From this point onward, our selection will not be natural. As Metzl correctly writes, we needed dramatic flair: “From this point onward, our mutation will not be random. Genes mutated in random ways, without anyone at the helm. Still, despite life’s remarkable resiliency, up to this point the evolution of life on Earth has been a passive process. We - and all other living creatures - are the mutants who made it in a planet that threw many curved balls our way. We are, quite literally, the product of reproductive mistakes and planetary cataclysms. Had reproduction been perfect, the only living creatures on Earth would be single-celled organisms, our 3.5 billion-year-old ancestors. The central question of this fast-paced account of where modern genetics is taking us is simple: How far should we go in changing our genetic identity? Assuming, in tandem with current research, that we will be able to manipulate the human genome at a level of detail that will allow for the cure of many horrible diseases: Should we also rethink our own design? If so, where do we draw the line between the acceptable and the morally repulsive?įor billions of years, life on Earth evolved through the process of Darwinian evolution via natural selection: Small errors during reproduction propagate from parents to offspring, occasionally offering some a survival advantage to find food or fight enemies. Like Metzl, I believe the conversation of where this is taking us - and how such advances should be regulated - is essential.

This is no wild sci-fi extrapolation but is already beginning to happen, given advances in genomics and gene-editing techniques. His case, based on an extrapolation of current research, is firmly grounded on what is indeed possible within the next decade or so. Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity by Jamie Metzl

Book hacking darwin