The problem is with society, politics and ethics, rather than a technical problem. in addition to a technical problem.
I think the solution should be to vividly demonstrate how effective and safe it is with animal studies, so that a lot of normal people will want to do it, and feel that not doing it is scarier than doing it.
If a lot of normal people want it, they will be able to get it one way or another (flying to another country, etc.).
There may be additional societal and political problems afterwards. But none of those problems actually matter unless the technology works.
Obviously we are going to do it in animals first. We have in fact DONE gene editing in animals many times (especially mice, but also some minor stuff in cows and other livestock). But you’re correct that we need to test massive multiplex editing. My hope is we can have good data on this in cows in the next 1-3 years.
Oops, sorry about saying it’s not a technical problem.
I should have read the post before replying. I have a bad habit.
PS: my comment was about effectiveness demonstrating with animals not just safety testing with animals. If you have a mouse clearly smarter, healthier, etc. than the other mice it would leave a strong impression on people.
There may be additional societal and political problems afterwards. But none of those problems actually matter unless the technology works.
What do you think of the argument that “There may be additional technical problems afterwards. But none of those problems actually matter unless we have answers for societal and political problems.”?
The problem is with society, politics and ethics,
rather than a technical problem.in addition to a technical problem.I think the solution should be to vividly demonstrate how effective and safe it is with animal studies, so that a lot of normal people will want to do it, and feel that not doing it is scarier than doing it.
If a lot of normal people want it, they will be able to get it one way or another (flying to another country, etc.).
No, the problem really is technical right now.
There may be additional societal and political problems afterwards. But none of those problems actually matter unless the technology works.
Obviously we are going to do it in animals first. We have in fact DONE gene editing in animals many times (especially mice, but also some minor stuff in cows and other livestock). But you’re correct that we need to test massive multiplex editing. My hope is we can have good data on this in cows in the next 1-3 years.
Oops, sorry about saying it’s not a technical problem.
I should have read the post before replying. I have a bad habit.
PS: my comment was about effectiveness demonstrating with animals not just safety testing with animals. If you have a mouse clearly smarter, healthier, etc. than the other mice it would leave a strong impression on people.
What do you think of the argument that “There may be additional technical problems afterwards. But none of those problems actually matter unless we have answers for societal and political problems.”?