Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

Putin Could Decide For the World On CRISPR Babies (technologyreview.com) 148

An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: According to Bloomberg, top Russian geneticists held a "secret meeting" this summer with government health officials in Moscow to debate a bid by a scientist there, Denis Rebrikov, to create babies genetically modified with the gene-editing technology CRISPR. The first such children were born in China last year as part of a project to make HIV-resistant humans. That undertaking was halted amid pointed criticism of its ethical failings and a criminal investigation. The question now is whether Russia will grab the CRISPR baton where China dropped it. Dmitry Peskov, the spokesman for Russia's leader, declined to give Bloomberg a position, saying gene editing is not "a presidential issue."

However, Bloomberg reports that the Moscow gene-editing conclave was attended by pediatric endocrinologist Maria Vorontsova, who is Putin's eldest daughter (although this has never publicly confirmed by the Kremlin). Second-hand reports have Vorontsova saying she doesn't think scientific progress can be slowed but that it should be controlled -- or instance, by limiting production of CRISPR babies to "state" institutions. Health Minister Veronika Skvortsova told Bloomberg that "an ethics committee will deal with this very complicated issue."
MIT notes that Putin has in the past likened [CRISPR] technology to a nuclear bomb and cited the possibility of creating soldiers who feel no pain. According to Bloomberg, Putin last year directed $2 billion to be spent on genetic research that he said will "determine the future of the whole world."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Putin Could Decide For the World On CRISPR Babies

Comments Filter:
  • by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @10:33PM (#59259758)
    No, Putin doesn't get to "decide for the world" on the issue of CRISPR babies. He gets to decide for Russia. Congress will most likely get to decide for the USA; Parliament will get to decide for the UK, etc. We don't have a world government (yet). We are a world of sovereign nations.
    • by wierd_w ( 1375923 ) on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @10:47PM (#59259788)

      Genes entering the human population, enter the human population.

      The issue with CRISPR babies is that you are meddling with the human genome, potentially for politically motivated, rather than medically motivated reasons.

      Once those genes are in circulation, they can spread outside Russia, via normal human migration patterns. With that mindset, YES-- Russia deciding "CRISPR babies are OK" means that other countries have to either resort to genetic rationale for refusing entry to their countries, or accept that Russia has decided for the rest of the world.

      • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @11:48PM (#59259902)

        CRISPR babies are inevitable. As you say those genes will mix, and when one nation of parents can make choices about babies they have, every other nation will clamor for that same choice.

        What will be really interesting to see is, what changes will future parents look for beyond the obvious intelligence and beauty enhancements. Would parents of one race opt to change a baby to a different race? Will some parents opt to include gender dysphoria as a feature?

        What about furry parents raising babies that have an actual coat of fur? Or parents opting for completely hairless babies to save the future person maintenance time?

        Perhaps the ability to edit future children will even cause a surge in children, that might even offset the below replacement birth rates some nations are seeing...

        The future is going to be amazing, and weird.

        • Wings. Definitely wings.

          Furry children already exist.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          That's really sick. Children aren't some kind of accessory or toy for parents.
          • I don't think you are approaching that without blinders, (or at least, rose colored glasses), on.

            The primary desire for children is as much irrational want, as instinctual drive, and many parents use their children as proxies to overcome their own self-perceived inadequacies.

            Take for instance, the "competitive sports mom" (An umbrella for SoccerMom, GymnasticsMom, PagentMom, and pals). Stereotypically, "MOM" is the one driven to win, not the child. The child is forced to go along with mom's irrational desir

          • That's really sick. Children aren't some kind of accessory or toy for parents.

            What part of choosing height or hair color would make a child into a "toy" after it's born?

          • Well they are more like pets aren't they? We have a lot of choices for different breeds of animals when buying a pet. You may not like it but probably most of the world will choose superior CRISPR babies if they are available.

            • Interesting that you jump to the conclusion that CRISPER babies will be superior. If this represents the mentality for the future, then get ready to constantly reinvent the idea of "superior", until all functionality is basically broken and/or forgotten.

              I can only point to the world of computing as an example. Every year computing is advanced more and more into the great "betterment" of humanity. But look at all of the dysfunction and incompatibility among all of the systems that exist today. Incompatib

              • by Shotgun ( 30919 )

                You think there is a lot of dysfunction and incompatibility among all of the systems that exist today? You should have been around 35 yrs ago when I got started.

          • That's really sick. Children aren't some kind of accessory or toy for parents.

            Of course not.

            They're the retirement strategy.

        • by Dorianny ( 1847922 ) on Wednesday October 02, 2019 @03:00AM (#59260150) Journal
          CRISPER works best for targeting a single or at most a few single-purpose genes. When you are talking about "intelligence" or "beauty " which have a large number of multi-role genes associated with them then you are far more likely to end up with quasi-modo then what you intended
          • Still once that happens it will be an arms race to put them out like popcorn or be relegated to subservience.

            A supergenius raised in nations of dictatorial strong men probably won't have a natural tendency to benevolence.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          This is the kind of thing where some international agreement makes sense, say at the UN level. As a matter of urgency we should be getting all countries to agree to very limited use of this technology, perhaps with an international oversight body (part of the WHO?) which has to approve all uses.

          • Well, as with everything else, there are a number of rogue countries that will not sign the agreement, or not follow the international guidelines. For example, as rational as Japan may be and friendly with most of the world as they are, they still hunt whales, saying it's for scientific purpose, but in fact it is because they eat it.

            Another example is Ireland. They are in the EU and the UN, but still are a tax heaven.

            There will always be a country ready to go on their own, not following guidelines, either f

            • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Sure, some will refuse, but if the majority, and especially most of the rich nations join then the consequences will be pretty dire for them. The examples you cite are not serious enough in the case of Japan, or are actually being dealt with in Ireland's case with the EU recently forcing them to collect billions in back taxes.

              For this kind of thing it would likely result in sanctions. Restrictions on medical equipment, for example.

              • The examples you cite are not serious enough in the case of Japan, or are actually being dealt with in Ireland's case with the EU recently forcing them to collect billions in back taxes.

                Because those examples can't fly to vegas, get hammered, and reproduce.

                That's the problem with genetically editing anything that can still reproduce. Those edits do not stay contained within the host. It doesn't matter if the only place that genetically modifies super soldiers is North Korea. Unless they sterilize every one of them, those genes can and will make it into the world population after just a few generations. It just takes 5 minutes with the maid when nobody is looking.

                Life finds a way!

            • These CRISPR babies could be engineered by Russia to become perfect soldiers, strong and hard to kill. This would certainly give them an edge. Or they could also release humans that have genetic diseases that would spread through a few generations across the globe, but would be prevented to come back to Russia (they would have some sort of "test" at their border to not let them in).

              Why not both?

          • We already have had extremely strict rules against doping in sports, yet there's a continual urge to cheat. Countries like East Germany demonstrated a nearly psychopathic desire to use doping to win medals.

            If gene editing provides a national security advantage, it seems likely that the usual candidates will ignore regulations if they can breed military forces with enhanced capabilities.

            Nations like China or even North Korea will possibly this as a means to achieve political compliance and reduce liabilitie

            • Eugenics is an incredibly seductive concept at many levels. Parents want perfect kids.

              They also want kids born without their spinal column showing through holes in their flesh. And with working limbs. And hearts. And with the right number of fingers and toes, hands and feet.

              The problem is that this is indeed a very, very slippery slope. I think very few people are going to be against curing spina bifida or downs syndrome or heart valve problems in utero. Again, not a lot of people are going to be against a quick edit to remove the broken gene which will result in a kid born without hands. An

        • >"The future is going to be amazing, and weird."

          I think am glad I will be old enough to be dead by the time this stuff could really kick into full swing. I think there are a HUGE number of ethical issues and extremely dangerous/disastrous consequences with artificially haphazardly messing with the human genome. I suppose it really is inevitable.

        • Like a 12 fingered pianist? it's been done as a sci-fi thought piece ya know..

          "The creator of Ratboygenius was the 12-fingered piano player in Gattaca"

        • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

          Perhaps the ability to edit future children will even cause a surge in children, that might even offset the below replacement birth rates some nations are seeing...

          I am sure this is a large part of the discussion in Russia. They are already having an annual holiday to get people to stay home and have sex! If you birth a child around 9mo you get entered in lottery for prizes. They are very very worried about their population demographics

        • I think one reason for concern is the unknown effects of editing genes. Maybe you get an intelligent and pretty person, but maybe they're reproductive organs are faulty, or they can't see, hear, feel, smell, or taste very well, dunno. Maybe they're intelligent, pretty, can sense well, but are obnoxious, or in other ways, pushed away by unedited-gene-having people, for reasons that are obvious to everyone except the gene-edited people.

          On the other hand, maybe editing genes could help deal with sociopaths,

      • Sideways argument.

        In a non-Russia country, when pregnancy is identified and a parent is of certain descent, test the parent and if the CRISPR genes are found, well that's where it gets complicated.

        Similar in concept to invasive species control (OK, pretty much identical if not wanted locally).

        There's a movie plot the rhymes with Children of Men in that. And I'm searching for the root of rationality, if one wants to control such technology. I understand the implications.

      • What can be CRISPRed in can be CRISPRed out
      • "normal human migration patterns" aka Natasha is hot as hell, just ignore the tail and get down on it! jungle boogie, get down on it!

      • OH NO. THE RUSSIAN'S ARE GOING TO CREATE RUSSIAN SUPER CRISPR BABIES AND INTERBREED WITH US, MAKING US ALL SECRETLY LOVE MOTHER RUSSIA.

        Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
        Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
        Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

      • They need to first make a few distinctions and then boundaries on those distinctions. As you say, the risk of spreading genes is in the realm of editing germline cells which would form the first boundary due to unknown future effects. Somatic cells are only going to effect the individual.

        The second boundary in my book is curative vs designer. Is the child tested and 100% positive for a future crippling genetic condition or do you just want them to have blue eyes and fast twitch muscles?

        This distinction betw

    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      PFFT, Putin decides for no one, if you has been paying any real attention at all to what is going on in Russia, you would see how much politicking Putin has to do to stay so popular and how much he does address the popular needs of the Russian people. Putin is not doing the deciding, the Russian people are and make no mistake.

      CRISPR can best be used with algae, the easiest to transform, the quickest to grow and very water and space efficient and a whole lot can be created from it, food of any flavour and te

      • PFFT, Putin decides for no one, if you has been paying any real attention at all to what is going on in Russia, you would see how much politicking Putin has to do to stay so popular and how much he does address the popular needs of the Russian people. Putin is not doing the deciding, the Russian people are and make no mistake.

        Sorta. Quite often it is the people in the Forbes 100 list. I agree, he has been successful in staying in power and retaining a ridiculously high approval rating exactly because he tries to address the needs of the country. We may not agree with how he does it, but that's a different story.

        Honestly why bother with super soldiers when you have nukes, what, the obedient morons will fight over the ashes, I just don't get it (sure sometimes good sometimes bad sci fi fodder but totally unrealistic, tiny kamikaze drones deployed three per target, in their millions, to light up your head and you are done, headless super soldiers are of no use to no one).

        Ahem. It also takes 20 odd years to grow and train said soldiers. Even then they will be only marginally better than what the special "uni" in Gudermes prints anyway.

    • We are a world of sovereign nations.

      No

      "...There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels."

    • No, Putin doesn't get to "decide for the world" on the issue of CRISPR babies. He gets to decide for Russia.

      If you think Putin's influence doesn't extend to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC, then you haven't been watching the news lately.

    • No, Putin doesn't get to "decide for the world" on the issue of CRISPR babies. He gets to decide for Russia. Congress will most likely get to decide for the USA; Parliament will get to decide for the UK, etc. We don't have a world government (yet). We are a world of sovereign nations.

      Rubbish. If Putin creates some "super soldiers" then the military will make that decision for the USA.

      (and as soon as rich parents find out they can choose hair color and sporting prowess then it's all over anyway)

      • It is true that Bat Boy can fly, but he doesn't have stealth technology. It is not a game changer.

    • No, Putin doesn't get to "decide for the world" on the issue of CRISPR babies. He gets to decide for Russia. Congress will most likely get to decide for the USA; Parliament will get to decide for the UK, etc. We don't have a world government (yet). We are a world of sovereign nations.

      Well, he kinda does. If he uses it, it will be to make super soldiers and if they have them, we will want them and so will everyone else.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        His super solider ideas are terrible though. People who don't feel pain have a serious problem and it often results in them being badly injured because they didn't notice that they were burning themselves or got a severe cut.

        Also think about it would actually work. They would have to create children specifically for that programme, and either raise them to be soldiers or just create lots and then try to recruit as many as possible. And by the time it's done warfare will mostly be remotely controlled drones

        • Of course it's a terrible idea, doesn't mean they won't try though. I doubt they'd say anything though, just do it in secret. In his head though he probably just thinks they can make fully grown, super strong, super fast, impervious to pain, not not feeling it but able to ignore it. I mean, you're looking at at least an 18 year lead time so they'll probably just end up with drone operators full of fucking cancers and deformities.
          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            I doubt Putin really believes it. He says a lot of shit, but he's not an idiot. It's all carefully calculated, in this case probably just to scare his enemies and make them waste time worry about it or starting their own super soldier programmes.

            In fact Russia has a long history of doing it, from the "missile gap" to modern inflatable tanks.

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      You are correct thank God; but I don't think the authors meant it that way. I think they were speaking it in terms of an arms race. Its a lot harder to hold the line on "we should not go there" when others are already doing it and possibly breading super soldiers..

      That said I think that read of the situation is also wrong. Russia quite simply isnt scary unless you happen to right near their boarder and are already a weak former client state. This kind of stuff is Russia scraping the barrel bottom for an

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • You can debate globalism vs. nationalism on your own time, it doesn't figure into this one.

      If doing something gives some individual, organization, or group an advantage over others, it will be done. It does not really matter what anyone decides, it's going to just get done, particularly if it's easy to do.

      The only intelligent thing to do here to minimize the carnage is to use the technology and attempt to establish boundaries of what produces ethical results, what minimizes the dangers inherent in toying wi

    • Hmm... Insightful? Really? Well, perhaps for extremely minor values of insight.

      On the one hand, I do agree that the headline could be seen as slightly on the clickbait side.

      On the other hand, you have to qualify it as "slightly" because it's actually easier to see the headline as understating the threat of CRISPR and related gene-editing technologies.

      On the third hand, anyone who wants the biggest and best of the worst will know where to get it. Putin will accept payment in any sound currency, even if it's

  • Putin should change his name to Khan Noonien Singh [wikipedia.org]. Then we can have the Eugenics Wars, extra-CRISPR!

  • ”However, Bloomberg reports that the Moscow gene-editing conclave was attended by pediatric endocrinologist Maria Vorontsova, who is Putin's eldest daughter (although this has never publicly confirmed by the Kremlin).”

    So why won’t the Kremlin confirm that this woman is Putin’s eldest daughter?

    • There is an interesting documentary produced by the BBC a few years ago called "HyperNormalization" that you should look into. The strategy utilized by Russia is one of diversion and distraction, specifically to prevent the formation of a coherent set of directives from government, in order to keep all parties involved guessing what the true aims or objectives of the Kremlin are.

      with that in mind, this oversight makes total and complete sense.

    • ”However, Bloomberg reports that the Moscow gene-editing conclave was attended by pediatric endocrinologist Maria Vorontsova, who is Putin's eldest daughter (although this has never publicly confirmed by the Kremlin).”

      So why won’t the Kremlin confirm that this woman is Putin’s eldest daughter?

      Don't Snopes me, but maybe Vlad's not sure.

    • by Cyberax ( 705495 )

      So why won’t the Kremlin confirm that this woman is Putin’s eldest daughter?

      To give her a chance to have a private life. It's too late now, but she did manage to go through the school and university without attracting attention.

  • If we can create soldiers that feel no pain, could we create politicians that feel no shame?

  • by blindseer ( 891256 ) <blindseer@nOspam.earthlink.net> on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @11:00PM (#59259828)

    Pain and fear are very useful for survival. Lacking them doesn't make better soldiers. What it does is create 10 year old boys that end up dead because they didn't fear jumping off a roof.

    I'm reminded of a scene from Rossum's Universal Robots.

    http://www.gutenberg.org/files... [gutenberg.org]

    Dr. Gall. Not with regard to that, Domin. At present I am making pain nerves.

    Helena. Pain nerves?

    Dr. Gall. Yes, the Robots feel practically no bodily pain. You see, young Rossum provided them with too limited a nervous system. We must introduce suffering.

    Helena. Why do you want to cause them pain?

    Dr. Gall. For industrial reasons, Miss Glory. Sometimes a Robot does damage to himself because it doesnâ(TM)t hurt him. He puts his hand into the machineâ" (Describes with gesture) â"breaks his fingerâ" (Describes with gesture) â"smashes his head. Itâ(TM)s all the same to him. We must provide them with pain. Thatâ(TM)s an automatic protection against damage.

    • There is a rare medical condition, congenital insensitivity to pain. People thus afflicted just feel zero pain. Their childhoods are filled with accidents - they can bite pieces off their tongue while eating, handle burning pots without noticing, or just peel the skin off their hands while focusing in the same way other people might bite their fingernails without thinking about it.

      • There is a rare medical condition, congenital insensitivity to pain. People thus afflicted just feel zero pain. Their childhoods are filled with accidents - they can bite pieces off their tongue while eating, handle burning pots without noticing, or just peel the skin off their hands while focusing in the same way other people might bite their fingernails without thinking about it.

        Yep. Saw an episode of "House M.D." where there was a patient with CIPA that described the condition and the troubles it poses.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        I found this interesting from that Wikipedia page...

        Approximately 20% of people with CIPA die of hyperthermia by age 3.

        This is more of a problem of an inability to regulate body temperature properly, not the pain insensitivity. Just a guess that the two are highly linked, diminishing the ability to feel pain likely diminishes the ability to feel temperature. Soldiers that can't feel pain might run on two broken l

        • Yeah I thought of that disorder when reading the blurb and thought that if that was all they tried to do with the tech then we didn't have much to worry about. They also suffer effects from not tossing and turning in their sleep nor getting uncomfortable when wakefully sitting still, leading to circulation issues.
      • by martinX ( 672498 )

        Same with leprosy - patients damage parts of their bodies and don't know it at the time, nor do they notice the gangrene that follows until others complain of the smell.

    • Absolutely true. What you near is a high tolerance for pain, so that you can be effective even when injured and uncomfortable. Likewise with fear, if you have absolutely no fear or caution in warfare you will quickly get killed - avoiding death is most of what soldiers do in a battle, and the main reason infantry can be so tenacious is that each man is individually trying to maximize his chance of survival (and his squadmates) in a thousand minor ways.
    • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 )

      What we need is a system that disables fear and pain in dangerous situation.
      And that's exactly how our body fight-or-flight response works. Evolution took care of that long ago.

      That mechanism is not perfect, it could get a few tweaks for our super soldiers, but the thing is that it is not something that can be easily improved with tools as crude as CRISPR and our current understanding of genetics. What gene editing is best for is treating diseases that are caused by a well identified mutation, then changing

  • That's funny, the only thing putin knows about ethics is he doesn't have any.

    As to soldiers that can't feel pain, they'd be useless with them always getting infections and other wounds and not even getting treatment for them, often because they didn't realize they were there or underestimated the seriousness.
    You'd have to have so many medical resources expended just to keep those defects in some kind of semblance of combat readiness status that they'd never be able to afford more than a handful of them. The
  • If other countries start engineering an army of geniuses, the USA may have to do the same in order compete. Either that, it's sanctions, which have limits.

    • We cannot allow a genius gap!

    • Even if other countries don't start using CRISPR we'll likely have to resort to it anyways if we want to stay competitive with China. Just from a sheer numbers standpoint they should already have more very smart people than the USA has people.

      • by Shotgun ( 30919 )

        Nah! If it actually works, and they produce smart people, they'll just want to immigrate to the US anyway. And being smart, they'll find a way.

  • Sometimes children are born that feel no pain. They always die young because PAIN HAS A PURPOSE! You think evolution created it just to annoy us? It tells us when we are screwing up so we stop doing it, it is as simple as that.

    • Who knows... Maybe they'll only be given reduced pain, but also be given greater bone density, blood coagulation, thicker skin, etc etc... but yes the old Frankenstein trope... when man tries to outdo nature it often backfires. The blasphemous notion that we can play god, nearly always ends in retribution in the movies, but perhaps in real life we actually can play god and get away with it.

      Today we're the apex predator on this planet, the idea we can use genetic sciences to create a new variant of our own s

    • They wouldn't make very good soldiers as they have to constantly check themselves for bruising and if any is found it must be immediately checked by medical professional because without pain there is no other way for them to tell if it is minor or major injury
  • Need I say more?
    I will say more.
    The Star Trek reference, most of you should get -- and should get the warning behind it.
    Any Jerry Pournelle fans out there? How about Sauron Supermen?
    That's just on the plus side. Sure, sure, genetically altering humans could have amazing effects. We could make ourselves disease resistant, curtail or even eliminate aging effects, increase intelligence, any number of positive things.
    We could also create new genetic diseases that get passed down from generation to generati
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • It'll be China. They are already doing a bunch of Interesting experiments which would be considered fucked up in the West.
  • The problem here is that having genetically-edited humans is so desirable to governments that the idea has been circulated for a long time.
    Brave new World, anyone ?
    The clone army ?
    etc.
    Once the science/technology will advance enough to try out the idea in practice, the experiments will happen whether we like it or not.
    The main issue is: How do we go forward once the experiments are successful ?

  • According to the national respect for life index,
    Russia has some respect for life where China has near zero respect for life.

    I am sure that this research is already going gang-busters in China. I wouldn't doubt if China already mixed jelly fish genes with human babies so they glow green in the dark.

    China is beyond an ethical-shit show with Russia following close behind.
    This is already happening, most likely with political prisoners as guinea pigs.

    China has most like attempted to clone their dictator for li

  • It's the one where the historically evil and incompetent totalitarian government loses control of the genetically-altered-super-zombie-solders and kicks off a great end-of-the-world adventure franchise right?

    Night of the living resident universal soldier or some such silliness?

  • Someone will grab the baton and stick it up all our ass holes
  • With 7+ billion people already on the planet, a few CRSPR babies will be just noise in the dna soup. And you know what? Evolution will take care of everything. Even human editing could be considered part of evolution.
  • Wow, Freakanomics shows its face again. The 2 child policy has caused a cut in the number of females in the population. All those males want love. Explosion in HIV rates. Government wants HIV resistant children. Who could have predicted that?
  • Everyone thought you were just posturing because you wanted to look tough despite not producing any economic growth.
    You started to assassinate minor political rivals, invaded Ukraine because you needed a "bigger port", date women a 1/3 your age, and now this...
    You have an inferiority complex and you need to speak to a professional that can help.
  • Up until a few years ago, we could be sure that DNA is inherited from either both parents (nuclear DNA) or from the mother only (mitochondrial DNA). All research on molecular clocks, mutation, taxonomy, haplotypes, and so on was consistent.

    Now two things jeopardize this: CRISPR, where genes are introduced externally (not from either parent), or where two mothers are involved: one donates the nucleus, and the other donates the rest of the ovum. So, the mitochondrial DNA is not from the same parent as half (o

  • There was evidence that Stalin wanted to breed women with apes to create "Super Soldiers". I can see that mentality still flowing through the dictatorial elite. The guy convicted in China is probably working at a secret facility to hone his talents.

The power to destroy a planet is insignificant when compared to the power of the Force. - Darth Vader

Working...