Review: Redesigning Humans By Gregory Stock Essay, Research Paper
The triumph of the genetic revolution Redesigning HumansGregory Stock 277pp Penguin ‘Twas ever thus? Or a turning point in human evolution? Two alternative futures are being paraded before a jittery public. Francis Fukuyama, having declared the end of history, is on his way to another bestseller with Our Posthuman Future , predicting that advances in biotechnology threaten our common humanity. Gregory Stock, on the other hand, looks at gene manipulation and artificial reproduction and sees hope, health and challenge. If we can make better human beings, why not do it? Mother Nature has not been particularly kind: “Brutal decay lies in store for each of us lucky enough to reach it.” Postponing the blighting afflictions – stroke, cancer, Alzheimer’s – reducing infertility, preventing birth defects; all these can hardly be called inhumane. Stock’s book has much to offer those inclined to believe that the end of the world is not yet nigh. He directs (at the medical school of UCLA) a programme on the impact of new technologies on human society. He musters evidence that the worst may be behind us. Nuclear annihilation, forced sterilisation and eugenics, or “race hygiene”, are 20th-century scientific nightmares that have retreated rather than advanced. And “playing God” is as old as harnessing fire, carving stone tools, rotating crops or flying aircraft. He sees the worst fears are unrealistic – such as the creation of a new breed, a race distinct from ordinary mortals. Centuries of dog-breeding, he points out, have not altered the canine species. Designer babies also are unlikely. All the new techniques carry inherent risks that will deter those who would drastically alter genes. The coming genetic revolution, in Stock’s view, will be wary of unintended consequences, and will advance in slow, reversible steps. He cites China’s gender imbalance, the unforeseen corollary of its one-child policy. In a generation this anomaly will disappear, as did the surplus of females following the slaughter of the first world war. As for cloning, twins are living proof that identical genes do not mean identical personality. The fearful should recognise that in some ways, the future has already arrived. In vitro fertilisa tion is accepted, as is “pre-implantation diagnosis” – selecting among laboratory-created embryos to find one free of, say, cystic fibrosis. So too is amniocentesis, to look for Down’s syndrome. Still to be developed for medical use is gene alteration, the insertion of artificial chromosomes and reproductive cloning. In every case, in Stock’s eyes, the advantages outweigh the risks. The true challenge is to find a form of enforceable, internationally accepted regulation that will focus on real and present problems, not on future, imagined ones. It may be desirable to test embryos with a view to eliminating the risk of severe disability, but should such tests be compulsory? Should a subsequent abortion? If parental choice is to be respected, ought deaf parents be allowed to choose to have deaf children? With both lifespan and fertility lengthening dramatically, perhaps there should be a legal age limit for reproduction for women. And for men too? Stock’s worry is that Europe, mindful of bans in Germany and France against any laboratory work that may lead to modification of the human gene pool, will pull out of the world’s most excit-ing scientific endeavour. For the lay reader, it must be said that some of Stock’s scientific explanations are heavy going, and that, mysteriously, some of his most interesting nuggets are buried in the endnotes. None the less, his peroration is strong and clear. “Remaking ourselves is the ultimate human expression and realization of our humanity” – thus he sums up an informative, persuasive and reassuring book.