Rewriting the code of life

 One of my many, many, many drawbacks is this: I waste my time even on stuff that I don't understand.  Topics for which I am way underprepared.  Yet, I continue with this habit.

There is a reason for this madness.

Actually two.

First, I am genuinely interested in a bunch of things.  Of course, I know where my strengths and weaknesses are and I could simply focus on my strong areas alone.  But, that ain't me.  How could I not know about stuff about which I don't know anything?  No, do not jump to conclude that it is some kind of a FOMO.  Nope.  FOMO doesn't belong in this context.  FOMO is about fleeting, momentary excitement.  I am referring to something more than the now.

Second, even though I am a college professor, I don't consider myself a "teacher."  I am a life-long student who teaches.  If the university fires me from my job next year, I will continue to be a student even though I will no longer be a professor.  Being a student is absolutely a part of who I am.

So, I waste time reading about stuff that can often be way above my head.

CRISPR is one of those.

My earliest post--yes, there is more than one--on this was in March 2015.  In that post, I expressed my concerns about CRISPR.  I ended that post with this quote:

Rewriting human heredity has always been a theoretical possibility. Suddenly it’s a real one. But wasn’t the point always to understand and control our own biology—to become masters over the processes that created us? 

Doudna says she is also thinking about these issues. “It cuts to the core of who we are as people, and it makes you ask if humans should be exercising that kind of power. There are moral and ethical issues, but one of the profound questions is just the appreciation that if germ line editing is conducted in humans, that is changing human evolution,” Doudna told me. One reason she feels the research should stop is to give scientists a chance to spend more time explaining what their next steps could be. “Most of the public,” she says, “does not appreciate what is coming.”

See the name Doudna in that quote?

In October 2015, I blogged about CRISPR, Jennifer Doudna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier.  It was about how they were not awarded the Nobel, despite being considered the top bet.

They didn't get the October morning phone call until 2020!

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry was jointly awarded on Wednesday to Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna for their 2012 work on Crispr-Cas9, a method to edit DNA. The announcement marks the first time the award has gone to two women.

“This year’s prize is about rewriting the code of life,” Goran K. Hansson, the secretary-general of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, said as he announced the names of the laureates.

Not merely understanding life, but rewriting the code of life.

As Jennifer Doudna said, most of the public does not appreciate what is coming.

For now, I am delighted that two women were the recipients of the Nobel Prize in chemistry.

But, I remain worried about the longer-term implications. 

If only I didn't waste time reading stuff that I don't truly understand!