GENETIC ENGINEERING

[More: Science News, 20 Sept. 1975.]

What he did, of course, is a superb example of genetic engineering, the big bogeyman waved by the scare mongers (such as ex-biologist and antiscientist Paul Ehrlich) who do not understand that there is not a single human discovery, from the wheel to the computer, that cannot be used either for, or abused against, mankind.

There are, presumably, no more evil minds among scientists than among nudists, ranchers or tightrope walkers; but even so, genetic engineering is hardly a particularly threatening aspect of the problem. "Police regiments consisting entirely of J. Edgar Hoovers" is the kind of tripe published by Time and Saturday Review; "cloning" (non-sexual, identical reproduction) has not progressed beyond carrots and frogs.

Genetic engineering is no more than deliberate action to produce desirable offspring, and as such has been practiced from before the dawn of recorded history. The vast majority of cultures throughout history have outlawed incest and that is genetic engineering, too. A pregnant mother who abstains from drinking is engaged in genetic engineering.

Then why all the pious fuss about self-restraint at the now famous Asilomar meeting last February?

A good question. It has now been answered by Erwin Chargaff of Columbia U., a pioneer in DNA structure discovery. Writing about the "Bishops of the Council of Asilomar" in The Sciences (Aug/Sep. 75), he says "The edict published in due course, which lists the various forbidden items, reads like a combined curriculum vitae of the conveners of the conference."