As Gods
A Moral History of the Genetic Age
-
- R$ 104,90
-
- R$ 104,90
Descrição da editora
The thrilling and terrifying history of genetic engineering
In 2018, scientists manipulated the DNA of human babies for the first time. As biologist and historian Matthew Cobb shows in As Gods, this achievement was one many scientists have feared from the start of the genetic age. Four times in the last fifty years, geneticists, frightened by their own technology, have called a temporary halt to their experiments. They ought to be frightened: Now we have powers that can target the extinction of pests, change our own genes, or create dangerous new versions of diseases in an attempt to prevent future pandemics. Both awe-inspiring and chilling, As Gods traces the history of genetic engineering, showing that this revolutionary technology is far too important to be left to the scientists. They have the power to change life itself, but should we trust them to keep their ingenuity from producing a hellish reality?
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
The power to change the blueprint of life comes with fraught ethical dilemmas, according to this knotty study of genetic engineering. University of Manchester biologist Cobb (The Idea of the Brain) recaps the development of genetic engineering, from DNA breakthroughs in the 1970s that let scientists introduce genes into viruses, bacteria, and mammals to new CRISPR technology that precisely rewrites DNA sequences. The author focuses on concerns over the safety and morality of the science, describing the ethical questions raised by a Chinese experiment that produced genetically engineered infants (and may have given them harmful mutations); the threat of engineered pandemics (he believes Covid-19 was of natural origin, but warns the next one might not be); and "gene drive" technologies that could spread sterilizing genes throughout an entire species and push it to extinction. The details fascinate (botanists use a "gene gun" to shoot DNA into plant cells), and Cobb's lucid analysis illuminates the stakes of the scientific debates. Additionally, his evenhanded critique balances caution about emergent technologies with tart skepticism of overreaching claims ("There really does not seem to be much point to germline editing at all"). The result is an eye-opening—and occasionally hair-raising—indictment of scientific hubris and recklessness. Photos.
