Living Medicines
For a science writer, it's always exciting to report on the dawn of a new kind of science.
In the 1990s, journalists furiously wrote about gene therapy, a treatment that medical researchers promised would cure hereditary diseases by injecting working genes into people's cells.
At the same time, champions of the Human Genome Project also promised tremendous benefits to mapping all our DNA.
By the end of the 1990s, a new field, known as synthetic biology, was also hatched. Researchers sought to rewire the genes of cells like electronic circuits, promising to fashion organisms that could carry out all sorts of new tasks for us.
But science writers also have a responsibility to follow these fields beyond their grand birth announcements, and see whether they live up to the promises--and, if they do, to see how long the process takes.
Gene therapy did not quickly deliver a panacea for hereditary diseases. Instead, after a death during a clinical trial, the field ground to a halt for years and then regained ground slowly. Five years ago,
I wrote about this hard rebound for Wired, profiling the scientist who ran the infamous trial that put the brakes on gene therapy. Just a few weeks ago, my
New York Times colleague Gina Kolata
reported on how gene therapy is starting to get FDA approval. And yet, she notes, there are still unresolved questions about how effective it will prove in the long run.
The Human Genome Project provided scientists with a tool that's now essential for studying our DNA. It's allowed scientists to tie many genes to many different diseases. In some cases, that knowledge is leading to new medicines and new ways to estimate people's risks. But it certainly hasn't made a big dent in major diseases like Alzheimer's and diabetes. The video series
The Code, which I helped create, offers a look at where we stand now.
And then there's synthetic biology. Among its exciting promises was the possibility of cheap, plentiful drugs to cure malaria. The drug, called artemisinin, is naturally produced by certain plants. Synthetic biology offered the possibility of retooling microbes to churn it out in far bigger amounts for far less effort. Here's a
2006 Q/A I did
for Discover on the project, talking with its leader, Jay Keasling. The pharmaceutical giant Sanofi ramped up Keasling's technology to an industrial scale.
But they couldn't make a lot of artemisinin from microbes, and what little they made proved expensive. As Mark Peplow recently reported in
Chemical and Engineering News,
researchers are still searching for a formula that can truly deliver on this particular promise of synthetic biology.
Another idea that's been tossed around is to use synthetic biology to make microbes that can treat diseases inside our bodies. I've heard people talk about this for years. I've seen prototype bacteria in labs that can do simple things like change color when they detect a pathogen. But it's no small task to gather all the data on one of these "living drugs" that could give it a chance of getting FDA approval.
This week in the
New York Times,
I looked at one such case: a microbe that's programmed to make an enzyme that people with a hereditary disease can't make for themselves.
History has taught me to not hold my breath until these microbes are curing real people of real diseases. But I still think it's an important milestone in the ~20-year history of synthetic biology.
She Has Her Mother's Laugh: Two Lists and an Interview
It was a delight to discover that
Vanity Fair put
She Has Her Mother's Laugh on
their list of the summer's best nonfiction, while Goodreads put the book on
its own list of the best new nonfiction.
Meanwhile, Canada's
Globe and Mail interviewed with me on the future of heredity. A snip:
Q: In addition to CRISPR, you talked about recent research where scientists take skin cells from mice, make them into stem cells and then in turn make those into sperm or eggs. If I understand this correctly, that could mean a homosexual couple could make sperm and eggs to have babies just like heterosexual couples do. How close are we to that happening?
A: I think we’re pretty close, as strange as that sounds. Something we would have thought was profoundly mysterious and defied the laws of nature turns out to be just a matter of finding the right chemicals to dunk your cells into. There are still a lot of obstacles for them to overcome but the fact that they’ve gotten so far already is pretty mind-blowing.
I think that that kind of technology could unsettle our ideas about heredity much more than CRISPR. Imagine one man takes a cheek scraping, turns them into stem cells, turns some of those cells into sperm and eggs, fertilizes the eggs with the sperm, and that turns into an embryo. That’s a one-parent embryo! Theoretically that’s possible!
Now imagine that you pluck a cell from that tiny little embryo, when it’s just a clump of cells, and you then grow eggs or sperm from that. Remember this is an embryo that has never turned into an adult. Then you fertilize another egg created this way, and you do that for a few generations. If an embryo that develops from that is now implanted into a woman and is able to grow into a person, that person has no parents… has no grandparents! That family tree is pretty much impossible to draw. So when I think about that possibility it just seems like we could really be going into a science fiction future.
Read the full interview here.
Talk to You In October!
This summer was a whirlwind of the best sort. I'm incredibly grateful to everyone who came out to hear me talk about
She Has Her Mother's Laugh, or listened to me on radio shows or podcasts. As the summer progressed, I also started getting a gratifying supply of emails and tweets from readers who let me know how much they enjoyed the book. (Please share your enthusiasm with everyone you know! And people you don't know on
Goodreads or Amazon!)
Now my work is shifting to a different phase. I'm back to teaching
my writing course at Yale. I'm continuing writing weekly for the
Times. And, as you can see below, I've got a busy travel schedule for
public lectures over the next few months.
With my work on
She Has Her Mother's Laugh pretty much done, I'm shifting back to the earlier stages of the book life cycle. I'm working on the third edition of
my evolution textbook with my co-author, the biologist Doug Emlen. And I'm spending a lot of time grazing for new ideas for a new trade book. Finding them requires me to take a fair-sized jump from the topic of my previous books. It has to provide me with enough excitement to fuel the long haul of writing another book. And gathering that fuel will take some time.
So I'm going to dial this newsletter back to a monthly pace. You'll still get plenty of warning about upcoming stuff, and I'll keep you up to date with the recent things I've been up to. But I'll also have a chance to be a bit more reflective about what I've been reading (or watching).
Think of this now as First Friday's Elk.
Upcoming Talks
September 20, 2018 University of Bath (UK), Evolution in the 21st Century
October 4, 2018 92nd Street Y, New York: "What Makes Us Human? Panel with Maria Konnikova, Nathan Lents, and Sebastian Seung.
October 9, 2018 New York University: "Why You’re You: Explaining Heredity to a Confused Public"
October 17, 2018 Colorado State University: Murray Honors Visiting Scholar Lecture (details to come)
October 19, 2018 Las Vegas, CSICon
October 23, 2018 Mount Holyoke College "Science Reporting in the Age of Fake News"
November 7, 2018 University of Pennsylvania (details to come)
November 13, 2018 New York, House of Speakeasy
November 14, 2018 Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ (details to come)
February 16, 2019 Washington DC AAAS Topical Lecture (details to come)
NEW! --> March 7, 2019 University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Thomas M. Siebel Lecture Series in Science and Society (details to come)
You can find information and ordering links for my other books here. You can also follow me on Twitter, Facebook, Goodreads, and LinkedIn. If someone forwarded this email to you, you can subscribe to it here.
Best wishes, Carl