reSee.it Podcast Summary
The podcast explores embryo selection and polygenic screening, a technology developed by Herasite. Jonathan Anomaly clarifies that this process, distinct from gene editing, provides comprehensive genetic information about embryos during IVF, allowing parents to select based on polygenic traits like disease risk (e.g., schizophrenia, diabetes), intelligence, and height. This is achieved by reconstructing the full embryo genome from existing PGTA data and parental whole-genome sequencing, effectively democratizing access by reducing reliance on individual doctors' understanding.
Anomaly addresses public apprehension, which often confuses embryo selection with gene editing or historical eugenics. He emphasizes the distinction between individual informed choice and coercive government control, noting that Herasite champions the former. Cultural differences in acceptance are highlighted, with Asian societies showing less moral distinction between screening for disease and positive traits compared to Western nations, where post-WWII taboos persist. Concerns about widening genetic inequality between socioeconomic groups are discussed; Anomaly suggests that while initial access might be limited, technology typically becomes more affordable over time. He argues against government subsidies, fearing it could lead to mandatory participation and infringe on individual autonomy, drawing parallels to debates around public health mandates.
The conversation delves into the "ickiness" often associated with genetics, which is frequently misconstrued as deterministic or judgmental. Anomaly posits that understanding genetics can be empowering, helping minimize disease burden and optimize for well-being. He tackles the "non-identity problem," explaining that choosing a different embryo means a different person is born, thus reframing parental "remorse" or "culpability." He uses analogies like preventing fetal alcohol syndrome or vaccinating children to argue that making choices to improve future offspring's prospects is morally sound.
Anomaly underscores the critical need for transparency and scientific validation of polygenic scores, particularly across diverse ancestries, to combat misleading claims by some companies. Herasite's research indicates "positive pleiotropy," where selecting against one disease often reduces risks for others, and intelligence correlates with numerous beneficial life outcomes. Regarding ethical boundaries, Anomaly suggests companies should refuse selection for clearly antisocial traits (e.g., sadism, psychopathy) or severe, debilitating conditions like Tay-Sachs, believing social norms are powerful deterrents. He differentiates the moral status of an undifferentiated embryo from a developed fetus, citing the high rate of natural spontaneous abortions due to genetic abnormalities. The discussion concludes with the technology's inevitability, its potential to challenge the "blank slate" view of human nature, and the geopolitical implications as nations adopt varying approaches.