1 00:00:01,020 --> 00:00:04,320 Hello. I'm Katrina. This is the Practical Ethics Channel. 2 00:00:05,190 --> 00:00:09,570 So this is the audio version of an interview I conducted with Julian Solecki, 3 00:00:09,580 --> 00:00:15,840 professor of Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford and Director of the Oxford Hero Centre for Practical Ethics. 4 00:00:16,560 --> 00:00:25,710 I interviewed Julian on the ethics of genetic selection and human enhancement, and this was at a public engagement event organised by the Mad Batman, 5 00:00:25,920 --> 00:00:34,860 which is a Belgian non-profit organisation, facilitating public debates on various topics related to the so-called make ability of humans. 6 00:00:35,370 --> 00:00:41,610 So we'd like to thank the Mac Batiments for the audio files of his interview and Monster for the photos. 7 00:00:44,710 --> 00:00:47,860 Professor Julian Soffer. Let's go. 8 00:00:53,170 --> 00:00:55,270 First of all, thanks so much for being here. 9 00:00:55,300 --> 00:01:03,010 So I realise very well how busy your schedule is, so I think we should all be grateful for having you here. 10 00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:13,929 So thanks very much. So Julian made valuable contributions to almost any debate in bioethics, to almost any debate in bioethics. 11 00:01:13,930 --> 00:01:22,860 So he has worked on the ethics of infectious disease, like how can we prevent a growing, growing danger of antibiotic resistance? 12 00:01:22,870 --> 00:01:30,460 And he's worked on end of life issues, euthanasia, animal ethics, like the ethics of animal experimentation and so on. 13 00:01:30,470 --> 00:01:37,270 But I think it's fairly uncontroversial to say that you've caused most controversy. 14 00:01:37,870 --> 00:01:46,290 But your contributions to the debate about genetic selection and human enhancement I think probably made a few people angry. 15 00:01:46,300 --> 00:01:51,850 Even so, it's great that you'll have a chance to explain your views a bit to us. 16 00:01:52,390 --> 00:01:56,260 Okay, so when we think about genetic selection, there are two important questions. 17 00:01:56,260 --> 00:02:02,739 So a first question is, is genetic selection acceptable genetic selection in general? 18 00:02:02,740 --> 00:02:05,770 So is it ever acceptable to use genetic selection? 19 00:02:06,310 --> 00:02:11,590 The second question is if it is acceptable to do genetic selection, 20 00:02:11,590 --> 00:02:19,490 sometimes in some circumstances, how do how should we decide what children to choose? 21 00:02:19,510 --> 00:02:29,050 How should we select? And that's what we want to or I would like to focus on today, because I think that's the interesting question. 22 00:02:29,530 --> 00:02:39,310 So, Julian, you have developed a famous or should I say, in famous principle to help us decide what children to select. 23 00:02:39,790 --> 00:02:42,639 And it's called procreative beneficence. 24 00:02:42,640 --> 00:02:55,390 And basically it means that parents or individuals or people who want to have a child should choose the child from among different children. 25 00:02:55,390 --> 00:03:02,650 They could have they should choose the child that that will have the best chance at the best life. 26 00:03:02,650 --> 00:03:09,490 So why should we choose the child that we think will have the best life? 27 00:03:11,980 --> 00:03:18,520 So Katrina said that my view is controversial, but but, in fact, it it's common sense. 28 00:03:19,870 --> 00:03:24,160 And I want to give you an example where I think that you will agree with me. 29 00:03:24,580 --> 00:03:28,570 That is a kind of clear example of of this principle. 30 00:03:29,590 --> 00:03:33,510 So not only do I think people should be allowed to do this, but that they should do it. 31 00:03:33,520 --> 00:03:39,849 And by should I mean they have a reason that can be outweighed by other reasons, 32 00:03:39,850 --> 00:03:43,690 but that if they're in any if there are no other reasons, they should do it. 33 00:03:44,290 --> 00:03:54,580 So here's an example. So some of you may have heard of this Zika virus, which is passed by mosquitoes to human beings. 34 00:03:55,090 --> 00:03:58,150 And if it doesn't affect people like you. 35 00:03:58,450 --> 00:04:06,070 But if you're trying to have a child, it can cause the child to have a small brain and intellectual disability. 36 00:04:08,170 --> 00:04:17,890 And so one way to there's no treatment for it, but one way to avoid this is to avoid getting Zika. 37 00:04:19,300 --> 00:04:27,820 But sometimes you don't know if you've been infected, and it can take three months to to tell whether you've actually had the the infection. 38 00:04:28,300 --> 00:04:34,900 So when the epidemic was at its peak in South America, for example, in countries like Brazil, 39 00:04:35,590 --> 00:04:43,000 Public Health, England, the medical authority said it issued a warning to people and it said, 40 00:04:43,360 --> 00:04:48,100 if you are thinking about having a child and you've been to an area with Zika, 41 00:04:48,550 --> 00:04:54,430 you should wait three months before you start to try to conceive to have a child. 42 00:04:55,310 --> 00:05:00,890 And the reason is if you conceive now, you might be infected with Zika still from coming back from Brazil. 43 00:05:01,910 --> 00:05:07,520 Now, the child that you will have. In three months will be a different egg. 44 00:05:07,560 --> 00:05:13,790 There will have been at least two cycles and a different sperm because sperm turnover. 45 00:05:14,240 --> 00:05:20,810 So the child that you will have in three months will be a different child than the child you would have had today. 46 00:05:21,500 --> 00:05:28,280 In fact, it might be of the opposite sex. So the child that you have in three months might be healthy, Harry, 47 00:05:29,090 --> 00:05:34,250 whereas the child that you would have today if you were infected with Zika will be maybe. 48 00:05:35,540 --> 00:05:39,920 Zelda with with microcephaly. An intellectual disability. 49 00:05:40,040 --> 00:05:48,990 So what Public Health England says is you should have healthy Harry rather than Zelda with intellectual disability. 50 00:05:49,040 --> 00:05:56,210 That's what you should do. And if you went to a doctor and asked their advice, you would expect the doctor to say You should wait three months. 51 00:05:56,930 --> 00:06:01,010 Now I have asthma. So I'm an asthmatic. 52 00:06:02,850 --> 00:06:07,230 If the doctor and I went to the doctor and said, Look, Doctor, I'm thinking of having a child. 53 00:06:08,780 --> 00:06:13,280 The doctor said, look, we've got this new pill, and if you and your wife take it for three months, 54 00:06:13,640 --> 00:06:17,330 the child that you'll have in three months time won't have asthma. 55 00:06:18,670 --> 00:06:22,810 I take the pill and wait three months, but that will be a different child. 56 00:06:23,380 --> 00:06:29,590 That's like having two embryos and you do tests on them and you predict one will have asthma and one won't. 57 00:06:30,770 --> 00:06:35,990 That indicates not only should we select against conditions like intellectual disability. 58 00:06:36,990 --> 00:06:43,110 But also minor conditions like asthma. Or to take another example, which is more controversial. 59 00:06:45,050 --> 00:06:48,860 If I went to the doctor and said, Look, Doctor, I'm thinking of trying to have a child, the doctor says, look, 60 00:06:49,220 --> 00:06:56,390 if you take this pill for three weeks, for three months and then try to conceive, your child will have a higher IQ. 61 00:06:57,470 --> 00:07:04,040 I'll guarantee you the child will have an IQ over 120 and be able to go to university, whereas who knows what will happen if you have a child now? 62 00:07:04,400 --> 00:07:11,750 I'd wait three months. Why? Because it's better to be able to go to university than not. 63 00:07:11,780 --> 00:07:19,910 You have a wider range of options and choices. So procreative beneficence is something that guides our mental, our medical advice, 64 00:07:20,360 --> 00:07:26,360 but also I think guides what would be our everyday practices if we reflected on them more. 65 00:07:27,260 --> 00:07:34,100 So it's good that you mentioned IQ. So there is this company in the U.S. genome prediction who claims that they'll be able to 66 00:07:34,100 --> 00:07:41,350 predict that they'll be able to help people select a GM through an embryo with a very high IQ. 67 00:07:41,360 --> 00:07:48,640 But so then we have to be pretty sure that IQ actually contributes to a good life. 68 00:07:48,650 --> 00:07:53,090 But how can we be sure about that? I mean, IQ aren't smart. 69 00:07:53,090 --> 00:07:58,700 Very smart people are also often a bit depressed just because they are so smart. 70 00:07:58,710 --> 00:08:05,030 So how how do we know what traits will continue contributes to well-being? 71 00:08:06,440 --> 00:08:10,759 So I think genomic prediction at the moment is only offering tests. 72 00:08:10,760 --> 00:08:23,120 But but they are offering tests for tests for identifying low normal intelligence, not very high IQ, but just IQ, which is normal. 73 00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:31,669 But the normal level is between 70 and 130 and less than 70 is intellectual disability. 74 00:08:31,670 --> 00:08:39,470 And they're offering tests that will give you a higher probability that an embryo will be somewhere in the lower range between 70 and 85. 75 00:08:41,520 --> 00:08:44,909 So. Is that a good thing? Well, 76 00:08:44,910 --> 00:08:51,389 we need to do scientific research and understand try to understand what are the benefits and disadvantages 77 00:08:51,390 --> 00:08:58,800 of having something like IQ or impulse control or whatever property you think that you might want to select. 78 00:08:59,370 --> 00:09:04,890 Now, as it happens, there is a lot of a lot of research on IQ. 79 00:09:06,510 --> 00:09:11,310 And what that research shows is that IQ is roughly 50% genetic. 80 00:09:13,380 --> 00:09:15,300 Using the sorts of research that. 81 00:09:19,000 --> 00:09:28,480 It's being used in this test, you could probably identify up to half of that 50%, but that still means you'll be able to make predictions. 82 00:09:29,140 --> 00:09:33,160 So is it better to have, you know, a higher or lower IQ? 83 00:09:33,610 --> 00:09:38,140 There is no evidence that higher IQ makes people less happy. 84 00:09:38,860 --> 00:09:43,830 Having a low IQ means that you'll have a lower range of job opportunities. 85 00:09:43,850 --> 00:09:48,420 You'll have to be in more supervised, lower paid jobs. 86 00:09:48,430 --> 00:09:59,740 You're more likely to be murdered. You're more likely to become ill, and you're more likely to be lower on the socioeconomic scale. 87 00:10:01,180 --> 00:10:07,830 Even even having a very, very high IQ, it's still worth increasing it. 88 00:10:07,840 --> 00:10:15,940 So if you if you think about patents as a measure, the ability to produce a patent means you've invented something that's useful to society. 89 00:10:16,690 --> 00:10:22,970 If you look at the top 1% of IQ, they produce more patents than the average. 90 00:10:23,500 --> 00:10:32,670 But even within that top 1%. The bottom quarter produces 3.5 times as many patents as the average, 91 00:10:32,760 --> 00:10:39,510 but Dentons in the top one quarter of that top 1% produces about eight times as many patents. 92 00:10:39,750 --> 00:10:46,950 So even moving even increasing your IQ, even if you're in the top 1%, will mean that you'll be able to produce more patents. 93 00:10:47,280 --> 00:10:54,569 So, I mean, this is just a sketch I'm going to I'm going to try to provoke you to because I think ethics is about getting you to think, 94 00:10:54,570 --> 00:11:00,990 I don't really care whether you're in favour enhancement or not personally and will whether society legal. 95 00:11:00,990 --> 00:11:03,720 I think it's good to think about it for yourself, 96 00:11:04,650 --> 00:11:09,990 but I think and I can only sketch a bit of the evidence, but clearly it depends on what the evidence is. 97 00:11:09,990 --> 00:11:16,740 But the evidence, as I see it, is very important for the individual, but it's even equally important for society. 98 00:11:17,580 --> 00:11:28,440 So when we used led in petrol and paint, it would reduce people's IQ by affecting children's brain development. 99 00:11:29,410 --> 00:11:33,790 And when we got rid of lead from petrol and paint people's IQ rose. 100 00:11:34,950 --> 00:11:50,780 This is called LED abatement. Based on those studies, experts have estimated that just a 3% increase in everyone's IQ would add 1.5% to GDP, 101 00:11:51,020 --> 00:12:01,700 150 billion to the US economy, reduce poverty by 25% and welfare recipients by 8% and males in jail by 18%. 102 00:12:02,090 --> 00:12:11,690 Massive effects. So the US military who don't have the sort of kind of restrictions that we have in civil society. 103 00:12:12,320 --> 00:12:17,870 The research arm of the US military has said even a small increase in the working 104 00:12:17,870 --> 00:12:22,820 population's IQ would have the same economic effects as the introduction of the Internet. 105 00:12:23,390 --> 00:12:29,540 So as far as I understand the evidence, it's good for the individual and it's good for society. 106 00:12:29,540 --> 00:12:37,489 And that's why if somebody told me that doing something would enable my child to have a higher IQ, I would do it. 107 00:12:37,490 --> 00:12:42,710 And that's why I send my children to school, because school is a cognitive enhancer. 108 00:12:43,250 --> 00:12:52,310 It actually increases IQ. And that's why school is compulsory, because it's a beneficial effect. 109 00:12:53,240 --> 00:13:00,260 Okay, so intelligence is one trait, but I want to zoom in a bit more on what you mean by the best chance at the best life. 110 00:13:00,260 --> 00:13:04,740 So the best life is a life containing much well-being. 111 00:13:04,760 --> 00:13:08,809 So does that mean we should create happy people? 112 00:13:08,810 --> 00:13:15,860 And does that mean that, for example, there is a reason to select for children, for example, Down's syndrome? 113 00:13:15,860 --> 00:13:21,739 Because, I mean, I don't know much about it, but some people say to have a cheerful disposition and are quite happy. 114 00:13:21,740 --> 00:13:28,580 So. Well, I think one of the most urgent questions facing society is what is a good life? 115 00:13:30,200 --> 00:13:40,280 So countries like Bhutan have moved from gross domestic product and economic markers of success of a country to the GROSS Happiness Index. 116 00:13:40,760 --> 00:13:45,110 So they follow a Buddhist tradition and say that what matters is happiness. 117 00:13:45,650 --> 00:13:50,600 And that's what we should be aiming for as a marker of success of our country and of individual lives. 118 00:13:51,590 --> 00:13:53,210 And happiness is certainly important. 119 00:13:53,600 --> 00:14:02,630 But if you think about your own life, well, at least when I think about my own life, my life, happiness is not the only thing I want. 120 00:14:03,020 --> 00:14:10,490 I want happiness, but I also want certain things that I think are good to have as a human being, 121 00:14:11,060 --> 00:14:16,980 like a rich and deep set of perks of relationships, friends and family, children. 122 00:14:17,750 --> 00:14:22,399 I want to be able to develop my talents. I entered this field of philosophy. 123 00:14:22,400 --> 00:14:25,580 I used to do medicine because I thought it would be more creative. 124 00:14:27,140 --> 00:14:30,260 I want to understand the world and myself. I want to improve. 125 00:14:31,190 --> 00:14:37,280 I want to engage with nature. I don't want to age all of these things. 126 00:14:37,490 --> 00:14:40,250 Some philosophers have said of our objective goods. 127 00:14:41,270 --> 00:14:47,780 So I think personally, I think well-being is a mixture of happiness and these these other kinds of goods. 128 00:14:49,010 --> 00:14:52,220 So why is why is IQ important? 129 00:14:52,730 --> 00:14:56,719 It's important to help you gain what are called rational beliefs, 130 00:14:56,720 --> 00:15:03,070 beliefs that are more likely to be true about the world or yourself based on the information that you have available. 131 00:15:03,080 --> 00:15:12,230 It's the ability to draw inferences. So I think that's a valuable property, whether or not it makes you happy. 132 00:15:12,530 --> 00:15:16,550 It enables you to gain a better understanding of yourself. 133 00:15:16,730 --> 00:15:23,660 I also think autonomy is important being able to set your own goals and live your own life according to what you think is best. 134 00:15:24,200 --> 00:15:28,910 So I think those three things autonomy, happiness and these objective properties. 135 00:15:29,210 --> 00:15:33,940 But this is hugely contested. For 2000 years, philosophers have debated this. 136 00:15:33,950 --> 00:15:41,960 But we have to start to answer the question because is it good for children like my children to spend hours on social media? 137 00:15:43,040 --> 00:15:49,220 Even if they want to. You have to have a yardstick to measure what it's doing. 138 00:15:50,000 --> 00:15:58,069 So the challenge of deciding whether this or that embryo is going to have a better chance of a better life is an important question, 139 00:15:58,070 --> 00:16:06,270 but it's also an important question for all of us. But doesn't that make it a bit too difficult for people who want to have a child? 140 00:16:06,290 --> 00:16:10,969 Doesn't that give them too much responsibility to try to think which of the 141 00:16:10,970 --> 00:16:15,050 possible children I could create will have the best chance at the best life? 142 00:16:15,080 --> 00:16:20,840 I mean, it's already very difficult to decide about what school you'll send your child to. 143 00:16:20,840 --> 00:16:24,200 That can already be very difficult. 144 00:16:24,340 --> 00:16:29,750 So. So to say to things with with power comes responsibility. 145 00:16:29,760 --> 00:16:38,390 So as soon as you can change the course of events, unfortunately, you become responsible for the outcome, even if you choose nothing. 146 00:16:38,780 --> 00:16:45,139 Because choosing nothing when you can avoid that outcome and knowing that there's, you know, 147 00:16:45,140 --> 00:16:51,170 another option within all the set of possible outcomes is to actively be choosing that. 148 00:16:51,770 --> 00:16:55,670 So unfortunately, we can't avoid the responsibility that we have, 149 00:16:56,060 --> 00:17:04,010 but it might sound very onerous to be searching through thousands of embryos to work out which one precisely is going to be. 150 00:17:04,670 --> 00:17:09,050 And for many people, it simply won't arise because they have a child. 151 00:17:09,080 --> 00:17:19,310 In the normal way, they become pregnant and they don't want to give up their pregnancy for the sake of, you know, a few IQ points, possible gain. 152 00:17:19,460 --> 00:17:25,730 They will only have a termination of pregnancy for something they judged to be very significant, like Zika. 153 00:17:27,740 --> 00:17:36,950 But when you're already having IVF and you produce ten embryos, we now have this ability to sequence the whole genome. 154 00:17:37,640 --> 00:17:44,390 And I think you've heard talks already where doctors are searching that genome for diseases. 155 00:17:44,390 --> 00:17:54,450 And that's a wonderful thing, in my view. But if there are also combinations of genes that are associated with either better or worse lives. 156 00:17:54,720 --> 00:18:02,730 In my view, we should treat them in exactly the same way as we treat diseases, because disease is not something that is a category difference. 157 00:18:03,300 --> 00:18:08,970 It blends into normality. Intellectual disability blends into normal IQ. 158 00:18:09,510 --> 00:18:12,570 Psychopathy blends into hard headedness. 159 00:18:13,710 --> 00:18:22,950 So many of the properties that we call diseases are actually just extreme ends of something that, you know, has degrees. 160 00:18:23,310 --> 00:18:29,400 And what matters to us is how our lives go. And we should make a decision about whether those properties are going to make for better. 161 00:18:29,400 --> 00:18:38,580 So. So do you think it's the parents who have to decide about what they think will give their child a good life or the best possible life? 162 00:18:39,030 --> 00:18:41,820 And if so, what do you think about cases where. 163 00:18:42,750 --> 00:18:52,140 So these these are real cases where death couples have used genetic technologies to choose a death child because on their view, 164 00:18:52,290 --> 00:19:03,780 deafness is not a disability. A child that is deaf, they say, will have a life as good as any as as hearing children. 165 00:19:04,590 --> 00:19:07,620 Deafness is more like deaf. 166 00:19:07,620 --> 00:19:16,380 People are more like a minority group comparable to black people or or women. 167 00:19:18,180 --> 00:19:22,350 So minority groups, minority groups, women. 168 00:19:22,830 --> 00:19:29,190 I was going to say now a group that that is that was a mistake. 169 00:19:29,460 --> 00:19:38,280 I was thinking of where the disadvantage that comes to you is is sort of mainly caused by society. 170 00:19:39,090 --> 00:19:42,780 And that was more the comparison between women and deaf people, where deaf people say, 171 00:19:42,780 --> 00:19:51,380 well, the disadvantage that we have is just because society is not adapting well enough to. 172 00:19:51,560 --> 00:19:58,020 So. So. So some some deaf people say that deafness is a culture and it's a difference, not a disability, 173 00:19:58,020 --> 00:20:03,420 that the disadvantages that this deaf people face are the result of the way society is constructed. 174 00:20:04,110 --> 00:20:10,860 So that, you know, if we all were able to sign or society wasn't constructed in a way that was based on, 175 00:20:11,130 --> 00:20:20,370 you know, speech and all and and oral signals, they would have as good a lives as as as any anyone else. 176 00:20:21,180 --> 00:20:28,530 And I agree with that to a large degree, that there are four ways in which you can improve human well-being. 177 00:20:29,190 --> 00:20:33,270 You can change the natural environment. You can change society. 178 00:20:33,570 --> 00:20:36,600 You can change psychology, or you can change biology. 179 00:20:37,200 --> 00:20:46,650 And it's certainly true that we that deaf people have very good lives and that their lives could be even better if society were reorganised. 180 00:20:47,220 --> 00:20:56,400 But even if society were maximally reorganised, we could not eliminate all of the disadvantages of deafness. 181 00:20:56,910 --> 00:21:04,560 So you won't be able to respond to auditory warnings or an auditory threats. 182 00:21:05,940 --> 00:21:14,970 And it's simply we don't have the resources to completely reconfigure society in a way that completely eliminates all of those disadvantages. 183 00:21:15,240 --> 00:21:18,450 At the moment, if we did, it would be no disadvantage at all. 184 00:21:18,870 --> 00:21:28,110 And I think being hearing for a child of a deaf couple is like being able to be bilingual or be a part of two societies. 185 00:21:28,740 --> 00:21:34,850 The hearing child can be both a part of the deaf culture and learn to sign, but also be able to hear and speak. 186 00:21:34,860 --> 00:21:40,980 So I think deafness has some disadvantage less than we think, but still some. 187 00:21:41,460 --> 00:21:50,580 Now we face this crisis of ethics where up until now we've been able to get away with what's called liberal neutrality, 188 00:21:50,820 --> 00:21:55,290 saying we're in neutral to what people think is good for themselves. 189 00:21:55,830 --> 00:21:59,670 And really, it's it's relative to what they think or what their culture thinks. 190 00:22:00,750 --> 00:22:10,620 But unfortunately, now we have to make decisions. So if a deaf couple comes and says to a doctor, we want you to defend our child, the child can hear, 191 00:22:10,620 --> 00:22:15,300 but we want the child to be a part of our culture and we want you to cut the auditory nerves. 192 00:22:15,690 --> 00:22:22,079 Or if they have a deaf child where there is a cure for the deafness, that has to be done now like a cochlear implant. 193 00:22:22,080 --> 00:22:28,560 And they say, we don't want to use the cochlear implant because we think that deafness is just the difference. 194 00:22:28,830 --> 00:22:36,870 Now you have to make a decision. Is it really just a difference, like having a different hair colour or being a different sex? 195 00:22:37,650 --> 00:22:42,300 Or is there something that is really going to be a disadvantage for that child to some degree? 196 00:22:42,690 --> 00:22:45,899 And we should correct that disadvantage. And I think it is. 197 00:22:45,900 --> 00:22:55,650 I don't. Think that people should be allowed to to deafen their child or refuse interventions that will give that child hearing. 198 00:22:56,160 --> 00:23:03,990 Now, when it comes to selection, I think it's slightly different because as just go back to my Zika example, 199 00:23:04,260 --> 00:23:13,290 imagine that a couple have a virus that if they conceive a child now said rubella is like this German measles. 200 00:23:14,160 --> 00:23:19,350 Imagine that a woman has German measles. And she says, look, I want to have a child. 201 00:23:19,350 --> 00:23:22,500 And the doctor says, look, if you have a child now, the child's going to be deaf. 202 00:23:22,770 --> 00:23:31,670 But if you wait three months, the child will be able to hear if she has a child now, she'll have one deaf child. 203 00:23:31,680 --> 00:23:35,130 If she waits three months, she'll have a hearing child. That's different. 204 00:23:36,480 --> 00:23:40,080 Now, if she has the child now, she hasn't harmed that child. 205 00:23:41,050 --> 00:23:48,730 Because that child won't exist. That's different to taking a child who can hear now and cutting the auditory nerves. 206 00:23:49,060 --> 00:23:55,600 So I think selection is wrong for a for a disability, but I think it should be allowed. 207 00:23:55,630 --> 00:24:01,060 I think people should be free to do that because it's a different kind of way of having a deaf child. 208 00:24:01,090 --> 00:24:09,340 It's a complicated point, but I think shows that philosophy is necessary to really carve up these cases more, more, more finely. 209 00:24:10,160 --> 00:24:17,469 So, I mean, if we sort of form ideas of what type of children should exist and shouldn't exist, 210 00:24:17,470 --> 00:24:26,200 if it's not completely up to the parents, in a sense, aren't we sort of at risk of sliding down the path to dangerous forms of eugenics? 211 00:24:26,200 --> 00:24:32,680 So if you think of eugenics, I mean, people think of what the Nazis did, 212 00:24:33,160 --> 00:24:40,000 forced sterilisation of certain groups, even killing people that were thought to have inferior genes. 213 00:24:40,750 --> 00:24:46,989 Think of progressives in the US in the early 20th century, in the US, in the early 20th century, 214 00:24:46,990 --> 00:24:54,309 there were many states that had laws that say that it was allowed to forcibly 215 00:24:54,310 --> 00:25:01,060 sterilise certain groups of people like the mentally retarded or the blind, 216 00:25:01,060 --> 00:25:07,910 the deaf, Native Americans and African-Americans, because they were thought to have inferior genes. 217 00:25:07,930 --> 00:25:12,549 So these were also people that had good things in mind. 218 00:25:12,550 --> 00:25:15,940 They wanted to improve genes in the human gene pool. 219 00:25:17,310 --> 00:25:23,430 But it ended up with really horrible practices. 220 00:25:23,430 --> 00:25:30,690 So isn't what you are promoting too close to this sort of scenario? 221 00:25:31,320 --> 00:25:37,380 Well, the word eugenics comes from the Greek, meaning well-born, and it means choosing better children, 222 00:25:37,950 --> 00:25:41,760 having the next generation better than the previous generation. 223 00:25:43,230 --> 00:25:48,270 And clinical genetics is a form of eugenics. 224 00:25:48,660 --> 00:25:54,660 It's enabling people to be born without diseases. So Down's syndrome screening is a form of eugenics. 225 00:25:54,660 --> 00:25:55,740 That's practice now. 226 00:25:56,490 --> 00:26:05,819 The difference between modern eugenics, which is sometimes called liberal eugenics and Nazi eugenics, or the eugenics of the 19th and 20th century, 227 00:26:05,820 --> 00:26:10,770 because it wasn't only the Nazis, it was practice in Sweden and the US and many, many parts of Europe. 228 00:26:11,940 --> 00:26:16,320 Is that, as you correctly said, Nazi eugenics was involuntary. 229 00:26:16,980 --> 00:26:24,180 People were forced to have terminations of pregnancy or forced to be sterilised. 230 00:26:24,780 --> 00:26:29,640 And it wasn't aimed at having a child with a better chance of a better life for the child. 231 00:26:30,030 --> 00:26:37,050 It was aimed at realising racist, social Darwinist ideals about how society should be. 232 00:26:37,800 --> 00:26:46,230 Now, modern eugenics is about offering parents the opportunity to choose and the freedom to say no. 233 00:26:46,620 --> 00:26:55,890 So 10% of people choose not to terminate pregnancies with Down's syndrome and they've absolutely free to do that and that freedom should be protected. 234 00:26:56,310 --> 00:26:59,639 People are free not to have screening for deafness and I think they should 235 00:26:59,640 --> 00:27:05,190 even be free to select embryos that have either Down's syndrome or deafness. 236 00:27:06,450 --> 00:27:08,970 So modern eugenics is very different. 237 00:27:09,330 --> 00:27:21,450 But would we think that parents are free to cause intellectual disability to their child, say, by shaking a baby or hitting a child over the head, 238 00:27:22,230 --> 00:27:29,700 causing a similar level of intellectual disability as that would be associated with with Zika or or even Down's syndrome. 239 00:27:30,060 --> 00:27:38,940 Or say there was a cure now for cystic fibrosis or for Down's syndrome, a pill that you could give in the early months of life. 240 00:27:39,360 --> 00:27:43,890 Would we think then parents should be able to decide not to give that pill? 241 00:27:44,610 --> 00:27:55,140 It's like a Jehovah's Witness saying, I'm not going to give my child a blood transfusion because I believe that the Bible forbids taking blood. 242 00:27:55,320 --> 00:27:57,510 And if we don't take blood, we'll go to heaven. 243 00:27:58,380 --> 00:28:04,920 It's entirely reasonable for adults who decide to not have a blood transfusion and die for their religious beliefs. 244 00:28:05,370 --> 00:28:09,059 But I don't believe that parents should be able to refuse lifesaving blood transfusions, 245 00:28:09,060 --> 00:28:13,650 and I don't believe we should be able to refuse treatments for major medical 246 00:28:13,650 --> 00:28:18,180 conditions or even minor conditions that are going to help the child later in life. 247 00:28:18,960 --> 00:28:26,160 So I fully agree that eugenics today is very different from eugenics in the past and there is no coercion involved. 248 00:28:26,160 --> 00:28:33,389 But some people are concerned that there is still quite a lot of pressure on people to do a lot of tests. 249 00:28:33,390 --> 00:28:43,290 And for example, in Belgium there was a quite a bit of controversy because the government made sure that the NIPT test, 250 00:28:43,290 --> 00:28:49,620 NIPT test, the non-invasive prenatal diagnosis test, you might tell them. 251 00:28:49,650 --> 00:28:55,080 Well, I'll tell you. I mean, it could be, I think, largely, um. 252 00:28:56,740 --> 00:29:03,280 Reef. It's like it could refund it. So it is very cheap for people in Belgium to have this test. 253 00:29:03,280 --> 00:29:08,739 So it does their blood tests. This is going to the and he need a test from the food uses. 254 00:29:08,740 --> 00:29:12,370 So out of those one it is Malcolm who won't go down the van. 255 00:29:12,370 --> 00:29:20,799 [INAUDIBLE] simply blood test anatomic DNA up on the futures and routes funding for his Mr. Zane Akeelah Inform the test student [INAUDIBLE] have 256 00:29:20,800 --> 00:29:31,270 to go pencil you see Campbell and Angland because that says on bond so many people thought that the government's making this tests so cheap. 257 00:29:33,470 --> 00:29:37,190 Actually thereby sort of put some kind of pressure on people. 258 00:29:38,660 --> 00:29:47,450 To have yourself tested and that there were worried that this would result in fewer cases, fewer children with Down syndrome. 259 00:29:47,450 --> 00:29:51,450 So people were concerned that there would be fewer children with Down syndrome. 260 00:29:51,470 --> 00:29:55,040 I don't think it was the case, but it's difficult to know what the effect was of the policy. 261 00:29:55,040 --> 00:30:04,010 But, yeah, it's so. So my question is, I mean, is there a reason to be concerned about this sort of pressure that can be created by policies? 262 00:30:04,340 --> 00:30:07,520 Well, one one concern is that it will create a pressure. 263 00:30:08,360 --> 00:30:15,710 And indeed, people have, you know, quite inappropriately been criticised for not using the screening tests. 264 00:30:16,190 --> 00:30:19,549 It it may reduce the number of people with that condition. 265 00:30:19,550 --> 00:30:29,750 And so the social support services for people and it may be seen to be expressing a view about the value of people's lives with those conditions. 266 00:30:29,750 --> 00:30:40,610 So another common criticism is that promoting screening for Down's syndrome expresses a negative view about people's lives who have Down syndrome. 267 00:30:41,090 --> 00:30:46,070 And I think all three of those are problems and those are problems that need to be addressed. 268 00:30:47,360 --> 00:30:49,220 So, for example, 269 00:30:49,700 --> 00:31:04,579 we should be putting more money into supporting and including people of a diverse range of features because they're people and somebody who has Down 270 00:31:04,580 --> 00:31:15,950 syndrome or intellectual disability or asthma or some other feature that makes their life in society more difficult should be given a fair go. 271 00:31:16,550 --> 00:31:24,650 And I think it's a mistake to equate people with some feature about themselves, 272 00:31:24,650 --> 00:31:35,240 like equating me with my asthma or equating somebody with Down's syndrome as as as being somehow identical with Down's syndrome are a person. 273 00:31:35,870 --> 00:31:41,410 Their name might be John, just like my name is Julian. They'll have friends, they'll have interests, 274 00:31:41,420 --> 00:31:51,229 I'll have a life that and so I think we need to move away from this reduction of people to their disabilities or features about themselves. 275 00:31:51,230 --> 00:31:54,380 And this also applies in the sort of trans to the gender debate. 276 00:31:55,250 --> 00:32:01,309 So I think we need to correct that reduction. We need to ensure that people are given a fair go and we need to ensure that they're 277 00:32:01,310 --> 00:32:05,930 not forced into choices because freedom is only real if people have a real choice. 278 00:32:06,410 --> 00:32:14,390 And that doesn't just mean a choice on paper. It means the real opportunity to choose the option that other people might disagree with. 279 00:32:14,720 --> 00:32:21,320 So that means not just supporting their choices, but enabling them to have the mental environment to make those choices freely. 280 00:32:21,680 --> 00:32:27,110 So I agree those are real adverse effects of promoting screening, 281 00:32:27,440 --> 00:32:32,059 but I don't think the response to it is we should ban Down's syndrome screening or we should discourage 282 00:32:32,060 --> 00:32:37,160 Down's Syndrome screening by making it expensive in what we should be doing is looking at those problems, 283 00:32:37,160 --> 00:32:41,960 which are separate to giving people the choice about something that is is is very important. 284 00:32:45,350 --> 00:32:50,399 Okay. Now, I just want to move on to some discussion about enhancements. 285 00:32:50,400 --> 00:32:58,129 So think about the gene editing experiments that were recently done in China that were mentioned earlier today. 286 00:32:58,130 --> 00:32:59,360 I think so. 287 00:33:01,010 --> 00:33:11,660 Scientists genetically modified genes in the embryo to ensure that the children that would develop from these embryos would be resistant to HIV, 288 00:33:11,930 --> 00:33:17,450 the virus causing AIDS. So this is a form of enhancement. 289 00:33:17,480 --> 00:33:21,680 These children would not have been ill, they would not have had AIDS. 290 00:33:21,680 --> 00:33:24,920 It's just making them resistant to AIDS. 291 00:33:25,970 --> 00:33:29,720 So do you think these experiments are a good thing? 292 00:33:32,080 --> 00:33:39,460 So those experiments I described as monstrous. But and I think they were unethical and shouldn't have been done. 293 00:33:39,550 --> 00:33:48,879 And the reason for that is that the scientist, Jan Quaid, he or her, I think it's pronounced in Chinese, 294 00:33:48,880 --> 00:33:56,500 but I don't speak Chinese, took normal embryos with a normal chance of a normal life, a good chance of a good life, 295 00:33:57,100 --> 00:34:05,950 and gave them attempted to give them resistance to HIV, which can be prevented in many ways by not having sex with people with HIV, 296 00:34:05,950 --> 00:34:11,110 by not sharing needles, by not engaging in risky practices, and it can be treated. 297 00:34:11,560 --> 00:34:17,379 So it didn't provide a necessary benefit, and it also exposed them to risks, 298 00:34:17,380 --> 00:34:28,360 because gene editing is a very immature technology that can cause damage too to the DNA in other areas and maybe cause cancer. 299 00:34:29,110 --> 00:34:35,530 So I think it was wrong to expose those children to a risk for no real benefit. 300 00:34:35,950 --> 00:34:45,640 However, if he had done the gene editing experiment with an embryo with a condition that was lethal very early in life, 301 00:34:45,880 --> 00:34:51,850 say in the first few months of life or even just the first few years attempting to cure that condition. 302 00:34:52,120 --> 00:34:57,340 So one genetic condition that's common in the Jewish population is Tay-Sachs disease. 303 00:34:57,880 --> 00:35:07,030 If you took an embryo with Tay-Sachs disease where that child would only survive a few years, the benefits are very great. 304 00:35:07,840 --> 00:35:10,680 And the risk if, for example, 305 00:35:10,680 --> 00:35:22,180 the the gene editing were to result in the premature death would be a much smaller loss to that to to that to that individual. 306 00:35:22,540 --> 00:35:30,400 So I think this sort of research is important at some point because what it's doing is trying to develop cures. 307 00:35:31,670 --> 00:35:37,180 For genetic conditions. And this is a kind of ultimate form of medicine. 308 00:35:37,190 --> 00:35:41,210 Instead of trying to give a drug the replaces the missing protein. 309 00:35:42,030 --> 00:35:51,120 That is the result of a genetic disorder. They tried to go back and correct the gene itself so the body can produce that protein in every cell. 310 00:35:51,630 --> 00:36:01,500 So I think the this kind of research is very important, but it should start with with embryos that essentially have nothing to lose. 311 00:36:01,770 --> 00:36:05,250 Instead of human beings with everything to lose. 312 00:36:06,150 --> 00:36:14,710 But you think that in principle I mean, you don't have any objections in principle to gene editing embryos, even if it's for enhancement purposes. 313 00:36:14,730 --> 00:36:19,410 If it were if the technology were safe. Well, I mean, think about it. 314 00:36:20,470 --> 00:36:30,370 If there were a vaccination for HIV that was completely safe and had no side effects, I would fall over myself to get it. 315 00:36:31,690 --> 00:36:41,589 That's what medicine is about. Now, if that, instead of being a vaccination, were a modification of a gene and it had no side effects, 316 00:36:41,590 --> 00:36:45,310 I would fall over myself to get it and also to give it to my children. 317 00:36:45,550 --> 00:36:52,270 The only difference between routine vaccination and gene editing is the risks. 318 00:36:52,960 --> 00:36:57,360 The outcome is the same. So, you know, genes. 319 00:36:57,490 --> 00:37:06,760 People have this kind of mystery about genes. Genes just make proteins and proteins contribute to who we are, but they are not who we are. 320 00:37:06,790 --> 00:37:12,249 There's nothing special about genes except that at the moment we are understanding them. 321 00:37:12,250 --> 00:37:16,210 It is very limited and our ability to intervene safely is very limited. 322 00:37:16,600 --> 00:37:26,530 But were it the science to progress? There is no difference between giving a drug and correcting a gene so that the body 323 00:37:26,530 --> 00:37:31,840 itself produces the same molecule that you were going to give you externally. 324 00:37:31,870 --> 00:37:34,000 So to take one example another. 325 00:37:34,420 --> 00:37:42,550 Well, to take one example, there's a disease called Gaucher disease, where an enzyme isn't produced and it causes brain and liver damage. 326 00:37:42,910 --> 00:37:49,620 Now, researchers have been able to to replace that enzyme and and essentially cure this disease. 327 00:37:49,780 --> 00:37:56,560 But it's really expensive. It costs £180,000, I mean, over €200,000 a year per patient to treat. 328 00:37:57,250 --> 00:38:00,790 So in the UK it costs over £20 million. 329 00:38:01,510 --> 00:38:06,760 Gene editing would be very cheap and what gene editing would do would be correct, that gene. 330 00:38:06,760 --> 00:38:12,819 So the body produces the enzyme it was supposed to produce every day for the rest of that individual's life, 331 00:38:12,820 --> 00:38:17,530 instead of having to give a drug every day. And gene editing probably costs about £5,000. 332 00:38:17,770 --> 00:38:22,930 So it's as a treatment for disease, it's it's really irresistible. 333 00:38:23,200 --> 00:38:24,520 Once it becomes safe enough. 334 00:38:24,790 --> 00:38:34,630 So one difference, of course, is if you gene at it's very early embryos, the changes that you make will be passed on to future generations. 335 00:38:34,900 --> 00:38:42,400 So one of the principles of practical ethics is you want to compare the intervention you're discussing, 336 00:38:42,970 --> 00:38:49,060 not with some Hollywood romantic fantasy the way you think the world should be, but with actually reality. 337 00:38:49,510 --> 00:38:54,760 I'll give you a whole range of things that change the DNA that's passed on to the next generation. 338 00:38:55,780 --> 00:39:00,340 Smoking. Having a child when you're older. 339 00:39:03,070 --> 00:39:09,550 Viruses. Getting a virus. All of these things change our DNA and they passed on to the next generation. 340 00:39:09,790 --> 00:39:17,169 Now, it's true that when you do a gene, editing at the stage of an embryo will be passed on to the next generation. 341 00:39:17,170 --> 00:39:21,130 And that means that that next generation is exposed to risks. 342 00:39:21,850 --> 00:39:23,800 That just increases the stakes. 343 00:39:24,010 --> 00:39:32,469 It also increases the benefits because if you're talking about correcting a gene that is abnormal, that would be passed on to the next generation. 344 00:39:32,470 --> 00:39:34,840 Now it won't be passed on to the next generation. 345 00:39:35,260 --> 00:39:42,400 So there's nothing there's nothing, first of all, unusual about changing genes that are passed on to the next generation. 346 00:39:42,670 --> 00:39:49,299 And there's nothing special about it in court. It just changes the magnitude of the risks and benefits. 347 00:39:49,300 --> 00:39:55,660 That means you have to do more scientific research before you do it. But there's no absolute line to do it to doing it, in my view. 348 00:39:57,190 --> 00:40:01,749 So a question about so how it could be used in society. 349 00:40:01,750 --> 00:40:05,860 I mean, is there a risk that it would increase inequality in society, 350 00:40:05,860 --> 00:40:13,210 that gene editing in embryos would be something that is used by the rich and that this would sort of result in a, 351 00:40:13,780 --> 00:40:23,290 say, a genetic upper class of intelligence, attractive, healthy people, because they had access to these technologies. 352 00:40:23,740 --> 00:40:33,640 And then poorer people just don't have access to these technologies exacerbating some of the socio economical splits between the two groups. 353 00:40:34,870 --> 00:40:38,590 All right. Let's take one example that is close to my heart. 354 00:40:39,490 --> 00:40:46,900 Ageing is completely normal. It's but and it's also one of the targets of enhancement. 355 00:40:47,560 --> 00:40:54,460 And in non-human animals, there have been mice that have been genetically engineered to live twice as long as normal mice. 356 00:40:55,180 --> 00:41:03,579 So let's assume and what Katrina is talking about is not correction of a single gene, but maybe modifying 50 genes, 357 00:41:03,580 --> 00:41:10,600 which has already been done in non-human animals and modifying them so that people don't age. 358 00:41:10,930 --> 00:41:17,590 They may be live to 120 with a healthy life, a healthy life and full capacity until they're 120. 359 00:41:18,190 --> 00:41:24,940 This is called health span, increasing health span. In my view, that would be a fantastic enhancement. 360 00:41:24,940 --> 00:41:31,130 It would raise huge social questions and questions about the number of people there should be in the world. 361 00:41:31,150 --> 00:41:32,650 So it will raise other questions. 362 00:41:32,650 --> 00:41:38,230 But in itself, I think it would be benefit for that individual, at least if a sufficient number of other individuals did it. 363 00:41:38,800 --> 00:41:42,130 So we can imagine a world where this is expensive. 364 00:41:42,610 --> 00:41:46,960 And not only do the rich have cosmetic surgery and sort of look younger, 365 00:41:47,230 --> 00:41:53,050 they actually are younger the younger because they've had their genes modified and they're not ageing. 366 00:41:53,800 --> 00:42:06,130 And then the poor like me age and sort of lose their capacities and and look at these kind of healthy, vibrant, productive functioning. 367 00:42:07,500 --> 00:42:10,980 Centenarians. Yeah, that would be bad. 368 00:42:12,000 --> 00:42:16,530 It's just like it's bad that the rich buy better health care or better education. 369 00:42:17,880 --> 00:42:25,950 And in my view, if it's important, it should be made made available through the public health system and everyone gets access to it. 370 00:42:26,190 --> 00:42:29,820 But it's it's even more important than that because at the moment. 371 00:42:31,140 --> 00:42:35,250 There are some people who get to 100 in really good shape and it's genetic. 372 00:42:35,680 --> 00:42:41,790 They're lucky. Nature allots every property about us unequally. 373 00:42:42,420 --> 00:42:47,129 The mere fact that you're here, you know, on a Sunday, a Saturday afternoon, you know, 374 00:42:47,130 --> 00:42:52,380 at this means that you're probably pretty financially and biologically privileged. 375 00:42:55,170 --> 00:43:00,630 There are a lot of people who aren't that well off. And gene editing can correct that. 376 00:43:01,050 --> 00:43:09,870 So gene editing could give those of us who don't age, as well as the centenarians, an equal chance of having the best things that life can offer. 377 00:43:09,870 --> 00:43:13,680 And science is giving us, you know, the power to do these things. 378 00:43:14,190 --> 00:43:19,560 And I think we should have the ethical framework to to do them in a way that. 379 00:43:20,680 --> 00:43:25,360 Creates the sort of lives that and the sort of society that we think we ought to create. 380 00:43:25,360 --> 00:43:29,980 And I think greater equality could also be the outcome as well as greater inequality. 381 00:43:30,430 --> 00:43:38,469 Thanks for that. I would like to invite some of the previous speakers to ask a question if it's very dark for me so I can't really see where they are. 382 00:43:38,470 --> 00:43:43,350 But if there's any of the previous speakers who would like to ask a question. 383 00:43:43,360 --> 00:43:48,610 Um, yes. Yeah. I was looking for you, but I couldn't get stuck. 384 00:43:49,060 --> 00:43:52,870 So if you want to go, it's. Yes. 385 00:43:52,930 --> 00:43:54,150 I thought you'd have some questions. 386 00:43:55,200 --> 00:44:04,770 The thing is, of course, you can say there will be this pill that will give me the perfect in perfectly intelligent baby. 387 00:44:05,790 --> 00:44:10,610 From a today's genetic standpoint, we know that we don't have this enhanced yet. 388 00:44:10,620 --> 00:44:18,660 You mentioned 50 genes, and I agree with you. There may be situations where, say, in ten years from now, we will have a better grasp on this thing. 389 00:44:19,140 --> 00:44:26,910 But aren't you applying rules and examples that are suitable to black and white situations? 390 00:44:27,210 --> 00:44:37,230 Now to your kind of inclining or declining field, can you say that something which is treated now because it's black and white, the Zika kit. 391 00:44:38,220 --> 00:44:48,210 Compare it to something which is which, which will always be great, and that your principle seems to be the same that apply for those two situations. 392 00:44:48,480 --> 00:44:56,820 Can you apply the same rules ethically or philosophically to things which are less tangible than others? 393 00:44:57,330 --> 00:45:04,050 Yeah, look, I think that's a great I'm glad you asked that we didn't actually organise this, but I think that's a really important point. 394 00:45:04,080 --> 00:45:10,139 Sometimes people come to me say, Look, Julian, you know, it's very simple in these sort of cases that you're describing. 395 00:45:10,140 --> 00:45:19,710 But but actually, genes don't work like that. The genes that will dispose to manic depression will also be associated with creativity. 396 00:45:20,340 --> 00:45:26,250 The genes that are associated with autism spectrum disorders, at least in the Aspergers range, 397 00:45:26,550 --> 00:45:32,040 are associated with abilities in in in science, technology, engineering, mathematics. 398 00:45:32,490 --> 00:45:37,049 There will be there will be. Introversion has advantages and disadvantages. 399 00:45:37,050 --> 00:45:40,680 Extroversion has different advantages. How do we know what's better? 400 00:45:41,400 --> 00:45:52,080 I absolutely agree there. There'll be much grey, as you said, it won't be clear whether it's better or worse to have that that constellation of genes. 401 00:45:52,320 --> 00:45:57,420 Maybe in that case we don't allow selection or we don't allow enhance and we just allow people, 402 00:45:57,930 --> 00:46:02,459 parents to choose which of them they whether they want to have the the embryo, 403 00:46:02,460 --> 00:46:05,100 which has got a higher chance of having a mental disorder, 404 00:46:05,100 --> 00:46:12,990 but perhaps having a higher chance of a creative life or one that's got a less interesting life but is mentally healthier. 405 00:46:14,670 --> 00:46:19,440 That's a great question. But that shouldn't stop us for looking from looking for the black and the white. 406 00:46:19,440 --> 00:46:23,639 And maybe there won't be much black and white once you get outside of disease, 407 00:46:23,640 --> 00:46:27,500 because disease is just something where we're really clear that that thing. 408 00:46:27,510 --> 00:46:32,760 But even now we're getting pressure where people say, well, maybe deafness isn't a disease or a disability. 409 00:46:34,080 --> 00:46:40,770 I think that we have to search for the black and the white, but also acknowledge that there's grey and there might be a lot of grey. 410 00:46:42,240 --> 00:46:47,880 And how far we'll go, we don't know because we haven't done the science and we also haven't done the ethics, 411 00:46:48,180 --> 00:46:53,460 we haven't done the we haven't set the values that we're trying to achieve properly. 412 00:46:53,940 --> 00:47:00,059 We haven't we haven't really thought through what we should be aiming for. But, you know, I think the jury's out. 413 00:47:00,060 --> 00:47:06,960 And, you know, I think it's a project that, you know, I think has got legs because I, 414 00:47:07,140 --> 00:47:15,540 I just think as a matter of observation, you know, inequality is quite profound and not all of that. 415 00:47:15,540 --> 00:47:20,130 Inequality is social, socially determined. 416 00:47:20,250 --> 00:47:24,210 Some of it has a biological contribution. Now, I could be wrong about that. 417 00:47:25,290 --> 00:47:30,390 We just really don't know at the moment because this has only really started in the last these 418 00:47:30,810 --> 00:47:38,010 these what are called g was huge studies of hundreds of thousands or millions of people. 419 00:47:38,010 --> 00:47:41,280 And genetics is just really starting. And that's what's kicked off. 420 00:47:41,280 --> 00:47:44,730 Until a few years ago. There were no genes for intelligence, there was nothing. 421 00:47:45,450 --> 00:47:51,570 And then they started these genius studies and then and the problem was they couldn't get large enough because they didn't have IQ scores. 422 00:47:51,840 --> 00:47:58,860 So what they did was they used educational attainment as a proxy, the correlates and that was found. 423 00:47:59,430 --> 00:48:04,440 And because you could get hundreds of thousands of people, they suddenly started to account for, 424 00:48:04,470 --> 00:48:11,250 you know, five, ten, 15, now up to 15% of the genetic contribution to intelligence. 425 00:48:11,250 --> 00:48:15,000 And I think they can get to 30 but not 50 without new methods. 426 00:48:15,270 --> 00:48:18,960 So I think we're starting to make it. That's only been in the last two or three years. 427 00:48:19,440 --> 00:48:23,180 So I think it's really too early to say whether it's just all grey. 428 00:48:23,760 --> 00:48:29,129 Yeah, but maybe then we should explain to people if they allow me to, to tell about this. 429 00:48:29,130 --> 00:48:37,020 Gee was. So what happens in your studies is people look at disease patients or intellect, intelligent people, people and less intelligent people. 430 00:48:37,260 --> 00:48:40,410 And then they look at the frequency, as we call it, of variation. 431 00:48:40,980 --> 00:48:48,720 And then people say, okay, we see that, for instance, one gene variant is more frequent in disease, but it's about proportions. 432 00:48:49,080 --> 00:48:51,930 So statistically it can be very strong. 433 00:48:51,930 --> 00:49:01,620 And you can say we have found that variant more often, but because the variant exists in both groups, you cannot reverse the interference. 434 00:49:01,620 --> 00:49:09,810 You cannot say. Well, now I have to say that you have a black box here, but you have less black than you have yellow. 435 00:49:10,050 --> 00:49:12,420 And here you have all the said national colours. 436 00:49:14,100 --> 00:49:21,990 And then on the other one, you have you have significantly, statistically, significantly more black rather than yellow. 437 00:49:22,410 --> 00:49:30,450 But if I would give you a black one, you can't tell me on which side of these two groups that black person would be or that black ball would be. 438 00:49:30,450 --> 00:49:33,839 It's another person. You see what I mean? So you can't reverse it. 439 00:49:33,840 --> 00:49:40,470 And this is a mistake that is being made when people interpret this kind of, gee, what studies and what. 440 00:49:40,800 --> 00:49:44,520 So another area that kind of throws. 441 00:49:45,730 --> 00:49:51,270 The sort of questions up is the genetic modify modification of non-human animals? 442 00:49:51,280 --> 00:49:55,150 We don't have genetically modified human beings. We have. 443 00:49:56,270 --> 00:50:04,070 Billions of dollars and massive, you know, experiments modifying characteristics in nonhuman animals. 444 00:50:04,280 --> 00:50:13,790 In fact, one sort of, you know, example you'll be familiar with, the greatest genetic experiment ever done is the breeding of dogs over 10,000 years. 445 00:50:13,790 --> 00:50:17,960 That's a genetic experiment of genetic selection that breeds certain properties. 446 00:50:18,890 --> 00:50:25,070 So when it comes to non-human animals, you're able to create striking differences. 447 00:50:25,070 --> 00:50:31,610 And, you know, from a biological point of view, we are very different from our cousins. 448 00:50:32,570 --> 00:50:39,440 And what is possible in non-human animals is possible in humans. 449 00:50:39,440 --> 00:50:49,669 So to take one example, I've got a book coming out, plug it in January, Love Drugs about biologically modifying love and I sell whisky. 450 00:50:49,670 --> 00:50:52,940 That's crazy love in the sense I'm using. 451 00:50:52,940 --> 00:50:56,270 It has three phases lust, attraction, attachment. 452 00:50:57,050 --> 00:50:59,960 We have the same phases as all other mammals. 453 00:51:01,220 --> 00:51:09,830 Love is one of the most highly biologically coded behaviours that creates the propagation of the species through reproduction. 454 00:51:10,640 --> 00:51:18,110 Each of those three lust is sexual desire for a quasi appropriate mate. 455 00:51:18,470 --> 00:51:25,070 Attraction is falling in obsessively attracted to features of that individual. 456 00:51:25,490 --> 00:51:33,260 And then attachment is a long term pair bond that that enables us to bring up our offspring. 457 00:51:34,010 --> 00:51:39,799 Each of those has different biological bases. You can modify the biological bases of all three of them. 458 00:51:39,800 --> 00:51:43,940 You can create lust by giving testosterone or in women flibanserin. 459 00:51:44,900 --> 00:51:55,010 Oxytocin promotes bonding. You can change the mating patterns of non-human animals by fiddling with the oxytocin. 460 00:51:55,010 --> 00:51:57,800 Vizer represses viso press a receptor system. 461 00:51:58,250 --> 00:52:10,190 The third part so you can create a monogamous foal where previously they were polygamous and that system has also been implicated in human attachment. 462 00:52:10,430 --> 00:52:16,040 And there are genetic variants. The Ivy Ivy PR one I polymorphism the 331 polymorphism. 463 00:52:16,040 --> 00:52:21,889 There's some association with the instability of relationships, very immature science, 464 00:52:21,890 --> 00:52:27,410 but in principle, what has been done with non-human animals could be done with humans. 465 00:52:27,410 --> 00:52:31,430 What's your view about that? What's my opinion? So I explain the hang just so. 466 00:52:31,520 --> 00:52:35,150 So if you want your husband or wife to be faithful, you'll be able to. 467 00:52:37,220 --> 00:52:40,410 That's right. And one can use oxytocin sprays. 468 00:52:40,430 --> 00:52:44,300 And apparently people look you more often in the eyes if you have these things. 469 00:52:46,400 --> 00:52:56,150 My opinion is still that it's a very multifactorial it's not a disease making love, but it's a very multifactorial thing. 470 00:52:56,660 --> 00:53:00,650 And again, how would you select on the genetic level? 471 00:53:01,190 --> 00:53:05,780 Would you? Okay, you can say I select against polygamy, I select in favour of whatever. 472 00:53:06,440 --> 00:53:10,759 But socially, would you try and change it the way you say it? 473 00:53:10,760 --> 00:53:14,830 Would you allow, you know, parents to to take a look at how children will? 474 00:53:14,850 --> 00:53:25,009 I mean, this is just all really at the very beginning, we're we're at the beginning of what I've called rational evolution of changing our biology, 475 00:53:25,010 --> 00:53:30,740 not just to survive long enough to reproduce, which is how it's been going, but according to our values. 476 00:53:31,280 --> 00:53:34,459 And, you know, how would you use it? You're exactly right. 477 00:53:34,460 --> 00:53:37,640 It's multifactorial. There are going to be lots of different influences, 478 00:53:38,600 --> 00:53:45,680 but I'm pretty sure that this is going to be an important part of our future and it won't just be about disease. 479 00:53:45,950 --> 00:53:51,590 Give you another example. So should I finish well, so that there's another gene. 480 00:53:51,800 --> 00:53:53,990 Okay, another one may have high and low. 481 00:53:54,080 --> 00:54:00,740 This is a gene where if you've got the one third of you have the low variant, two thirds have the high variant. 482 00:54:01,160 --> 00:54:10,280 The low variant is fine as long as you're not abused or neglected as a child, and then you're more likely become a criminal or violent or aggressive. 483 00:54:10,550 --> 00:54:17,330 I mean, again, if you want like this, but if I were having IVF and I had ten embryos, they're all healthy. 484 00:54:17,600 --> 00:54:21,830 And then, you know, the doctor comes says, we can tell you the Mayo status. 485 00:54:22,070 --> 00:54:27,560 Do you want to know it? Yeah, I want to know it. I'll choose the high embryo, not because I'm going to abuse my child. 486 00:54:27,770 --> 00:54:32,690 It's just because unless you can show me an upside to having a lot of variant, 487 00:54:33,170 --> 00:54:39,889 a child might end up in an environment where they're abused or neglected without, you know, outside of my control. 488 00:54:39,890 --> 00:54:49,190 So there will be, you know, ways in which or you could use that to test children who are in deprived environments to see which is more vulnerable. 489 00:54:49,340 --> 00:54:54,890 Or you could use it. Now, I don't think that studies that research is mature enough to use. 490 00:54:55,410 --> 00:54:59,370 In the ways that I'm describing. But if it were replicated and developed, 491 00:54:59,580 --> 00:55:09,120 we may well be using biomarkers to allocate resources to identify people at risk or even to select which children we have. 492 00:55:09,510 --> 00:55:13,880 I agree we will do the same for cancer risk anyways. Okay. 493 00:55:13,890 --> 00:55:17,879 Thanks so much, Julian, for this provocative discussion and think we agree on something. 494 00:55:17,880 --> 00:55:23,040 You agree on some things, maybe some extra oxytocin will make the bond a bit stronger. 495 00:55:24,450 --> 00:55:27,660 So thanks very much for this piece. Let's give Julian a big applause. 496 00:55:29,340 --> 00:55:31,630 Thanks very much for listening to this interview. 497 00:55:31,650 --> 00:55:37,860 If you like this, please visit the Practical Ethics Channel on YouTube where you can find more interviews like this.