Zuzanna Devey Halik
In the year 1990 a publicly funded research project was embarked upon to find the human genome.
Genome, a word derived from both gene and chromosome, describes the entire DNA in a cell.
On 26 June 2000, it was publicly announced that scientists had made the first ' working draft'
of the sequence
of the human genome, the recipe for making human beings.
It was firstly thought that each human cell carried about 100,000 genes. Apparently not. Today's discoveries have shown
that there are only between 27,000 and 40,000 human genes in our genome. That's the same as a cat or dog. The thought
that we are larger in size and smarter in intellect than these mammals obviously meant we would carry more building blocks.
But this is not the case. It is even more surprising that a fruit fly has 13,000 genes in its genome, just a fraction less
than us humans.
But even though these numbers are significantly lower than first expected, the under taking of this whole project is a
task of mammoth proportions. If you were to write the human genome down it would fill 200 books the size of the yellow
pages and take an estimated nine years to read out aloud.
It is not the amount of genes we have but the way that they organize themselves that really makes the difference in
forming all species of living things.
To understand these complexities will take years but the possibility of a gene-governed future is fast becoming something
to think about.
There are many exciting issues that have arisen and obviously the scientific community is keen to push forward after
this key breakthrough, but there maybe a lot of trouble on the horizon.
Firstly, the whole way in which this race was won. At the center of this discovery are two projects.
The one already mentioned, the human genome project, is publicly funded. But in 1998 a privately owned company named
CELERA announced it would finish the genome by the year 2001. These company's, in fierce competition with each other
have two different standings.
Where the human genome project believes that the human genome belongs to all human kind and would allow anyone to freely
access its information,"...CELERA also announced that the company would not adhere to the public consortium's policy of
allowing researchers immediate and unrestricted access to the sequence data." In fact fears have arisen that CELERA will
patent their version. A patent is the property right awarded to the first to invent. Although something like the genome
should not fall in to this category, it does fulfill all the patent criteria by law so therefore it is a possibility.
Currently, over three million genome related patents have been filed in the United States. A patent lasts for twenty years
from its issue date in the USA, meaning we may not have any right to intervene and change the laws that govern patents of
this nature until that period is over.
Restrictions on other important genomes are already in place e.g. the mouse genome, both wheat and rice genomes and others
such as the chimp genome.
These all hold vital information for experimentation and for instance with the rice genome made public, the prospect of
future world hunger could cease to exist. The fear that CELERA will patent and sell the human genome sequence has made the
public consortium double its efforts in finishing a version. Completion date is spring 2001.
Medically, the genome is a welcome addition.
Jean-Michel Clavier of the French national research agency states,
'... The over all goal of deciphering genomic information is not to see which genes are wrong and to cure disease by
gene therapy. It is to understand how normal people with normal genes function, so we can plan how and when to intervene'.
This statement banishes the frakenstein-esque thoughts of a paranoid nation. At the moment, scientific rationality say
that what we can expect to see over the next thirty years is the conventional way of pharmaceutically treating illness
made redundant.
For a specific disease in a specific person, drugs will be made to suit the individual. A precise method of intervention
will be applied.
As all diseases have a genetic component, whether it be an inherited illness or one resulting from environmental stress
such as toxins or a virus, study's today are able to pin point all of the errors in genes that cause or contribute to
these diseases. Doctor John Bishop states, "At the moment some 100,000 people die each year from bad reactions to drugs.
As genes that influence drug responses are uncovered, we can expect the number of toxic responses to drop and most
unwanted side effects to be eliminated." Common cancers and diabetes, two diseases that are on the increase in the
western world will be a lesser threat and the fatality cases will substantially lower.
Genetic testing in courtroom is already commonplace. It is used in identifying fathers in paternity cases it is also used
for incriminating perpetrators of certain crimes by DNA testing their hair or blood against that which was left at the
scene of the crime. With the genome we will be able to determine whether someone was genetically programmed to have a
certain type of anti-social behaviour. In theory more criminals would be able to be identified easily. But on the down
side, would murderers be equited on the basis that they were genetically pre- disposed to commit murder, therefore
rendering them an innocent bystander to the injustice of being born with a violent gene? Would our prisons take on the
form of gene therapy hospitals that would leave inmates with a nicer disposition? Science fiction has been telling
these foreboding stories for years, yet until today we have never had the technology or knowledge to implement these
changes.
What will happen to the insurance industry?
With genetic information sold to insurers they would guarantee no loss of earnings. The chance of payout would be minimal
through inside knowledge. The whole big brother syndrome would in fact become a type of reality, where your personal
genetic info would be published next to your credit rating and telephone number. Those privileged to that information
would to some extent know an individual's destiny and their limitations, thus being able to manipulate them accordingly.
Insurance claims from accidents caused by failing eyesight to loss of earnings through arthritis could have enormous
question marks hanging over them. If the road did indeed go this way we might see the fall of insurance for health,
and everything else for that matter?
Genetically we are all 99.8 percent identical to each other, regardless of race or geographical location. The chances
are that a white male from Cornwall shares a closer genetic resemblance to a black Kenyan lady than his next-door
neighbour. Because of this prejudice views will take on a different standing. The hope that this knowledge will some
to some extent eradicate racism as we know it today brings us a step nearer to our hopes for a utopian society. We
should in theory become a more compassionate species. The clearer it is to see how closely we are interlinked to others
should help change ignorant uneducated views that come about through fear of the unknown.
But this again is a double-edged sword. With information that highlights the differences between the fit and infirm
publicly available, chances are a divide could grow in a different direction. The view that genetically imperfect
people were somehow diseased may create a new class system. Wealth could quite easily change from being equated with
money to the measure of health you have. What your pedigree is.
Potential mothers-to-be have a whole new concept to shop with.
Studies carried out show that women, as do men, react to a basic animalistic, programmed response when it comes to
selecting a mate. The health and strength of the potential partner is the key issue, not a caring companion and
breadwinner as we would believe. Women are more likely to become pregnant by a man that subconsciously fits these
criteria. Her whole body, even down to the sucking up effect of her cervix after sexual intercourse works harder
toward the opportunity to creating a stronger child.
For centuries humans have relied upon a number of key signs to warn them away from what could be seen in the future
as a ' genetic disaster'.
In a recent programme on BBC 1 about the human face, it was explained that our ideas of beauty and health were governed
by certain criteria. Clear skin, symmetrical facial structure, sweet breath and bright eyes for example. The reason that
aesthetically these things are considered good and the opposites bad or poorer substitutes is that unsymmetrical
features or bad breath and dull eyes were a sure sign of severe illness at worst and low immune system at best.
So what we find sexually attractive gives the notion of health, thereby giving the promise of strong offspring and
giving them a better chance at survival.
This guessing game of natural selection could well be over. Apart from the superficial looks of ' next generation
babies' that is so publicized at the moment, all key health issues could be eradicated. The thought that you can grow
your own baby without any faulty genes that create illness is a welcome idea to some future parents. What the scientists
today are saying is that they have no intention of going down this path. Will this responsible attitude still ring
true in years from now when more brilliant discoveries are on the doorstep and morality may have to be sacrificed for
the name of science?
It seems that the better the discoveries the more dangerous the consequences.
If CELERA succeed in patenting the genome, this most precious of discoveries may only be for the
rich or connected.
We may be left to have our most personal information sold to the highest bidder without a clue.
This marvelous thing
could soon turn into a real living nightmare.
It is important to set laws now, genome specific, so that the innocent will be protected, so it wont be used as a get
rich quick scheme and so we can all get on with reaping the benefits of this and subsequent discoveries in this field.
Positive hopes like these will make the genome a welcome addition to our libraries and the children of the future will
undoubtedly learn the genome along side the periodic table in high school.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
New Scientist Magazine. Febuary 2001. ISSN: 02624076
The Human Genome Project. www.thehumangenomeproject.com/
Sunday Times Magazine. Article: The Genome. Dr.J.Bishop