people

the focus is not going to be so much on science.

That's not what's going to be driving them.

It's going to be ideology or the chase for a profit.

And they're going to go for designer babies.

So why should we be concerned about this?

We know from Darwin, if we go back two centuries,

that evolution and genetics profoundly have impacted humanity,

who we are today.

And some think there's like a social Darwinism at work in our world,

and maybe even a eugenics as well.

Imagine those trends, those forces,

with a booster rocket of this CRISPR technology

that is so powerful and so ubiquitous.

And in fact, we can just go back one century to the last century

to see the power that eugenics can have.

So my father, Peter Knoepfler,

was actually born right here in Vienna.

He was Viennese, and he was born here in 1929.

And when my grandparents had little baby Peter,

the world was very different. Right?

It was a different Vienna.

The United States was different.

The world was different.

There was a eugenics rising,

and my grandparents realized,

pretty quickly I think,

that they were on the wrong side of the eugenics equation.

And so despite this being their home

and their whole extended family's home,

and this area being their family's home for generations,

they decided because of eugenics

that they had to leave.

And they survived, but they were heartbroken,

and I'm not sure my dad ever really got over leaving Vienna.

He left when he was just eight years old

in 1938.

So today, I see a new eugenics

kind of bubbling to the surface.

It's supposed to be a kinder, gentler, positive eugenics,

different than all that past stuff.

But I think even though it's focused on trying to improve people,

it could have negative consequences,

and it really worries me

that some of the top proponents of this new eugenics,

they think CRISPR is the ticket to make it happen.

So I have to admit, you know,

eugenics, we talk about making better people.

It's a tough question.

What is better when we're talking about a human being?

But I admit I think maybe a lot of us

could agree that human beings,

maybe we could use a little betterment.

Look at our politicians

here, you know, back in the US --

God forbid we go there right now.

Maybe even if we just look in the mirror,

there might be ways we think we could be better.

I might wish, honestly, that I had more hair here, instead of baldness.

Some people might wish they were taller,

have a different weight, a different face.

If we could do those things, we could make those things happen,

or we could make them happen in our children,

it would be very seductive.

And yet coming with it would be these risks.

I talked about eugenics,

but there would be risks to individuals as well.

So if we forget about enhancing people

and we just try to make them healthier using genetic modification,

this technology is so new

and so powerful,

that by accident we could make them sicker.

That easily could happen.

And there's another risk,

and that is that all of the legitimate, important genetic modification research

going on just in the lab --

again, no interest in designer babies --

a few people going the designer baby route,

things go badly,

that entire field could be damaged.

I also think it's not that unlikely

that governments might start taking an interest in genetic modification.

So for example our imagined GM Jenna child

who is healthier,

if there's a generation that looks like they have lower health care costs,

it's possible that governments may start trying to compel their citizens

to go the GM route.

Look at China's one-child policy.

It's thought that that prevented the birth of 400 million human beings.

So it's not beyond the realm of possible

that genetic modification could be something that governments push.

And if designer babies become popular,

in our digital age --

viral videos, social media --

what if designer babies are thought to be fashionable,

and they kind of become the new glitterati,

the new Kardashians or something?

(Laughter)

You know, are those trends that we really could control?

I'm not convinced that we could.

So again, today it's Halloween

and when we talk about genetic modification,

there's one Halloween-associated character

that is talked about or invoked more than anything else,

and that is Frankenstein.

Mostly that's been Frankenfoods and all this other stuff.

But if we think about this now and we think about it in the human context

on a day like Halloween,

if parents can in essence costume their children genetically,

are we going to be talking about a Frankenstein 2.0 kind of situation?

I don't think so. I don't think it's going to get to that extreme.

But when we are going about hacking the human code,

I think all bets are off in terms of what might come of that.

There would still be dangers.

And we can look in the past

to other elements of transformative science

and see how they can basically go out of control

and permeate society.

So I'll just give you one example, and that is in vitro fertilization.

Almost exactly 40 years ago,

test tube baby number one Louise Brown was born,

and that's a great thing,

and I think since then five million IVF babies have been born,

bringing immeasurable happiness.

A lot of parents now can love those kids.

But if you think about it, in four decades,

five million babies being born from a new technology

is pretty remarkable,

and the same kind of thing could happen

with human genetic modification and designer babies.

So depending on the decisions we make in the next few months,

the next year or so,

if designer baby number one is born,

within a few decades,

there could well be millions of genetically modified humans.

And there's a difference there too, because if we, you in the audience, or I,

if we decide to have a designer baby,

then their children will also be genetically modified, and so on,

because it's heritable.

So that's a big difference.

So with all of this in mind,

what should we do?

There's actually going to be a meeting

a month from tomorrow in Washington, D.C.

by the US National Academy of Sciences

to tackle that exact question.

What is the right path forward with human genetic modification?

I believe at this time

we need a moratorium.

We have to ban this.

We should not allow creating genetically modified people,

because it's just too dangerous and too unpredictable.

But there's a lot of people --

(Applause)

Thanks.

(Applause)

And let me say, just as a scientist,

it's a little bit scary for me to say that in public,

because science generally doesn't like self-regulation and things like that.

So I think we need to put a hold on this,

but there are many people who not only disagree with me,

they feel the exact opposite.

They're like, step on the gas, full speed ahead,

let's make designer babies.

And so in the meeting in December

and other meetings that are likely to follow in the next few months,

it's very possible there may be no moratorium.

And I think part of the problem that we have

is that all of this trend,

this revolution in genetic modification applying to humans,

the public hasn't known about it.

Nobody has been saying,

look, this is a big deal, this is a revolution,

and this could affect you in very personal ways.

And so part of my goal is actually to change that

and to educate and engage with the public

and get you guys talking about this.

And so I hope at these meetings that there will be a role for the public

to bring their voice to bear as well.

So if we kind of circle back now to 2030 again, that imagined story,

and depending on the decisions we make, again, today --

literally we don't have a lot of time --

in the next few months, the next year or so,

because this technology is spreading like wildfire.

Let's pretend we're back in that reality.

We're at a park,

and our kid is swinging on the swing.

Is that kid a regular old kid,

or did we decide to have a designer baby?

And let's say we went the sort of traditional route,

and there's our kid swinging on the swing,

and frankly, they're kind of a mess.

Their hair is all over the place like mine.

They have a stuffy nose.

They're not the best student in the world.

They're adorable, you love them,

but there on the swing next to them,

their best friend is a GM kid,

and the two of them are kind of swinging like this,

and you can't help but compare them, right?

And the GM kid is swinging higher,

they look better, they're a better student,

they don't have that stuffy nose you need to wipe.

How is that going to make you feel

and what decision might you make next time?

Thank you.

(Applause)