Editing DNA For Fame and Fortune

An anonymous reader writes: The world of genome editing is booming, with several startups racing to develop new tools and therapies out of the DNA-hacking insights of several hotshot scientists. Venture capitalists are pouring big money into this so-called 'CRISPR craze,' which has attracted over $600 million in funding since the beginning of 2013. But major questions loom over who is the rightful owner of this technology, and the leading parties are battling for control of the key patents. Will this new crop of genome-editing companies survive long enough to fulfill their promise of treating genetic disorders? As the patent feud wages on, lives and fortunes hang in the balance.

Comments

CRISPR second generation medicine

[Dukenukemx]

Today it'll fix genetic disorders. Tomorrow it'll allow us to change our attributes.

Re:CRISPR second generation medicine

[Anonymous Coward]

Like cup size. Invest in bra manufacturers!

Re:CRISPR second generation medicine

[Adriax]

Charisma is just one SPECIAL you can raise with this. I'd personally be more interested in Luck.

I wonder how many caps it'll cost per treatment?

Re:CRISPR second generation medicine

[Anonymous Coward]

If bra manufacturers are still required after genome editing, you're doing it wrong. Short bra manufacturers.

Re:CRISPR second generation medicine

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

D&D Doctor: "Some people are doing +STR or +CHA or +CON, but most males are taking +PNS."

I have invented things that will change the world

[Rinikusu]

For instance, here's the 4 assed monkey.

Time to recompile humanity

[sinij]

It is time to recompile humanity. Too many bugs in the old stable release. First we can patch out bugs, but we will also be able to optimize performance and add new features. This way we won't have to be scared of AI out of fear that it could rewrite itself. We would be able to do that as well.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[sinij]

Feature requests:

1. Perfect recall

2. Integrated ALU capable of complex math

3. Direct userland control over driver behavior (e.g. uninstall gluttony)

4. More wetware redundancies to increase uptime

5. Run-time patching and garbage collection to reduce the need for nightly downtime

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[PPH]

6. An e-mail client

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[DigiShaman]

Most likely, AI would be the one recompiling our DNA for us. It may..say...unleash a virus to no wipe out humanity, but rather change it.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[oh_my_080980980]

You realize those bugs are mutations that allowed "us" to happen. Without them organisms would not have evolved beyond single celled organisms.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[holmstar]

Yeah, but we can do better than random modifications if we have a solid understanding of ourselves. Huge challenge though, as our biology is a huge example of spaghetti code. Right now, changing one gene can have a complex cascade of unintended consequences. Some level of interdependency is probably necessary, but it's likely that a lot of it isn't, it just ended up that way randomly. It will really be the golden age of DNA modification if we figure out enough that we can start unraveling those interdependencies and clean up our genetics.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

our biology is a huge example of spaghetti code

Yea just like non-coding DNA is junk. Does every generation have to make the same hubristic errors?

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[holmstar]

No not like "non-coding DNA is junk". You can have a fully functional example of spaghetti code where every bit of it is doing something vital to the code being functional, but doing it in a way that is much more complicated than necessary.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[rogoshen1]

Where are my mod points? And why isn't there an option for "-5 Stupidly Naive and Autistic"?

Look at the problems space programs have had world over. Mission scrubbing bugs revolving around things as trivial as converting between metric and imperial. Mistakes made by teams comprised of literally some of the smartest people on the entire planet.

And you're naive enough to think we'd be able to do better than millions of years of trial and error evolution?

No thank you.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[pesho]

Yeah, but we can do better than random modifications if we have a solid understanding of ourselves.

Can you do better? May be you could in the simplest of cases, where we know that the gene variant in another organism works better than the variant we have. Even in such cases you will need to brace yourself for the unexpected consequences. The number of nonlinear interactions between different genes, and between genes and the environment makes it very hard to predict outcomes. There is a virtue in having a population with buggy, unstable and diverse genomes. If the environment changes, and it alwys does, the population as a whole has a better chance of surviving the changes, compared to a population with stable and uniform genomes.

Having said that here is the number one on my list for bettering the human genome:DNA Photolyase, an enzyme that directly repairs the most common type of DNA damage caused by UV light. For reasons that are poorly understood most mammals, including humans lack this enzyme. The health benefit is obvious - a photolyase will reduce the incidence of skin cancer.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[holmstar]

Me? Absolutely not. I'm a software engineer, not a biochemist. That doesn't mean that nobody can. We've mapped the genome, now the job is figuring out what everything does, including all of the interactions. Once we know that (which is a truly massive task that has only just begun), we can start looking at what we can change to make things work better. It might require changing many things at once in order to separate, for example, two biological pathways that are currently connected, where correcting an issue in one creates an issue in the other. And the result might be people that are no longer genetically compatible with unmodified humans. I'll let someone else tackle the sociological effects of that, but it's almost certainly possible to make those sort of changes once we understand our biology well enough.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[drinkypoo]

7. WiFi

8. More space than a Nomad

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

doing it in a way that is much more complicated than necessary

It is the same thing. It is confidently asserting that because you don't understand nature's ways that you are observing a suboptimal solution. That may be true, but is by no means supported by any evidence. Remember, the magic of the current scientific narrative is many, many years of trial and error under many different conditions. Claiming you can best that is like claiming you can predict the future better than someone/something who remembers the entire history of life.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[the gnat]

Yea just like non-coding DNA is junk. Does every generation have to make the same hubristic errors?

You're grossly overstating the case here. The fact that non-coding DNA contains essential regulatory information has been known for many decades, long before the modern age of genomics. The label "junk" was applied because nobody knew what most of that DNA did, and it obviously has very low information content compared to genes. But this pejorative never stopped people from studying it or trying to figure out what role it played - of course it imposes a significant metabolic cost on the organism, so why keep it around? We just haven't had mature tools to study it until relatively recently. Despite some sensationalism to the contrary, it's still far from resolved whether and how much it is functional; the best-supported hypothesis that I'm aware of is that it's structurally important and facilitates the 3D organization of the genome in cells in such a way that enhances regulatory control. We certainly don't have any clue how to derive therapeutic applications from our knowledge, unlike coding DNA (i.e. translated into proteins that most drugs target).

The claim that "mainstream biologists assumed that noncoding DNA was junk, and therefore asked the wrong questions" is simplistic nonsense at best, and creationist propaganda at worst. Scientific investigation - especially biology - proceeds on the basis of incomplete evidence all the time, because we have no choice (among other lacunae, we still don't understand what half of all human genes actually do). And unexpected new discoveries or inventions shake up molecular biology on a fairly regular basis - 10-15 years ago, RNA interference was thought to be equally revolutionary. So we always hope for surprises (all research faculty at major universities fantasize about making discoveries like Crispr/Cas), but we have to concentrate on areas of study that we feel are most likely to yield actual results.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

So you'd then have two repair mechanisms. Which do you think will work better?
That's the problem with the whole genetics field. We understand very very little of it. Worse, we don't have the tools right tools to work with what we know.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[ThatsNotPudding]

sudo apt-get uninstall greed
sudo apt-get uninstall religion

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

Having said that here is the number one on my list for bettering the human genome:DNA Photolyase [wikipedia.org], an enzyme that directly repairs the most common type of DNA damage caused by UV light. For reasons that are poorly understood most mammals, including humans lack this enzyme. The health benefit is obvious - a photolyase will reduce the incidence of skin cancer.

How many mutations are we talking per cell exposed to the light? If many the reason is obvious, you don't want that damage repaired. You want to either prevent it in the first place or have the faulty cell lineage die off. This will require replenishment of the tissue from other stem cells, which increases the risk of cancer eventually, but less than having half-functioning cells dividing now.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[holmstar]

It is confidently asserting that because you don't understand nature's ways that you are observing a suboptimal solution.

Ha! What in the world suggests to you that we're an optimal solution? Evolution only makes an organism fit enough to reproduce and rear the next generation. Things that cause problems rarely, or create health in old age are poorly selected for. If we're optimized for anything, it would be as tribal hunter-gatherers, not modern civilization. Science is not magic. I am confident that we can do better, if we choose to do so.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[currently_awake]

There are 2 ways to handle this: 1-map out everything and figure out what/how everything works, so there are no unexpected results. 2-try stuff out and see what happens. Obviously plan 2 requires a corporation and a 3rd world military dictatorship, as they don't have moral values and human rights laws to block this.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

What in the world suggests to you that we're an optimal solution?

Nature has had access to the most extensive training data possible. The future is the test data. Until biologists show they have theories that can make accurate and precise predictions about the future under numerous circumstances, I will continue to doubt they can top that.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

9- in hardware built anti virus and anti spamming
10- bigger plug and tighter socket than the competitors
11- tweak-able engine performance

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[pesho]

So you'd then have two repair mechanisms.

And by "two" you mean "three". The two mechanisms dealing with this type of damage in human cells are Nucleotide Excision Repair and Trans-Lesion Synthesis. There are multiple published works showing that the resistance of human cells to UV radiation increases when they are made to express photolyase. Doesn't matter if one mechanism is better than the other as long as having two (or three) does a better job than one.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[pesho]

How exactly is "1-map out everything and figure out what/how everything works, so there are no unexpected results." different from "2-try stuff out and see what happens."? Is far as I know the way we "figure how something works" is to "try stuff out and see what happens". We do this with lab animals and then try as best as we can to show that the animal model is a good approximation to the human. If this is the case we can assume that we whatever "stuff" we tried on the animal will work the same way in humans without doing human experimentation. You can also "experiment" on humans without being unethical. That's why we study human disease. In this case the some random "stuff" has been already broken by nature and we can see the consequences. What is left to us is to figure out what the "stuff" is.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

But this pejorative never stopped people from studying it or trying to figure out what role it played - of course it imposes a significant metabolic cost on the organism, so why keep it around?

It is supposedly parasitic.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[sootman]

I'd be happy with upgraded logic in 51% of the population. :D

(Yes, I'm going to hell for that one.)

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[holmstar]

Then I guess I'm just more optimistic about what we can learn and do than you are. Nature is far from perfect.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[St.Creed]

However, nature was optimizing for survival until somewhere around the age of 16. Any time after that was just an unintentional, beneficial side effect. I do agree with the GP that we can probably enhance ourselves quite a bit to optimize for survival to, say, 200 years of age.

It probably wouldn't even take all that much. What about a second heart? Take up cancer resistance genes that give more heart issues, but offset that with a smaller backup heart tucked away somewhere. Most americans have got plenty of space for a full RAID-5 set of them :)

Optimize the lay-out of our spine. It sucks. We can develop much stronger, lighter spines nowadays, without touching the original purpose.

Optimize our air intake channels: our lungs were developed when the air intake was at the front instead of the top, and stuff that came in was pulled out by gravity eventually.

Remove killer mutations before birth. A personal one - I've several acquaintances with dead babies due to genetic defects. Horrible, painful, lingering deaths in both cases. Both rare enough that the standard screening didn't get it. Once we can cure the carriers this won't happen as much as it does now.

Etcetera.

Nature doesn't optimize. The first working solution is the one that has the advantage and thus gets adopted. We can do better with a little thought and foresight, once we understand genetics - but we're not so near that point as some people like to believe, I fear.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

Nature does not optimize at the level of the individual in one single envrionment, so your examples are not appropriate. Sure, change the air intake channels to be optimal now, as soon as the situation changes (eg more/less pollution, volcanic eruptions) the species will be more likely to go extinct. Nature has optimized to deal with these possibilities at the species level.

Re:Time to recompile humanity

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a software engineer, not a biochemist.

You have no idea the BS that passes for science when it comes to medicine. Perhaps we could do it sometime in the future, but we are not even close at this point. Less than 5-30% of what is published can't even be reproduced*? I assure you that the poor replication rates are just the tip of the iceberg. Most of what does replicate is still measuring the wrong thing, they do not take the necessary precautions to avoid this.

*http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/28/us-science-cancer-idUSBRE82R12P20120328

In principle you may be correct, but as I said:

Until biologists show they have theories that can make accurate and precise predictions about the future under numerous circumstances, I will continue to doubt they can top that.

If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[sideslash]

If genetic modifications ever emerge as the medical miracle they're supposed to, there will be no stopping the use of the technology. All you need is for a country to refuse to enforce or recognize the patents, and presto -- the world's foremost medical tourism destination. I sort of despise the idea of patenting features of nature, so perhaps a bit of schadenfreude there.

I have no doubt the information will be spread, too. If Snowden can be widely hailed as a hero for leaking the NSA's rampant cybercrime, just imagine the pats on the back for the guy who leaks the key to cancer. (Yeah, yeah, along with threats of jail time, so he'll have to light out for Cambodia or whatever.)

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[fustakrakich]

All you need is for a country to refuse to enforce or recognize the patents

I certainly wish for a few of those, but they WILL be invaded, even nuked, if that's what it takes. The mafia state will not be denied.

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[ColdWetDog]

It will likely be China. You won't get a molecule or drug out of these kinds of 'treatments' - you'll get a protocol that involves specialized handling and specific, tailor made molecules. So you likely won't see patent busting big chemical factories like you now see in India, you need a back room (or more likely an entire building) of highly developed infrastructure, trained people and some significant time to get these techniques to work. It won't be quite as easy as TFA seems to think it is*.

China fits the bill pretty well.

* While you very well may get kitchen biochemists manipulating CRISPER-CAS9, the jump from mucking about the DNA code to a useful therapeutic is very, very wide. Which is why all of these startups are running with multi million dollar VC infusions.

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[plover]

I still don't understand how they can control it well enough. It seems like 99.9% of the mods they might try to make would result in a cancerous tumor. And if that's the case, a back alley in Chiba City wouldn't seem so attractive after all.

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[JoeMerchant]

On the spread of genetic modification:

Whether the agent is engineered by Skynet, Osama II, or the NSA, somebody (anybody) could create a virus that sweeps the world like an annoying, seemingly harmless, flu bug. One that makes the children of every couple who were ever infected have blue eyes, or fingernails that glow in the dark after they eat peanuts, or other things....

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[the gnat]

I sort of despise the idea of patenting features of nature

I'm not sure I would call the therapeutic applications of Crispr/Cas a "feature of nature". Any actual therapy is going to consist of, at a minimum, a combination of synthetic RNA and orthologously expressed Cas9 (probably heavily engineered). This isn't something that exists naturally in humans. I'm generally pretty conservative about what I would consider patentable (software, or "all drugs targeting this protein", are not included), and, frankly, I think it would be better for everyone if the patents around Crispr/Cas were limited to specific treatments rather than the general concept. But regardless, any useful therapies are going to involve a great deal of engineering and trial-and-error - and clinical testing, which is going to be the most expensive part. What's the incentive to spend money on this if China ends up copying it? Don't say "for the good of humanity" - if that were the primary goal, money would be far better spent curing various endemic infectious diseases.

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[currently_awake]

In many parts of the world, a drug or virus you inject to ensure you only have male children would be worth several years salary. Also a virus that causes infertility, but only against a specific racial group, would be a very desirable biological weapon.

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[JoeMerchant]

It doesn't even have to target humans.... how about a mutation that makes Hitchcock's Birds a reality, on demand when they smell a certain chemical that is odorless to humans....

Re:If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[Anonymous Coward]

Human make simulator, app and Legogen (available in your local retailer)

Re: If it ever takes off, no stopping it

[Anonymous Coward]

Except we can already do that and it doesn't require tinkering with DNA. All it requires is sorting sperm to remove all the ones carrying x chromosomes. It's not terribly easy if you expect perfection, but you can tilt it in one direction or the other.

Khaaaaaan!

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory: Khaaaaaan!

Re:Khaaaaaan!

[sinij]

I, for one, would like to sign up to be our new genetically-engineered overlord.

Re:Khaaaaaan!

[aurizon]

I hereby collect you as my 10,000th genetic slave - the real Genetic Overlord...

Re: Khaaaaaan!

[GrantRobertson]

I knew somebody would beat me to it.

Just like the real meaning to the Cylon Prayer, "All this has happened before and will happen again." Certain things are inevitable. There are countries and scientists who will have no problem with the the thousands of "failed experiments" necessary to perfect these techniques. The only question is whether we will die in eugenics wars, or at the hands of super-AI, or from runaway global warming.

Re:Can they cure

[DigiShaman]

There's no genetic cure for ignorance; a mental state that can be changed if we so choose of our own volition.

Will this new crop of genome-editing companies sur

[koan]

Do we want them to survive?

Patent What?

[g0bshiTe]

What's to patent? DNA is clearly prior art and in public domain.

Re:Patent What?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Sliding DNA into dynamic storage locations your body uses to flag viruses for destruction, for other uses like recognizing and killing cancer, or performing DNA surgery, might be.

Re:Patent What?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Here's a recent Radiolab on CRISPR

unreadable hipster website clickbait

[Anonymous Coward]

anonymous edition

PUT THE OLD COMMENT LINKS BACK

[sootman]

That is all.

time to open a dinosaur park

[Anonymous Coward]

Just need people to work the DNA.

why bother?

[AndyKron]

why bother inventing something if you can look forward to a life-long court battle?

Re:why bother?

[Anonymous Coward]

You looking it the wrong way, see it from the point of view of the lawyers
Why bother inventing something if you cannot look forward to a life-long court battle?