For a few years, biophysicist He Jiankui might have been one of the most recognizable scientists on the planet.
He made three “CRISPR babies” or gene edited people. However, his gene editing went badly and as best as we can tell his efforts did not result in precision edits. It’s unclear if he had institutional permission to do this controversial work too.
He ended up serving a couple of years in prison in China for this dangerous gene editing and associated actions.
Now he’s back and seemingly emboldened.
The “CRISPR baby guy” is back and funded
The health and future of those three gene-edited children remains unknown and uncertain. They likely have damaged genomes. Yet He recently tweeted that he wouldn’t apologize unless the families wanted him to do so.
What He did was wrong and I believe much of it stemmed from his personal ambition. But was He also made somewhat of a scapegoat? Did Chinese government officials initially give him support or encouragement for making gene-edited people but then flipped the script when there was an international outcry?
Some people see He Jiankui as a hero. However you see him, he’s got a lab and funding to do more human gene editing. Maybe germline editing.
Editing the He Jiankui image
In more recent years He has been working to rehabilitate his image. Some scientists and journalists have been engaging with him.
Is this engagement a positive thing? It could lead to a better understanding of what went so badly with He’s plans and efforts. That could be a positive. At the same time, it feels like He might view it as an opportunity to restart human germline editing work.
Think that is implausible?
He seems no less ambitious now and keeps tweeting about the potential of human germline editing. Some of these tweets are red flags. For example, see a picture of his tweet above where he insists journalists refer to him almost reverently. He also just tweeted this recently, “If they let me, I could start eradicating Alzheimer’s in two years.” This is a wild statement and totally unrealistic. Why is he making such claims now?
New germline editing-related research by He Jiankui
There’s another reason that He might be upbeat about going to scientific meetings and having journalists interview him. Another reason for the outsized medical claims for his research.
Such attention may lead him to get more funding for his future gene editing ambitions.
Megan Molteni over at STAT News has an interesting recent piece on the latest exploits of He Jiankui.
Based on the tweets, this STAT article, and other news items, He still seems all-in on human germline gene editing.
Silicon Valley connection and “better” humans
The funding side of the story is another reason for concern.
Megan’s article paints a worrisome picture of tech bros who have gotten interested in He and his CRISPR ambitions. At least one of these guys may fund He’s research or maybe already did. He tweeted pictures of his “new lab” a few weeks ago.
How did that new lab come about? Who okayed it and funded it? Why is He getting another chance here?
You might also want to check out my piece on discussing possible second chances in science for those who have committed misconduct.
What’s the tech bro connection?
There’s a major thread here of some form of Transhumanism. I’ve written many times before about Transhumanism in the earlier days of CRISPR and interviewed transhumanists.
Transhumanism seems itself as a form of “positive eugenics,” which in my view is not so promising. Let’s make humans “better” via technology seems like a very Silicon Valley mantra.
Years ago I also did an interview with George Church about human germline editing and other topics. It was great having that dialogue even if we see things fairly differently. Church’s own research seems responsible and exciting, but he seems intrigued by other endeavors that seem more out there like the DIY gene editing of Liz Parrish and BioVivia.
I’ve thought a lot about the idea of better humans through CRISPR. I even did a TEDx talk about it that was selected by TED to be featured (see above). In my view, we don’t have the wisdom to make ourselves “better” genetically even if we have the smarts to make technologies like CRISPR that could make attempts at that. What does “better” even mean in this context?
Those eager to make heritable edits
Those who are dying to do more human germline editing are not always giving it much deep contemplation or pursuing it for convincing reasons. I think some of the Silicon Valley folks just see it as simple recoding like what you might do to some software.
It’s definitely not that simple.
The genome is a dense, interconnected jungle with so many layers that we have just scratched the surface. Then if you look at the reality of the epigenome, its information, and a universe of almost uncountable types of machinery associated with that like proteins and RNAs, all playing and dancing together in a symphony humans may struggle to fully grasp.
Do tech bros eager to do heritable editing really understand this? Do they get what He did before with the damage to those kids’ genomes?
Maybe they get it but find that “rebel” element attractive rather than a negative?
Thinking differently is great. So is trying out innovative research. However, there’s danger in the myth that you have to break the law and hurt people to start a positive revolution in science.
That he calls himself a “CRISPR pioneer” says it all. This is pure madness. I never understood why the Chinese authorities have not banned him for life to ever engage in any scientific research again. It would be interesting to know, however, where his “new lab” is located. If in China, then the hypothesis that the Chinese government was supporting him from the beginning might have some meat. But for the government to continue to do so bears huge risks due to international backlashes. If he is doing this underground with financial aid from people like Musk et al, then we all are in deep trouble. The scientific community, the public and governments need to act. There are most likely more people like He right now holding pipettes in their hand…
@Peter,
Do the powers that be in China know the irresponsible stuff he is tweeting and being quoted about like germline editing supposedly to prevent Alzheimers?
If they are OK or even tolerate that (could they even be giving him funding?), it does make me wonder about whether he had support from the beginning, which just was taken away.
Even if he’s not pursuing germline editing and is just do in vitro editing in his new lab now, his words and apparent aspirations are hugely problematic.