The Corner

Politics & Policy

Genetic Engineering with ‘Strict Guidelines?’ Ha!

Human genetic engineering is moving forward exponentially and we are still not having any meaningful societal, regulatory, or legislative conversations about whether, how, and to what extent we should permit the human genome to be altered in ways that flow down the generations.

But don’t worry. “The scientists” assure us, when that can be done, there will (somehow) be ”STRICT OVERSIGHT” From the AP story:

And lots more research is needed to tell if it’s really safe, added Britain’s Lovell-Badge. He and Kahn were part of a National Academy of Sciences report earlier this year that said if germline editing ever were allowed, it should be only for serious diseases with no good alternatives and done with strict oversight.

Please! No more! When I laugh this hard it makes my stomach hurt.

Here’s the problem: Strict guidelines rarely are strict and the almost never permanently protect. They are ignored, unenforced, or stretched over time until they, essentially, cease to exist.

That’s awful with actions such as euthanasia. But we can’t let that kind of pretense rule the day with technologies that could prove to be among the most powerful and potentially destructive inventions in human history. Indeed, other than nuclear weapons, I can’t think of a technology with more destructive potential.

“Strict oversight” will have to include legal limitations and clear boundaries, enforced by stiff criminal penalties, civil remedies, and international protocols.

They won’t be easy to craft and it will take significant time to work through all of the scientific and ethical conundrums.

But we haven’t’ made a beginning. If we wait until what may be able to be done actually can be done, it will be too late.

Where’s the leadership? All we have now is drift.

Wesley J. Smith — Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism.

Most Popular


What Self-Help Guru Tony Robbins Was Trying to Say

Tony Robbins must have known immediately that he'd made a huge mistake in how he responded to a question about #MeToo. Last month, at one of Robbins's popular, sold-out seminars, audience member Nanine McCool told the self-help guru that she thought he misunderstood the #MeToo movement. You can see the entire ... Read More

The Dominant-Sport Theory of American Politics

I think it’s safe to assert that President Trump has an unfortunate tendency to do and say (and tweet) embarrassing things. When he does, we all join in the condemnation, and often it’s not so much for the substance as for the style. The president of the United States should be dignified, measured, slow to ... Read More
Film & TV

Little Pink House Speaks Truth to Power

Coming soon to a cinema near you—you can make this happen; read on—is a bite-your-nails true-story thriller featuring heroes, villains, and a history-making struggle over . . . the Constitution’s Takings Clause. Next February 24, Little Pink House will win the Oscar for Best Picture if Hollywood’s ... Read More