Hacking Darwin: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity by Jamie Metzl

Hacking Darwin: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity Reviews

• 
  Brahm

  Another book rec plucked from
  Bill Gates' reading list.
  
  Pros: There are a handful of interesting, thoughtful ideas about the near- and far-future consequences of genetic engineering, and the associated societal issues. It is a very good introduction to the state of genetic engineering (in animals, plants & people) today, where the technology is heading, and some of the outstanding ethical, policy, and geopolitical questions associated with it.
  
  As an example, my favourite question the author asked in the book framed the ethics of genetic screening (for negative traits like disease, or positive traits like ability or intelligence) as follows: will people who are ethically opposed to generic screening tomorrow be equated with the anti-vaccine movement of today? What valid reasons can you give for turning down a technological solution to benefit the health of your offspring?
  
  Cons: It's a short book (~270 pages), so my common complaint about the material being broad but not deep applies to this one too. Similar to Harari's
  21 Lessons for the 21st Century (
  my review) - touches on lots of interesting ideas, but the devil is in the details.
  
  It's also a book about the future, which means that 10-15 years from now the forward-looking predictions might be completely rubbish. I recently read a 13-year-old book about oil predictions over "the next 10-15 years" (ie, now), and seeing how much it got wrong was a good cautionary lesson about books that make a lot of predictions. I don't think Hacking Darwin book will be so wrong (its predictions are less specific), but what do I know?
  
  I'm going to give it 2 stars - Goodreads mouseover for "it was OK". For me it was OK. Pretty darn OK, with engaging writing and some interesting questions asked. After reading this book, there's no doubt in my mind that genetic engineering will become more and more of an important issue in the years to come. Maybe I will come and rev this up to 3 stars in the next few weeks if the ideas stick in my head. But overall, I just wasn't that info it.
• 
  Jacob Hedlund

  The book does provide a decent synopsis of the history of genetic engineering, what is going on now and what to expect in the future. But he consistenly goes off on un-related tangents to bash religous people, politically conservative people and of course Donald Trump (Who doesn't bash on Trump these days?)
  
  It is frustrating that when I wanted to learn about genetic engineering, I got bombarded with opinions of the authors in the form of left wing and atheistic propaganda. Leave your bias and personal opnions at home when you write a book like this, Jamie.
• 
  Ahmed Samir

  The book is a good way to introduce yourself to the many aspects of genetic manipulation in humans. The author is occasionally able to strike a good joke to break the science, but it's a science book, so don't be too optimistic.
  
  My problems with the title is that in some chapters it felt a little chaotic: there was no real drive or flow to the text and all seemed to be under the theme of the chapter, but nothing more.
• 
  Jim

  A very good primer that covers genetically engineering ourselves & the issues that raises. I really liked the way the author framed some of the questions through stories. That really made the issues understandable, even personal.
  
  For instance, a woman in an IVF clinic choosing which embryo to bring to term. This simple setting allows for the exploration of a variety of issues past, present, & future in a rational, but very human way. If she discards one because it has a recognizable 'defect' (Tay-Sachs or Huntington's) is the choice eugenics in action? Some Jews study their genealogy & recommend against marriages which might result in Tay-Sachs now. Is that eugenics? What is a recognizable defect? Is Down Syndrome, autism, or bipolar disorder?
  
  Does discarding the majority of the embryos count as abortion? Why don't Pro-lifers picket IVF clinics where more embryos die than in any abortion clinic? This is not 'bashing' Pro-lifers as some reviewers maintain, but simply asking a question we all need to ask of ourselves; where do we draw the lines & why? Is it rational? A lot of hard questions are raised & few are answered. They're just food for thought. My guess is probably not. There are too many complex gray areas with too much emotional baggage attached.
  
  The idea that reproduction can become weaponized isn't new or shocking, but I've rarely seen it framed better - I think. Unfortunately, I forgot to write this review & went on to read
  Animal Weapons: The Evolution of Battle which also explores the subject so the two mixed in my head since both had such a similar take on the subject.
  
  Highly recommended. It's not a great book, but it frames the general questions & fills in the basic science pretty well for regular folks. There were times I thought more depth was called for, though.
  
  Excellent narration. I read this with the Science & Inquiry group here:
  
  https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
  
• 
  Yzabel Ginsberg

  [I received a copy of this book through NetGalley, in exchange for an honest review.]
  
  This book is not heavy on the actual science details—if you’re looking for those, you’ll be better to get another book, but if you don’t know that much about genetics, then there won’t be anything in there impossible to follow. It focuses instead on the various advances in genetics in terms of “what do they do”, “what do they entail”, “what could the results be”, and “how should be approach those?” (You can tell that the author has also written novels, because there’s a definitive storytelling thread throughout some of the chapters, especially when he deals with IVF and the potential of modifying embryos to make their future selves healthier. This makes the reading all the more accessible and enjoyable.)
  
  You can also tell that Jamie Metzl is probably more on the side of advocating gene-related manipulations than on the side of those who want them banned, but in a cautious way: it’s not all enthusiasm and sparks and giggles, and for every “good point” he lists, he also takes care to consider the negative sides (or potentially negative sides, since there are still many approaches that haven’t been tested, so we just have no idea how people would react when given the choice). And it is true that while the transhumanist in me is excited at so many prospects, the cynic is me is also convinced that, like we so many other things, humanity in general will bork its way through this and pervert it. But let’s keep hope, shall we?
  
  “Hacking Darwin” considers the therapeutic potential of genetic intervention. Through current techniques such as CRISPR-Cas9, we are already able to cut material that leading to genetic diseases, although this hasn’t been approved so far on human embryos destined to be implanted, because the results are good, but more on a “60% good” scale than on a “95% good” one. Which leads to understandable caution about all this, and with reason. There is something frightening and sublime (in the philosophical and literary meanings of the word) to all these developing technologies, because when we contemplate them, we are put face to face with how we are, all in all, code; and code can be hacked, and modified, and this could be for the best or for the worst.
  
  The best: if we had a chance of preventing babies with genes condemning them to Alzheimer’s or to Huntington’s disease, for instance, shouldn’t we take it and thus prevent future suffering? If we can make crops that yield more nutrients (Golden Rice comes to mind, and is actually even mentioned), shouldn’t we do it, so that people dying of malnutrition illnesses can get a chance at life? And if we could give our future children better health and strength in general, better chances in their future lifes through specific abilities, wouldn’t we want to do that? But the worst, too: who’s to tell that this won’t spiral downward (eugenics and the earluy 20th century come to mind), lead to less diversity (not a good thing), to people all wanting the same kind of child—or, perhaps more alarmingly, to a growing chasm between those who can afford to enhance tyheir future babies, and those who can, thus leading to a class of “superhumans” trampling “subhumans”?
  
  The book considers these aspects, and other ones as well, including the major religion’s take on it (you’d be surprised at some of them) and approaches and pitfalls that humanity as a whole must consider here. It doesn’t hold all the answers, far from it. But it gives you a lot of food for thought. And even though it is perhaps too optimistic (again, seeing the world as it is today, I just don’t trust us in general to avoid creating worst societies based on even more inequalities, this time from before the womb), it does remain a very interesting start for more discussions about genetic engineering.
  
  4.5 stars
• 
  Allysia K

  Fantastic read! I devoured it over the course of a few days of summer holidays. It ain't light summer reading, but I found it intensely easy, and relatively easy to understand for someone who knows little about genetic engineering.
  
  My takeaway: The future of baby making is harrowing!
• 
  Pritam Chattopadhyay

  গতবছরের নভেম্বর মাসে প্রথম শুনেছিলাম বইটির কথা। শোনার কারণও ছিল অবশ্য। ২০২০ সালের রসায়নের নোবেল পুরষ্কারটি নিয়ে তখন সমগ্র সারা বিশ্ব জুড়েই প্রভূত আলোচনা সমালোচনার ঝড়। সেবারের পুরষ্কারটি সামান্য কিছুটা হলেও রসায়ন থেকে shift করে 'প্রাণরসায়ন' আর 'জীবপ্রযুক্তি'-র দিকে ঝুঁকে গিয়েছে। ‘ক্রিসপার ক্যাস-৯’ প্রযুক্তি দিয়ে প্রাণীর জিনোমকে খুব সহজেই কাটছাঁট করা যাবে, চাইলে প্রত্যাশিত পরিবর্তনও করা যাবে জিনোমে।
  
  আধুনিক বিজ্ঞানের যতগুলো গুরুত্বপূর্ণ আবিষ্কার তার অন্যতম ব্রিটিশ বিজ্ঞানী চার্লস ডারউইনের বিবর্তনবাদের তত্ত্ব। ১৮৫৯ সালে প্রকাশিত 'অন দ্য অরিজিন অফ স্পিশিজ' গ্রন্থে, ডারউইন বিবর্তনবাদকে সংজ্ঞায়িত করতে গিয়ে বলেছেন, এটি এমন একটি প্রক্রিয়া যাতে কোনো প্রাণী ক্রমাগত অভিযোজনের ফলে আপন পরিবেশের জন্যে বিশেষায়িত হতে হতে এক সময় নতুন একটি প্রাণীতে রূপান্তরিত হয়।
  
  জিওপলিটিক্স বিশেষজ্ঞ , সাই-ফি ঔপন্যাসিক Jamie Metzl তাঁর বই 'Hacking Darwin - Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity'-তে ডারউইনের উপরোক্ত তত্ত্বকে চ্যালেঞ্জ জানিয়েছেন। লেখকের নিজের কথায় : "My book argues that humаnіtу is оn thе cusp оf a future bеуоnd natural ѕеlесtіоn wіth thе hеlр оf аѕѕіѕtеd rерrоduсtіvе tесhnоlоgіеѕ thаt wіll enable us to hасk оur genetic makeup. By mарріng the hіѕtоrу оf gеnеtісѕ, tесhnоlоgу and thе іmрlісаtіоnѕ оf genetic еngіnееrіng, іt advocates for an іnfоrmеd adoption оf thе gеnеtіс rеvоlutіоn аnd suggests hоw to approach its political аnd еthісаl сhаllеngеѕ."
  
  প্রসঙ্গত , ২০১২ সালের আগে পর্যন্ত জিন প্রযুক্তি এতটা প্রবল সম্ভাবনাময়তা লাভ করেনি। ওই বছরই আবিষ্কৃত হয় জিন সম্পাদনার নতুন প্রযুক্তি—‘ক্রিসপার ক্যাস-৯’। তার ফলেই প্রায় পরিবর্তন ঘটে যায় জিন প্রকৌশলে। বিপ্লবও বলা চলে। মানুষ জানতে পারে যে ‘ক্রিসপার ক্যাস-৯’ প্রযুক্তি ব্যবহার করে জিনের নির্দিষ্ট অং�� অত্যন্ত নিখুঁতভাবে কেটে ফেলা যায়। শুধু তাই-ই নয় ; একই সঙ্গে বসিয়ে দেওয়া যায় নতুন কোড। এর ফলে ত্রুটিপূর্ণ জিন বাতিল করে একজন মানুষকে এইডস অথবা ক্যানসারের মতো ভয়ংকর রোগের হাত থেকে বাঁচানো যেতে পারে। অথবা বৃদ্ধি করা যেতে পারে মানুষের আয়ু। শুধু কি মানুষ? উদ্ভিদ ও প্রাণিজগতের নানান ক্ষেত্রেও জিন সম্পাদনার মাধ্যমে বৈপ্লবিক পরিবর্তন আনার ক্ষমতা আছে এই ‘ক্রিসপার ক্যাস-৯’ প্রযুক্তির।
  
  Metzl রচিত 'Hacking Darwin' বইটি মোট এগারোটি অনুচ্ছেদে বিভক্ত :
  
  ১) Where Darwin Meets Mendel
  ২) Climbing the Complexity Ladder
  ৩) Decoding Identity
  ৪) The End of Sex
  ৫) Divine Sparks and Pixie Dust
  ৬) Rebuilding the Living World
  ৭) Stealing Immortality from the Gods
  ৮) The Ethics of Engineering Ourselves
  ৯) We Contain Multitudes
  ১০) The Arms Race of the Human Race
  ১১) The Future of Humanity
  
  মূল তিন ভাগে বিভক্ত বইটি: --
  
  ক) বইয়ের ভূমিকা , যার শিরোনাম 'Entering the Genetic Age' থেকে তৃতীয় অনুচ্ছেদকে জেনেটিক্স তথা মাইক্রোবায়োলোজির একটি সুপার ফাস্ট ক্র্যাশ কোর্স বলা যেতে পারে। জিন প্রযুক্তির nitty-gritty সম্পর্কে সম্পূর্ণ অজ্ঞ পাঠকও তৃতীয় অনুচ্ছেদ সম্পূর্ণ করার সাথে সাথেই এ বিষয়ে সম্যক জ্ঞানের অধিকারী হয়ে উঠবেন।
  
  খ) বইয়ের দ্বিতীয় ভাগে, (চতুর্থ থেকে সপ্তম অনুচ্ছেদ) লেখক আলোচনা করেছেন বর্তমান কালে জিন প্রযুক্তির সীমা আসলে কতটুকু, তা নিয়ে। যেমন ধরা যাক, বিশ্বের প্রথম জিন সম্পাদিত মানবশিশুর জন্ম হয় মহাচীনে। ওই যমজ শিশুর জিন সম্পাদনা করা হয়। এর ফলে এইডস রোগে আক্রান্ত বাবার এই সন্তানেরা এক বিরল ক্ষমতার অধিকারী হয়ে জন্মগ্রহণ করে। বিজ্ঞানীদের দাবি অনুযায়ী ওই দুই শিশুর দেহে কখনোই এইডস সংক্রমিত হতে পারবে না। আর এই ঘোষণাতেই সারা বিশ্বে সৃষ্টি হয় আলোড়ন , ওঠে বিতর্কের ঝড়। বেশির ভাগ বিজ্ঞানী ও গবেষকই গেল গেল রব তোলেন। ওঠে নীতি-নৈতিকতার প্রশ্ন। কারণ মানবদেহে জিন সম্পাদনার প্রযুক্তি ব্যবহারের ক্ষেত্রে এখনো একমত হতে পারেনি সবাই। নেই কোনো সর্বজনীন নিয়মকানুনও।
  
  অর্থাৎ কি করা যাবে আর কি যাবে না— সেই সীমারেখাই টানা হয়নি। আমরা কি এমন এক ভবিষ্যতের সামনে দাঁড়িয়ে যেখানে অনাগত একটি মানুষের মাঝে কী কী বৈশিষ্ট্য থাকবে তা ঠিক করে দেওয়া যাবে? এতে ধনী দরিদ্রের বৈষম্য কোথায় গিয়ে দাঁড়াবে এই নিয়ে অনেক আলাপ আলোচনা চলছে। যদিও চীনা গবেষকরা বলছেন এই জিন পরিমার্জনের মাধ্যমে তারা 'CCR5' নামে একটি জিনকে সরিয়ে দিয়েছেন, ফলে শিশুটি এইডস, কলেরা, গুটিবসন্তের ঝুঁকি থেকে মুক্ত থাকবে। আবার অনেক গবেষক বলছেন এই জিনের অনেক অজানা কাজ থাকতে পারে, এই জিন সরিয়ে দিলে হয়তো পরিণতি ভয়াবহও হতে পারে।
  
  গ) বইটির শেষাংশ (অষ্টম থেকে একাদশ অনুচ্ছেদ) বইটির আসল high point ! জিন প্রযুক্তির সম্ভাবনার এমন সকল আঙ্গিকের কথা আলোচনা করেছেন লেখক যা পড়তে গিয়ে মনস্বী পাঠক আত্মহারা হয়ে যাবেন। মূল যে বিষয়টি উঠে এসেছে সেটি হলো এই যে, জিন প্রযুক্তির সাহায্যে আমরা কি আইনস্টাইন কিংবা নিউটনের মতো মেধাবী হতে পারি? কিংবা দুর্ঘটনায় হারিয়ে ফেলা চোখ অথবা কোনও অঙ্গ নিজেরাই প্রতিস্থাপন করতে পারি? আমরা কি রোগবালাই মুক্ত মানব জীবন উপহার পেতে পারি ? আমরা কি চিরসবুজ বা এভারগ্রিন হয়ে উঠতে পারি?
  
  লেখকের নিজের কথায় :
  
  'Imagine wаlkіng іntо a fеrtіlіtу сlіnіс іn thе уеаr 2035. Thanks tо the lаtеѕt, state оf the аrt gеnе tесhnоlоgу уоu can reduce thе сhаnсеѕ thаt your child wіll develop Alzheimer's disease, сеrtаіn types оf саnсеr and hеаrt disease later іn lіfе. You саn еvеn сhооѕе trаіtѕ which wіll influence your оffѕрrіng'ѕ height, IQ and реrѕоnаlіtу type. Thіѕ ѕсеn��rіо mіght ѕоund lіkе science fісtіоn, but іt could soon bе rеаlіtу. Thanks tо rесеnt lеарѕ іn tесhnоlоgу аnd a better undеrѕtаndіng оf thе humаn gеnоmе, wе will bе able tоplay an increasingly асtіvе role in dеѕіgnіng оur future оffѕрrіng. Welcome tо thе genetic rеvоlutіоn.'
  
  ভবিষ্যত পৃথিবী যে আর্টিফিশিয়াল ইন্টেলিজেন্স বা এআই নিয়ন্ত্রিত হতে চলছে তাতে কারও কোন সন্দেহ নেই। তবে জেনেটিক ইঞ্জিনিয়ারিংকে কাজে লাগিয়ে সঙ্কর মানব অর্থাৎ শক্তি, বুদ্ধি, রোগ প্রতিরোধক্ষম করা যে সম্ভব তাতে কারও দ্বিধা নেই। এ কথা অকাট্য যে, যেভাবে পৃথিবীতে রোগ বালাই শক্তিশালী হয়ে উঠছে তার বিরুদ্ধে ক্রিসপার ক্যাস-৯ পরশপাথরের মতোই অমোঘ। আমরা যদি ক্যান্সার মতো মরণব্যাধিকে নিয়ন্ত্রণ করতে পারি, দৃষ্টিহীনদের দৃষ্টি, হৃদপিণ্ড অকেজোদের হৃদপিণ্ড ফিরিয়ে দিতে পারি তাহলে সেটা হবে আমাদের জন্য আর্শীবাদ।
  
  এই প্রসঙ্গে মনে পড়ে ২০২০ সালে রসায়নে নোবেলজয়ী জেনিফার ডাউডনা-র লেখা বই ‘A Crack in Creation: The New Power to Control Evolution’-এর কথা। এই বইয়ে লেখিকা তাঁর আবিষ্কারের যাত্রার পাশাপাশি মানুষকে এই প্রযুক্তির ব্যাপারে সতর্কবাণীও দিয়েছেন। কিন্তু গবেষকরা কি মানবেন এই সতর্কবাণী? আইন করে কি থামানো যাবে এই প্রযুক্তির যাত্রা? ভ্রূণের জিনকে যদি পরিমার্জন করা ব্যাপক আকারে শুরু হয়ে যায় তবে এই আবিষ্কার কি মানুষের ভবিষ্যৎ বদলে দিতে সক্ষম?
  
  অপরদিকে ভাবতে গেলে, যদি মানুষের ভ্রুণকে গবেষণাগারে ডিএনএ বাছাই করে সুপারহিউম্যানের মতো শক্তিধারী করে তোলা হয়, তাহলে তা ধর্ম ও ঐশ্বরিক বিশ্বাসে আঘাত হানবে কি? হয়তো তা হতে পারে মানব ইতিহাসের সবচেয়ে বড় ভুল। ধর্মের প্রতি মানুষের বিশ্বাসবোধ আমাদের চলার পাথেয় হলেও বিজ্ঞানের অনৈতিক প্রয়োগ ধর্মীয় সংঘাত তীব্রতর করে তুলতে পারে কি? জেনেটিক ইঞ্জিনিয়ারিং নিউক্লিয়ার শক্তির চেয়ে ভয়ানক কিছু হতে পারে কি?
  
  পড়ে দেখুন Jamie Metzl রচিত 'Hacking Darwin - Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity'-
  
  নিঃসন্দেহে এই বই ২০২০ সালে আমার পড়া সর্বশ্রেষ্ঠ স্পেকুলেটিভ নন-ফিকশন।
  
  
• 
  Olivia

  I felt like I had to finish this book to be able to give it a proper review, but I really did not enjoy it. I appreciate the effort to summarize complex scientific concepts in a comprehensive manner, but so many elements of the book detracted from the science. The author tries to portray a desire for equality in his push for these new biotechnologies, but makes REPEATED comments throughout the book that are ignorant, biased, and quite frankly racist/ableist. It was extremely frustrating to read.
  
  The explanations of the science itself I think were generally okay, though some conclusions were blatantly incorrect or presumptive - the author made many concrete statements when these scientific “facts” are still up for debate within the community. I understand it’s difficult to summarize scientific articles, but you cannot make sweeping generalizations either. I also think the author overplayed how fast science is advancing - yes relative to past advancements, science is quickly evolving, but due diligence in science takes much longer than portrayed in this book. However, I appreciated the collection of sources on a wide variety of topics since biotechnology is such a large industry.
  
  I think the discussion on bioethics was poorly done, the points really only were discussed in a way to frame his argument - ethics really need to be discussed in an objective manner, especially in a book that focuses on scientific technology that touches upon so many social injustice issues. Some of the social/ethics issues mentioned were also not properly discussed - only given a short paragraph or two - it felt as if they were mentioned solely to check off some list of relevant topics.
  
  Overall, I just think the book was poorly written, the argument was repetitive (and not in a convincing manner - it relied solely on how the author views individuals as “productive” to society) and it was really disappointing to read as a scientist excited about these technologies as well.
• 
  Adam

  If you’re interested in the field of genetic engineering then this book isn’t a bad place to start. It offers a sort of crash course on the history of the science, along with a check in to the modern progress and limitations, and a look to the near future possibilities.
  
  I think it’s important to read the title to understand what this book contains. It’s roughly split between actual scientific fact - the current knowledge of genetic engineering - and theories of how it could impact the future. Theories is probably a strong word, it’s really just glorified guess work, and at times even felt like reading science fiction.
  
  I’ve read several reviews on this book and many people seem to love it or hate it. I don’t have the scientific acumen to criticize Metzl’s approach or rigor in presenting the ‘facts’ I also don’t search for reasons to be offended, so the political or race issues or whatever it is that some readers ruffled their own feathers over I completely missed.
  
  So in short, I didn’t hate it.
  
  I also understand absolutely everything Metzl writes about in this book, and much of what’s presented I knew already from the shallow research I had conducted previously. I’m not an overly intelligent person especially as it relates to science so that gives me the feeling that this book is likely dumbed down a bit, or lacks the complexity and depth that someone well versed in the subject matter would likely need to be engaged.
  
  So in short, I didn’t love it.
  
  Overall I think it’s a decent primer on the topic, especially if you go in knowing next to nothing. However, if you’re well versed on the science I don’t think there will be much to stimulate you here. Genetic engineering is undoubtedly a fascinating subject, and I do agree with Metzl that everyone should educate themselves on it because it could likely play an important role in humanity’s future.
  
  Story-6, Language-7, Ideas-9, Characters-, Enjoyment-7, Overalll-7.2
  
• 
  Alexander Rivas

  Being a father of two this book created a moral and ethical argument within myself on the topic of genetic engineering. If there was a way to pick to apply gene editing prior to my two kids being conceived, I probably would have done some gene editing to my kids. I am someone that reads a lot and can see the benefits of gene editing and the statistical probability of increasing the experience of my children's lives to be better if I didn't choose gene editing. This is a dilemma because it seems that the one who will survive and thrive in the future will be the kids that their parents choose gene editing, which is what Darwin called the "the survival of fittest."
  
  The only reason I read this book was because of the podcast the author did on Joe Rogan. So a lot of the content was over my head because of my knowledge of gene editing was close to nill before reading this book. It is still close to nill because it is an area of science that is growing and changing quickly but after reading this book seems like it will impact humanity greatly in the near future if not already.
  
• 
  Dipanshu Gupta

  Not gonna waste anymore time on the book by writing an actual review on it.
• 
  Jaan

  “From this point onward, much of our mutation will not be random. It will be self-designed.
  From this point onward, our selection will not be natural. It will be self-directed.
  From this point onward, our species will take active control of our evolutionary process by genetically altering our future offspring into something different from what we are today. We are, in other words, beginning a process of hacking Darwin.”
  
  Ülihea raamat sellest, kuidas geneetika areng hakkab mõjutama erinevaid eluvaldkondi. Mõjutatud saab olema see, kuidas saame lapsi, kuidas ravime haigusi ning kuidas see muudab ühiskonda.
• 
  Elentarri

  Hacking Darwin takes a look at the current status of genetic engineering, as well as the possible and probable future uses of these tools, ethics, and the future of humanity. Metzl has written an engaging, fascinating and thought-provoking book that focuses on the fast approaching and inevitable (and exiting) genetic revolution, with clear explanations of the tools involved and the consequences of their use. The writing is clear, explanations accurate and not too technical for the general interested reader.
  
  This book covers a vast array of topics that fall under the genetic engineering umbrella. He starts off with the history of genetic research, IVF, genetic screening; and continues with the relationship between genetics, diseases, traits, the environment; AI tools to process complex genetic patters; the pros and cons of the genetic engineering tools; "designer babies"; stem-cell research; mitochondrial disease; multiple donar babies; gene-editing tools such as CRISPR; gene-therapy; safety issues and challenges to the current technology; chimeras; organ transplants; synthetic biology; aging; the ethics and responsibility of using genetic engineering tool; our relationship with nature; GMOs; the arms race of the human race; and finaly, the furture of humanity.
  
  Metzl states that his intent is to inform the public about the genetic revolution so that we can "make the smartest collective decisions about our war forward... to understand what is happening and what's at stake." Genetic entineering is a tool. The genetic revolution has the potential to improve lives or do great harm. The future of humanity depends on how we use it.
• 
  The Conch

  Moore's Law states that we can expect the speed and capability of our computers to increase every couple of years, and we will pay less for them. This law is now driving to another revolution called 'human genetic', a new era of creating superhuman.
  
  Now many oppose application of PGT (pre-implantation genetic testing) i.e. screening of human embryo for gene disorder, however, this will soon be future since it will create human without critical genetic diseases like Huntington’s disease, Down syndrome etc.
  
  Author describes the future situation may be fantastic, however not free with danger. This 'genetic enhancement' , through gene splicing by CASPER-CAS9, of human may create a unbridgeable chasm between those who can afford genetic enhancement and those who can't. There may be cold war scenario in creating genetically enhance soldiers who can tolerate any extreme weather or returning of 'eugenic' movement which created Nazi era.
  
  Reader can get a flavor of how the entire biology is getting revolutionized in way of advance of synthetic biology (combining machine and life) and development of Senolytic drugs (for expanding life and reducing aging process).
  
  However, author opines this future can not be stopped, however, like NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) world leaders may settle on negotiable terms and conditions.
  
  Author, Jamie Metzl, is a technology futurist and geo-political expert.
• 
  David

  This is an important book that covers an important emerging issue. The main focus of this book is to bring awareness of the issues pertaining to the growing knowledge and implementation of human genetic manipulation and engineering, and to encourage dialog among all people who will be affected by it (which is potentially everyone).
  I heard this author on the JRE podcast and was intrigued. While he covered most of the points in this book on the podcast, it should still be required reading.
  One thing this book lacks is really any definable plan. Like climate change (which is frequently referenced and even used as parallel), it seems we are becoming aware, want to do something, but lack any realistic plan of actual implementation. For that realization, this book is rather depressing, as one gets the feeling that this may yet be another way of destroying ourselves that will be politically, morally and religiously divisive, and we will probably be arguing what to do about it while Rome burns.
• 
  Tugrul Akyuz

  I would like to express my opinion with my not very good English: This book is not a scientific book. This book is about things about ethics, a bit about politics, and a lot of strategic proposals for the future genetic engineering in USA. Although the author tries to put himself in a liberal side, he gives a lot of clues that he is a US nationalist. I am not a fan of china. But while giving some information of genetic engineering politics about China, it is not overlooked that the author always puts words that dispraise a little bit this country. At the same time, it is possible to see that the author, who is aware of the fact that China will make rapid progress in genetic engineering by using its own cultural structure which is different from the western culture, is jealous of this country. In addition, the author argues that the Chinese and South Korean governments violate children's rights by forcing children to be successful in their field, while he considers that it is a sublime effort for a US family to force their children to be successful .
  If we ignore all these negatives aside, I give 3 because I learned a few facts, in addition some statistics that I streinghten . Another positive feature of that book is that it makes think, at least, about the ethical issues of genetic engineering.
• 
  Betsy

  [6 Sept 2021]
  "How do we balance the magnificent wonder and brutal cruelty of our own biology?"
  
  Metzl spends a large portion of this book describing the various way in which we have messed with evolution throughout our history, and goes into some detail about the new science of genetic engineering. He describes our current capabilities and the possibilities that are just beyond the horizon. This is all very interesting, but then he goes on to discuss the implications of these capabilities and whether and how we should attempt to put limits on this emerging technology. To my mind, those later discussions represent the true value of this book.
  
  "We have a strong attraction to what we feel is natural, but our species is defined by our relentless efforts to tame nature."
  
  Metzl is a writer, not a scientist, but he's written about this subject extensively and has apparently been involved at very high levels of the ethical discussions already taking place. He makes a good attempt at evenhandedly presenting different viewpoints, but his bias is pretty clear. He believes that the genie is out of the bottle and attempts to put it back in will be futile. He also believes that the net benefit of the technology will be good for humanity, but that it must be done with restraint that reflects a consensus of all nations and all interests. He understands that such a consensus will be difficult to obtain, but it is imperative.
  
  I personally have mixed feelings about genetic engineering. Some of the possibilities for curing disease are very exciting. But there are other possibilities that could be very dangerous. I am reminded of one of my favorite science fiction series, the
  "Honorverse". In the history of that future civilization there was a period where genetic engineering got out of hand, with an attempt to create a "superhuman". Those who resulted from those efforts end up trying to take over the galaxy and they were not friendly or sympathetic to "ordinary" humans. It was such a disastrous episode that genetic engineering had to be nearly outlawed, and anyone suspected of being in any way genetically altered was looked at with suspicion. This seems a very likely scenario to me.
  
  Plus we have a long history of good intentions gone amuck. But the potential for disaster when we're talking about the future of the human race seems to me something we must take very seriously. Errors may not be very easy to fix. However, as Metzl says, it may be too late to stop it entirely.
  
  The writing in this book is fairly good, easy to follow and understand. My biggest complaint about the book is that he frequently seems to go on and on about a subject that he's already covered quite adequately. He gets very wordy. But maybe that's just his passion getting the better of him. And I salute his passion.
• 
  Ksenia Kulichik

  A very readable, relentlessly optimistic book about the future of genetic engineering and how it may be applied to human reproduction.
  
  Jamie Metzl knows his subject matter very well and is an experienced writer: one does not need to have much familiarity with how human genome works or what the current state of science on the matter is to grasp his arguments. He covers a wide array of loosely related topics: genetic engineering, iPC research, IVF, embryo selection, genetic diseases, GMOs, political handling of all those, what “nature” means in such a context… His ultimate goal is to mobilize his readers to consider genetic engineering in human reproduction and spur productive discussions about it, since it is just around the corner, and to this end the book is a great tool and resource.
  
  Unfortunately, my pessimism is almost as bottomless as Metzl’s optimism, and a lot of his exuberantly hopeful claims smashed against my entrenched suspicions about the goodness of humanity. I found the brief chapter on social and political dimensions of the genetic engineering revolution (evolution?) he foresees particularly disconcerting. He does acknowledge the current inequality within first world countries and globally, but does not offer any realistic prognoses or sound advice on how genetic science could and should proceed on such terrain. Metzl limits himself to virtuous claims about how flawed our current social order and moral judgements are, and how they could use a critical eye and rethinking, but does not advance further towards how that could be achieved and what the absence of such rethinking would mean for the genetically advancing future of humanity. I see a world divided not just by wealth and technological progress, but by sheer physical fitness, and so does Metzl, but he does not explore this potential future further, simply stating its possible emergence, prescribing critical thinking as an antidote. I think such blasé attitude towards this most realistic of the futures is irresponsible and wish the social, political and financial consequences of genetically engineering humans were explored further in the book.
  
  Despite this shortcoming, “Hacking Darwin” is absolutely worth a read. It is educational, interesting and pleasantly written, and is capable of starting necessary discussions, as it has between my friends and I. I tip my hat to Jamie Metzl for that success.
  
  Thanks to NetGalley for a digital ARC of the book.
• 
  Kim McGee

  This is a great scientific book to read if you don't normally read scientific books and let's face it - we are already dealing with DNA issues so it makes sense to be smart about it. Jamie Metzl provides insight through funny anecdotes, plain speaking English and sifts through all the facts and figures to give us a history of our DNA, what we know already and most important of all, where we are going in the not too distant future. Our children probably will be picking out our grandchildren from a catalog of desired traits and disease-free genes and great grandparents will be there to welcome them. Very readable and equally exciting and frightening in the same measure.
  The information is especially valuable for people wanting to start a family in the coming years. My thanks to the publisher for the advance copy.
• 
  Annarella

  An interesting and fascinating book about an interesting and fascinating topic.
  I liked the style of writing, the clear explanations and how the author is able to talk about very complex topics in a clear and engaging mode.
  This book is a lot of food for thought, highly recommended!
  Many thanks to SOURCEBOOKS and Netgalley for this ARC. I voluntarily read and reviewed this book, all opinions are mine.
• 
  Martyn

  After ‘The Gene: An intimate History’ I thought that any book about genetics would only be a disappointment. I was more than happily surprised. This is a book about genetics which starts where The Gene’ finishes and which looks to the future rather than the past -Where we are going rather than where we have come from - and it is jaw dropping. Engaging, often dryly humorous and not a little scary. Informative yet really enjoyable
• 
  Jessica

  High on the eugenics and pronatalism, low on class analysis. Jamie Metzl spends most of this book stating what he believes the future holds, but stated as if these things are facts.
  
  If you want to read about the history of genetics as a science, a far better choice is "The Gene: An Intimate History" by Siddhartha Mukherjee.
• 
  Clémentine

  Easy to understand for those who aren’t familiar with genetic engineering, Informative and engaging!
• 
  Milica

  Toliko loša knjiga, da je na momente bilo bolno čitati.
  
  Gosn. Džejmi Mecl, po zanimanju "futurista", daje pregled metoda genetičkog inženjeringa i asistirane reprodukcije i otvara mnoga zaista intresantna pitanja koja iz njih slede i zbog kojih me je ova knjiga i zainteresovala, ali se ne ustručava i da na njih daje odgovore zasnovane na sopstvenom mišljenju i ideologiji. To naravno ne bi bio problem - svako od nas jelte može da ima mišljenje o bilo čemu - ali jedno je o nečemu pričati iz sopstvenog ugla i dati sopstveno mišljenje, a drugo je sve to uviti u navodnu "nauku," tvrditi da je to jedina istina i pritom na neukusan način ismevati svakoga ko se s tobom ne slaže (pre svega religiozne i konzervativne ljude; ne spadam u njih, ali je način na koji ih gospodin kritikuje ogavan). Sasvim u redu bi bilo da je izneo metode, naveo šta iz njih proizilazi i ponudio svoje mišljenje...ali ne.
  
  Veliki deo "nauke" koju iznosi nije tačan. U najvećem delu izvodi tzv. "cherry picking" - izvlači rezultate istraživanja iz konkteksta i iskorišćava ih za svoju priču. Navodi veliki broj istraživanja koja su prevaziđena i netačna (iz '70. i '80. godina) ili drugu krajnost - neka skorašnja koja liče na SciFi i koja nisu validirana. Uzima u obzir gene i samo gene, pokušava da ubedi da je čovek samo rezultat gena, što je daleko od istine (ovo ne govorim iz nekog humanizing ugla i želje za distanciranjem čoveka od životinje, naprotiv, biti bilo koje živo biće (bakterija, biljka, životinja) osim gena podrazumeva milion drugih elemenata koji jesu u svojoj osnovi materijalistički kao i geni, ali nikako se ne može reći da su geni sve); to je najviše izraženo u delu u kome priča o inteligenciji i tipu ličnosti, što je jako pipav teren sa pitanjima na koja biolozi (pošto o biolozima priča) ni ne tvrde da imaju odgovore; ali gospodin koji se time ni ne bavi kao da trpa reči u usta ljudima kojima se time bave i daje sebi za pravo da svoje mišljenje iznosi kao opšti stav savremene kognitivne nauke, što je smešno, a i bezobrazno.
  
  Naravno, sve vreme upliće svoju ideologiju i politička mišljenja, što je kao što rekoh u redu, naročito jer će se implikacije razvoja genetičkog inženjeringa u budućnosti itekako ticati politike i naših ličnih filozofija i gledišta; ali ovaj lik sve to strpa zajedno sa rezultatima nekog istraživanja i pokušava to da servira kao nešto što nema veze s njegovim mišljenjem nego je, prosto, tako. Sve to, zajedno sa cherry picking-om i drugim neistinama, itekako može da dovede čitaoca u zabludu.
  
  Vrhunac dostiže u poglavlju o etici bioinženjeriga, kad postavi pitanje zašto bismo čeprkali po genima iako su sve ove tehnologije mlade i minimalno ispitane i uprkos tome što znamo da bi posledice mogle biti strašne i pogubne, a onda daje odgovor, citiram: "Zato što smo ljudi, eto zašto." Izjednačava uvođenje mutacije koja će MOŽDA da izleči bolest i pritom možda dovede do nastanka druge bolesti, sa ljudskom radoznalošću i inventivnošću. Razumem da je on radoznao i da voli SciFi i da je nestrpljiv da vidi šta nam budućnost donosi, ali u pasusima koji slede ismeva naučnike, političare i ostale koji izražavaju predostrožnost, nazivajući tu itekako opravdanu predostrožnost nekakvom nazadnom konzervativnošću i nečim što nije prirodno za čoveka. Logika mu je da ako nisi spreman da rizikuješ i izvršiš neku izmenu znajući da ćeš možda uraditi nešto katastrofalno, to onda znači da nisi radoznao i da nisi pravi čovek, jer čovek je vazda bio sklon inventivnosti i željom za novim. Mutiranje embriona svoje buduće dece tehnologijama za koje još uvek ni ne znamo kako rade vidi kao vrhunac ostvarenja liberalne bajke i kao nekakvu istorijsku pobedu - kaže, nekad se dešavalo da države odlučuju o tome ko se i koliko razmnožava (nacistička eugenika i slični događaji u SAD, zakoni o abortusu...), a ovako ti sam odlučuješ o tome i donekle je tvoja dužnost da to uradiš, nema veze što je to klizav i opasan teren, just do it, biće to šamar u lice autoritarnim sistemima i ostvarenje tvog progresivnog i slobodoumnog bića.
  
  
  Razmišljala sam da je jedina dobra strana ove knjige to što su navedene razne metode i tehnologije, ali kad na momenat pokušah da čitam te delove kao neko ko se ne bavi time, shvatih da su jako loše objašnjenje i da ih neko ko se ne bavi time ne bi ni razumeo.
  
  Nisam htela da budem snob, ali ne-biolozi da prestanu da pišu o biologiji. Nadam se da niko neće hejtovati biologe posle čitanja ove knjige, zaista niko ne smatra da su geni sve i da je sve tako jednostavno.
• 
  Cav

  This is going to be a long one, so buckle up if you're interested...
  This was an interesting read. Author Jamie Metzl writes with a style that holds the reader's attention, while effectively communicating the information.
  This easy writing style makes the book accessible to the layperson. It is not written in the overly technical manner that is a hallmark of many other science books.
  He covers a lot of ground in here. He starts the book theorizing about the increased utilization of IVF technology in the future, and then a brief outline of genetics, and the mapping of the human genome by The Human Genome Project.
  He then moves on to Mendelian diseases, twins studies and intelligence. He disappointingly mentions Charles' Murray's "The Bell Curve":
  

  "By simultaneously raising the taboo topics of intelligence differences between people and groups, IQ, and race, Herrnstein and Murray smashed into the buzz saw of progressive public opinion.
  New York Times columnist Bob Herbert called The Bell Curve “a scabrous piece of racial pornography masquerading as serious scholarship.” Harvard’s Stephen Jay Gould, a longtime critic of the concept of general factor intelligence, argued that other environmental factors like prenatal nutrition, home life, and access to quality education had a more significant influence on a person’s intelligence than Herrnstein and Murray accounted for.
  Other critics attacked the book as reductionist, scientifically sloppy, and dangerously biased."

  
  ...Conveniently not mentioning that the data documenting "g" - or general intelligence is very well documented and evidenced, as is the data on group differences. Murray's book was controversial because it hurt people's feelings. That there are average differences between groups is something patently obvious to any child, and something he ironically mentions towards the end of the book, when talking about the prowess of Kenyan runners.
  It would truly be a miracle of evolution if isolated groups located in vastly different environments around the globe all evolved identical traits, at the same time. He should know better.
  Moving on from this, he talks about how stem cells can be used to make gametes, and revolutionize IVF technology.
  This seemed like some odd reasoning, however:
  

  "In their thought-provoking paper, Embryo Selection for Cognitive Enhancement: Curiosity or Game Changer?, Oxford professors Carl Shulman and Nick Bostrom attempt to quantify what increase in IQ might be possible based on mating unimplanted embryos with each other.
  The IQ of a traditionally conceived child, an n of 1, simply has the genetic component of IQ he or she is born with. Because the genetic component of IQ varies among embryos created by the same parents, other than identical twins, we can safely assume the range of IQ options would be greater the larger the number of embryos that might be generated. This means that we would have a greater chance of selecting an unimplanted embryo with a higher IQ if the number of options was larger.
  According to Shulman and Bostrom’s calculations, the average IQ difference between the highest and lowest IQ of the fifteen or so embryos conceived in IVF, as practiced today, from the same parents would be about twelve points. But if we use the induced stem-cell procedure to start with a hundred fertilized eggs, rather than just ten or fifteen, the average difference between the highest and lowest genetic IQ potentials between these hundred options is estimated at about twenty points. Making a thousand embryos could increase the average differential between the highest and lowest IQ of all the embryos to about twenty-five points.
  Twenty-five IQ points may seem like a small return from generating and testing a thousand
  pre implanted embryos, but that difference would, on average, lead to vastly different life experiences...
  ...Shulman and Bostrom estimate that breeding five generations of embryos picked for having the highest IQ among their ten cohorts could create a bump up of sixty-five points in IQ, and a 130-point bump after ten generations."

  
  I'm not sure you can just keep amplifying intelligence like that. They make the assumption that each grouping of embryos would have examples of progressively higher intelligence zygotes among them, well above the mean. Why would that be so? It seems more likely to me that the embryos will exhibit different values, but will still largely group around the mean. This is evidenced by how intelligence is distributed already in society. If super-high IQ happened with a large statistical regularity, random chance would dictate there would be many more intelligent people than there are now.
  Even if you could repeatedly select for the highest among the group, at some point you will push up against the physical limitations of our inherent hardware. Neurons can only fire so quickly. Only so many networks can be established and maintained. Our hardware is fixed and finite. He goes on to theorize a person with an IQ of 1000. Doesn't sound very likely to me.
  The book moves on with talk about CRISPR and gene therapy, gene editing, and the related ethics.
  These leftist writers crack me up:
  

  "Mozart grew up in the Hapsburg court, but how many Mozarts are today languishing in Syrian refugee camps?"

  
  LOL, judging by the relative technological, cultural, and musical output from the rest of the entire Middle East, I'm going to hazard a guess of NOT TOO MANY...
  To his credit, however, he then talks at length about GMOs, their introduction, usage, and benefits. He has a good blurb about anti-GMOers:
  

  "...anti-GMO activists, many inspired by some combination of a distrust of new
  technologies, U.S. global corporations, and market capitalism more generally, as well as by the
  romanticizing of small farmers and fears their food supplies will be contaminated, have increasingly raised the alarm over what they started calling Frankenfoods.
  Anti-GMO organizations have launched massive disinformation campaigns designed to counter and
  muffle the voices of the scientific community. Many people are susceptible to this type of disinformation because most of us instinctively resort to a “naturalistic fallacy” that nature is natural, even though our ancestors have been massively modifying much of it for thousands of years."

  
  Superfluous long-winded chapter at the end completely detached from reality where the author recommends global-wide regulation on genome editing, based on some empathy-driven ethical concerns he has. These leftist writers are hilarious - in a tragically ironic way... So knowledgeable in certain fields, yet so disconnected from reality.
  You know who is not encumbered by the same ethical constraints and concerns? CHINA AND RUSSIA. The author doesn't seem to realize the obvious here. Also completely detached from reality; he suggests military intervention could be needed in countries who don't agree to global restriction terms. Has he no understanding of MAD? MAD makes sure this would not be a tenable option with countries like China and Russia...
  
  Overall, this was a really interesting book, covering a broad range of science, and related research.
  I would recommend it, despite the author's inclusion of his laughable, irrelevant and unneeded political/ideological commentary. A cursory glance of his Twitter feed reveals a virtual cornucopia of leftist nonsense, coupled with raging Trump Derangement Syndrome.
  I wanted to give this 5 stars, but the author's inclusion of his screeching leftist nonsense makes me subtract 2 stars. This book didn't need his ideological commentary. I don't know why these "progressives" feel that people will appreciate their evangelizing and virtue signalling in a science book...
• 
  Jess

  This book illustrates many of the ways that genetic engineering can help humans (and through them, the rest of the world but less so). It offers up a repeated narrative through time of a woman seeking to have a child through IVF and the options available to her as technology becomes more advanced.
  
  The technology and genetics explored include: preventing serious disease, improving immune response, selecting for physical traits, identifying personality, etc. Some of this technology is already here, and saving lives: like identifying life-threatening recessive genes in early stages of development. Some of it is already here and can be used for "designer" babies: like identifying deafness or dwarfism. Some of it is postulated - like identifying genetic markers for intelligence, kindness, strategy, etc.
  
  The author spends a little time talking about ethics throughout, and legality and policy considerations in the last part. However, this was my greatest discomfort with the book. It seems to me that Jamie missed some very real ethical dilemmas in the woman-visiting-their-fertility-doctor narrative throughout. The "choices" of genetic combinations never discussed the likelihood that the "smartest, kindest, most something or other" embryo might also have the weakest immune response or any other sort of contrary combination. Let's ignore all of the physical appearance space (like eye and skin color). Sure, if we first eliminate the possibility that you could pursue further development of embryos that will develop into humans whose lives will be incredibly short and/or painful, some of the moral divergence is reduced....but it there is a whole lotta grey between "definitely gonna have a terrible short life" to probably going to be healthy. That grey area is where I think most of the moral ambiguity resides (assuming that embryo selection were to be a generally accepted practice). Back to the connection between science, health, policy, and morality - what kinds of incentives will these hypothetical future mothers face? Are there incentives to raise certain types of children over others. Who structured those incentives? Who is responsible for making those choices, or changes to them?
  
  Interesting book, nonetheless. I'd also recommend
  Homo Deus: A History of Tomorrow for readers of this one.
• 
  Viktor Stoyanov

  Книгата превежда през пътеката на еволюцията, с поглеждане през рамо към миналото, споделяне на актуални лабораторни разработки и почти философски зареяни мисли за бъдещето.
  
  По-голямата част се върти около генома (предимно човешкия) и стремежа за решаване на проблема със стареенето. Авторът се опитва да прави паралели с научната фантастика и някои разработки, които се доближават до популярните сценарии. Разсъждава за множеството морални проблеми от "хакването на естествения ход на еволюцията", свързани с религия, предрасъдъци, полове, мутации, генно инжинерство, IVF и тнт.
  
  Надявам се съм успял да ориентирам. Книгата би могла да предложи добро време за размисъл по тези въпроси, но нито е осеяна с кой знае какви прозрения, нито с неочаквани въпроси/отговори, нито представя изцяло нови постановки. Както се казва, за някои от хипотезите, SciFi авторите са се сетили преди 50 и повече години, когато не сме имали и 10% от сегашните научни знания в материята на генетиката. Все пак е добър повод да се замислим над повечето от поставените въпроси.
• 
  Eddy D. Sanchez

  La humanidad está viviendo la era de la biotecnología, de la edición genética para corregir y curar nuestras enfermedades, alargar la vida o simplemente mejorarnos como especie.
  El abaratamiento en secuencia genética y avance en tecnología reproductiva nos ha dado herramientas para conocernos más y tomar acción, durante siglos nos hemos auto-diseñado mediante la reproducción sexual, ha sido largo el proceso evolutivo, pero ahora tenemos herramientas para editarnos y diseñarnos genéticamente de forma más precisa.
  Hacking Darwin es un excelente libro, nos muestra el futuro del homo sapiens con el camino claro a ser homo deus, cruzando la frontera de la modificación y mejora del ser humano, también nos plantea temas filosóficos pero siempre con un punto de vista científico.
• 
  Mackenzie

  Not gonna lie, this book was a bit of a struggle! I’m not used to reading this genre, but OMG am I happy I did!! There are things that I learned in this book that I just want to TALK about! So all my friends, prepare for more on my nonsense ramblings!
  Also, the chapter on abortion DID NOT age well lol