Prime Time Replay:

Dr. Lee Silver
author of Remaking Eden: Cloning and
Beyond In A Brave New World


MsgId: *infinities(8)
Date: Fri Nov 28 20:53:25 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Welcome to Infinities. I'm Sherry Baker and my guest tonight is Princeton molecular biologist and neuroscience professor Lee Silver. Dr. Silver is the author of a new and extraordinarily timely book --- Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond In A Brave New World, published by Avon. Welcome, Lee.
MsgId: *infinities(10)
Date: Fri Nov 28 20:55:04 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Hello to all. This is Lee Silver signing on.
MsgId: *infinities(11)
Date: Fri Nov 28 20:55:42 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

While we're waiting for Lee, we'll get started talking about his controversial new book.

Hi, Lee !

MsgId: *infinities(13)
Date: Fri Nov 28 20:56:51 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Go ahead Sherry. Fire away with any questions or comments that you have, and I'll try to respond.
MsgId: *infinities(14)
Date: Fri Nov 28 20:57:08 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Lee conducts research in genetics, evolution , developmental biology, behavioral reproduction, and reproduction. His book uses his knowledge and expertise to give us a reasoned, optimistic look at the future of humankind. It is a future some may object to, even call unthinkable, but it is a future Lee Silver says is coming ready or not.

A future where men will, literally, be mothers . . . where two lesbians will be able to combine their bloodlines and truly have their own baby . . . where a woman can carry her own twin sister, her identical clone, in her own womb . . . a future where parents can select from an embryo pool to make sure they get the boy or girl they want , and that the child will have particular characteristics and talents . . . a future where parents can look at computer-generated pictures of your child -- and see what he or she will look like at 5, at 12, at 20 -- before that child is born . . . a future where embryo selection and gene enhancement will not only be possible but, practiced, could change the course of humankind's evolution . . . splitting our descendants into two branches . . . one that reproduces the old fashioned way and one that can't and isn't interested in plain, old fashioned mating. Are these sci fi fantasies? Nope. They are fiction, but based on scientific understanding and technologies already available.

Lee, I said your book is extraordinarily timely -- and I'm not talking just talking about the cloning of sheep. I'm talking, of course, about the seven McCaughey babies. The world is buzzing . . . the fact this is possible . . . the ethical questions it raises. What you are writing about is such a huge, controversial topic, but let's jump right in. Would you briefly describe the scope of reprogenetic technologies -- and tell us why you believe the use of these technologies is inevitable?

MsgId: *infinities(23)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:03:06 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Well, based on the 20 years that I've actually been using these technologies in my own lab (on mice not people) and based on the incredible rapidity with which this technology continues to expand in ways that none of us thought possible just a few years ago, . . . and also based on my own foray into the actual human use side of technologies like in vitro fertilization and surrogacy, it seems to me that the marketplace will be the final arbiter of what goes rather than scientists or governments.

And what these technologies do is one or both of two different things. First, they allow people to reproduce in ways that they desire, in ways that were not possible before, and the instinct to produce biological children is very powerful. But the instinct to provide your children with all possible advantages is also powerful, and together these instincts will drive people to use these technologies, no matter what society as a whole or governments may say.

MsgId: *infinities(27)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:07:40 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

I think when people learn about the possibilites of reprogenetics, many think , oh, no, the government will grab this and start creating and manipulating people and classes . . . . you say it's not governments who will cease this technology -- but people who want babies, healthy, happy babies, right?
MsgId: *infinities(29)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:10:54 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

That's right. The idea that a government who take control of reproductive technologies to build soldiers or docile citizens makes no sense in a democratic society like ours. Instead, although people don't seem to believe it over often, when it comes to personal matters like reproduction, democractic governments do very little, and indeed, could do very little. Remember, women are still required to reproduce all children, and in a democratic society, government can't control women's bodies in this way. BUT, prospective parents can take advantage of these technologies . . . and when they learn about the power of these technologies -- for example, to determine exactly what genes they can put into their children to provide resistance to disease and to provide advantages in height, health, and talent -- I think there is no doubt ordinary people will run to use them.
MsgId: *infinities(31)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:13:19 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Could you talk about the dilemma -- using technology as part of a personal reproductive choice but a choice that could have incredible long ranging consequences for society.
MsgId: *infinities(33)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:14:53 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Yes, the dilemma that results is what I consider to be the main ethical issue when it comes to the use of these technologies to produce healthy children who will be loved by their parents. The dilemma is that although no individual use of the technology could have any effect on society as a whole -- all it would do is provide an advantage to just one child . . . when many, many people start to use these technologies, together they will build a genetically enhanced class of people from what is now just an environmentally enhanced class. These technologies are very expensive, probably always will be, and they will only be available to those who can afford them, although where the line will be drawn is hard to tell.

Furthermore, once a child is genetically enhanced, all of his or her children will also be enhanced. At each generation, new enhancements could be added, and eventually, the genetically enhanced class could actually evolve into a species that is separate from "natural" human beings . . . I know this sounds like science fiction, but there is nothing to stop it from happening based on the science that we already know! The only thing that could stop it would be political action of a very strong nature. I don't know if politicians could be strong enough to react against such basic instincts.

MsgId: *infinities(37)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:22:02 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

It does sound like sci fi, fascinating sci fi. In your book, you discuss in detail a scenario, say, a thousand years from now, in which those you dub the GenRich, the genetically enhanced, actually might not be ABLE, much less want to, reproduce the old fashioned way. So you are talking about the actual, possible outcome of genetic engineering resulting eventually -- possibly -- in the actual split of humankind into two species?
MsgId: *infinities(39)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:24:31 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Yes. This scenario is based on what we know actually happens when a species splits into two populations that begin to differ from each other genetically. Eventually, the two populations are unable to breed with each other, and don't even want to breed with each other even if they could. I think a "Genrich" class of people could get to this point within a thousand years . . .

This estimate is actually conservative. And at that point, there really would be two different species of human beings. How would they treat each other? Based on the way we probably treated the Neanderthals we found in Europe when we got there 30,000 years ago, I suspect it wouldn't be very pretty. That's the real reason why this is so scary.

MsgId: *infinities(41)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:27:38 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

But you are willing to address these issues. Not people seem to, unless it is in the political arena where there are already, it seems to me, misguided attempts to but legal restraints on cloning and other biogenetic technologies. In fact, you are to be commended for addressing the really huge ethnical and spiritual as well as scientific issues in your book. We can't get around it. People bring God into this whole biogenetic debate and you aren't afraid to talk about that . . . and the fact that people are scared and confused and, perhaps, misguided about what it is that makes a human a human . . . as though genetic engineering is going to change the soul somehow. It seems that much of the ethical debate involves the belief that human life is contained within DNA -- you say, no, it exists in the human mind, right? I may not be quoting you perfectly, but you say something like: You say "the specialness of human beings is found between their ears; go looking for it anywhere else and you'll be disappointed."
MsgId: *infinities(44)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:35:01 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

You are quoting me exactly right. The ethical issues that most bioethicists focus on are phony. They are worried about scientists messing in God's domain or with mother naturee, but evey time you take an aspirin or you give your child a vaccine, you are messing with mother nature. Polio and Smallpox are natural! I don't think any bioethicist would withhold the polio vaccine from their children, so they are being hypocritical when they criticize new reprogenetic technologies . . .

In fact, I see nothing wrong with using new technologies to help children be healthy and happier. I just wish that we could provide these technologies to ALL children. I feel sorry for the families that can't afford to give their children genetic gifts just because they happen to have the finances to do it. . . So, the ethical dilemma that we touched upon earlier is one that I can't solve. I think it is wrong to withhold good technologies that can only make children healthier. At the same time, I don't want society to split into two species, and that seems to me to be a possible longterm outcome.

MsgId: *infinities(47)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:38:51 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Whew! This hour is flying. I'd like to invite our audience to join if you'd like to ask Lee any questions . . . this is one huge subject! Take us through the more immediate future -- how you expect genetic engineering to benefit human kind in terms of health ( curing diseases like cystic fibrosis, for example, we all hope ) and then move beyond that to, actually honing and enhancing the physical and intellectual attributes of humans. Are SuperMan and SuperWoman a possibility?
MsgId: *infinities(48)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:41:15 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Well, in a certain sense, the future is already here. For the last 5 years, it has been possible to screen human embryos (before pregnancy) for deadly diseases like Tay Sachs, or cystic fibrosis, or sickle cell. And already thousands of prospective parents have used this "Embryo Selection" technology to START their pregnancies without having to worry that their fetus might be diseased . . .

But, the very same technology can be used to look at ANY gene, and the Human Genome Project will reveal what every gene does within the next 20 years. So by that time at the latest, parents will be able to choose which of their characteristics to pass to their children (blue eyes for example) and which to withhold (weak chin, baldness). This will definitely happen. . . And by that time, we will advance to the next step in reprogenetics -- actually adding new, synthetic genes to embryos. At that time, we will almost certainly understand the genetic basis for all sorts of complex things like predispositions to certain personalities, as well as athletic and artitistic talents. So parents would be able to go to a catalog and choose which of these traits to add to their children. But, there's an important qualification . . .

The qualification is that all you can do is give the predisposition. No matter how much talent you're born with, you won't become a star player unless you practice (piano, math, or basketball). Parents will have to understand this limitation. But, why not start out with an advantage?

MsgId: *infinities(52)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:48:56 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

I was discussing your book earlier with a friend, a lawyer, who posed this question --- if you combine genetic engineering and, perhaps, if replacement organs can even been grown for those who can afford to have it done . . . will a class of virtually immortal humans eventually emerge? Is that simply a too far out possibility -- or do we simply have no way of knowing the true limits of the new reprogenetic technology?
MsgId: *infinities(54)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:51:06 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

That's a very interesting question. One consequence of the cloning technology in particular will be the ability to grow new tissues (which we can already do for unstructured things like bone marrow or liver), and eventually we'll be able to do this for organs like the heart and lungs. I don't see any scientific barriers to doing this. But at the moment, there seems to be one barrier that we may not cross . . .

The barrier is the brain. I can't forsee how we can get around the slow loss of brain cells that goes on all the time, with the slow loss of what makes us who we are. But, one should never say never! Who knows what could happen in the future. If we ever do achieve the technology for immortality, I only hope that we will have solved the world population problem to let us all live comfortably. This is getting a bit beyond what I touched on in my book, but I really think there may be no limits -- we really do understand ourselvses in a very sophisticated way!

MsgId: *infinities(56)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:55:32 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Since this is OMNI Internet, I'd like to mention that Dr. Silver's book contains urls for many web sites that will be of interest to those surfing for more information on some of the topics we've touched on tonight . . .

Lee, it's time to say goodnight for this edition of Infinities. I'd like to leave with a quote from your book. Lee wrote: "Are there answers to be had to the great questions of our existence? . . . will humankind ever learn what they are?"

"My own feeling is that there are answers, and we will eventually have them. We have come to understand much about life and the universe . . . And we are now poised to use reprogenetics together with other technologies to expand our powers to prove the universe in ways that we can only begin to imagine today. It is for this reason that I refuse to believe that knowledge exists that is beyond our reach."

This is Sherry Baker. My guest tonight has been Lee Silver, author of "Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond In A Brave New World," published by Avon Books. Thank you for joining us. Good evening and remember, watch the skies !

MsgId: *infinities(61)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:58:38 PST 1997
From: Lee_Silver At: 128.112.114.167

Goodnight Sherry, Thanks for a great discussion! :)
MsgId: *infinities(62)
Date: Fri Nov 28 21:59:55 PST 1997
From: Sherry_Baker At: 209.86.43.14

Goodnight, Lee ! And thanks for a great book. It is really well written, exciting to read. It's been a pleasure.


Home || Prime Time || Live Science || Machine Dreams || Project Open Book || SF-Fantasy-Horror
Continuum || Antimatter || Mind-Brain Lab || Interactive IQ || Gallery || OMNI Toons

Questions, comments and suggestions can be mailed to the webmaster.


Copyright © 1998 by Omni Publications International, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.