DNA, Babies, Life, and Death

DNA evidence in a court case isn't new: but deer DNA in a poaching trial is.

Less than two decades after a cloned sheep's birth, British Members of Parliament okayed human cloning: using DNA from three people.

Scientists who think this is a good idea may be right: at least for some versions of the new tech.

1. Deer DNA Proves Poacher's Guilt
2. Science, Technology, and "Rational Reflection"
   • Mitochondria
   • Therapy and Death
   • Problems — and Opportunities — Ahead

I've said it before, a lot: new ideas aren't always bad, old ideas aren't always good, and thinking is always a good idea. (September 7, 2014; February 14, 2014)

---

Humans are People

(From sporki, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
(World Youth Day 2000.)

Human beings are people: all humans, no matter who our ancestors are, where we live, what we look like, or how old we are. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 357, 361, 369-370, 1700, 1730, 1929, 2273-2274, 2276-2279)

We have equal dignity, but we're not all alike: and we're not supposed to be. (Catechism, 33, 366, 1934-1938, 2232, 2393)

Maybe that sounds radical: but it's what I must believe, since I'm a Catholic.

Families are important, but not all-important. (Catechism, 2201-2213, 2232)

Children are an important part of a family, and they've got duties. (Catechism, 2214-2220)

So do parents, but it's not the same set of duties. (Catechism, 2221-2231)

Wanting to raise children is a good thing, but nobody has a right to have children. Children are not property. Nobody is. (Catechism, 2373-2379, 2414)

Science and technology, learning how things work and using that knowledge to make new tools, is part of being human. It's what we're supposed to do. Like everything else we do, ethics apply. That includes medical techniques intended to produce children. (Catechism, 159, 2292-2296, 2375-2377, 2414)

That's how we should behave. What actually happens is — sometimes regrettable, occasionally tragic, and that's another topic. Topics. (February 1, 2015; January 18, 2015; December 28, 2014; July 11, 2012)

Life and Health: "Precious Gifts"

Backing up a little: I must believe that human life is sacred; that life and health are "precious gifts;" and that healing the sick is a good idea, within reason. (Catechism, 2258, 2288-2295)

Individual Catholics might feel squeamish about organ transplants, for example: but the Church says they're okay.

On the other hand, we're not allowed to dry-gulch someone and take their kidneys — or kill one person to get parts for another. (Catechism, 2296)

We're also required to believe that humans are people: all humans. That includes folks who aren't old enough to vote: or breathe.

"...The inviolability of the innocent human being's right to life 'from the moment of conception until death'..."
"Instruction on Respect for Human Life In Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation Replies to Certain Questions of the Day," William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (February 22, 1987))

I live in a country where it's legal to kill people: as long as we do it while they're still young enough to be fair game. This convenient arrangement is getting extended to other folks: who are too old or sick to be worthy of life.

We don't call it Lebensunwertes Leben, but most Americans speak English: and that phrase got a distasteful reputation about 73 years back. (December 5, 2014)

It's been decades since I've heard the phrase "quality lifestyle" used in discussions of euthanasia. I thought it was a bad idea in my youth, partly because I realized that I'd probably get culled soon after the first sweep. (December 5, 2014)

Moving on.

People, Property, and Parts

Designating some humans as non-persons can be convenient.

Folks with the 'wrong' ancestry were once considered property in my country. We're still cleaning up the mess that left. Slavery is a bad idea, and we shouldn't do it. (Catechism, 2414)

Some Catholics have owned slaves, others have been slaves: and neither makes it right.

I didn't become a Catholic because we're all perfect people. Good grief: one Pope was elected three times, kicked out twice, and sold the Papacy once. Then there was the Verdun incident, and that's another yet another set of topics. (September 14, 2014; January 11, 2015)

Sooner or later, someone's going to suggest cloning 'important' people so that Senator Fogbottom or the CEO of Amalgamated Gigabucks will have spare parts available.

That was lurid fiction in 1979. Today? For all I know, someone's discussing a real-life analog to Clonus in Washington.

Life and physical health are "precious gifts." Maintaining or restoring health and normal function is a duty. So is not making health, fitness, or appearance, my top priority. (Catechism, 2288-2291)

That's why I don't feel guilty about having metal and plastic hip joints, re-engineered hands, and a brain that needs prescribed drugs to work properly. (August 29, 2014)

On the other hand, if I needed a new heart — breaking someone else down for parts wouldn't be right: even if the donor wasn't, legally, a 'real' person. Killing one person to help another isn't right. (Catechism, 2296)

Ancient, Not Old-Fashioned

The Catholic Church is old, ancient. Some of our traditions (lower-case "t") go back to the days when Rome was a superpower.

But we're not desperately trying to live in the 1st, or 11th, century.

Our basic principles don't change. No matter what century I lived in, the rules would be:

• Love God, love my neighbor
  (Matthew 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-27)
• See everyone as my neighbor
  (Matthew 5:43-44; Luke 10:29-37; Catechism, 1825)
• Treat others as I want to be treated
  (Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31)

That hasn't changed in two millennia, and it won't.

How we apply those principles to our daily lives: that's changed, and will continue to change.

But forgetting that humans are people was wrong when Rome went through four emperors in one year, it's wrong today, and it'll be wrong when Caesar's assassination, Zhang Zeduan's landscapes, and the United Nations Charter are seen as roughly contemporary.


(Zhang Zeduan's Along the River During Qingming Festival, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)


(From Raphael-Lacoste, DeviantArt.com, used w/o permission.)

Diversity, Unity, and Tradition

As a Catholic, I'm part of an outfit that's καθολικός, universal: a united and diverse people, embracing all cultures and all times.

Our Tradition, capital "T" is important: but the Catholic Tradition isn't our word for 'clinging to a bygone age.'

It is the living transmission of the Gospel.

Our Tradition is not about one culture or one era. It's for Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and everyone else; although the Acts 2:5-11 thing is about the Holy Spirit. There's Sacred Scripture, too. (Catechism, 74-95, 113, 174, and 126)

Before wrenching myself back on-topic, some definitions:

• "BIBLE: Sacred Scripture: the books which contain the truth of God's Revelation and were composed by human authors inspired by the Holy Spirit (105). The Bible contains both the forty-six books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New Testament (120). See Old Testament; New Testament."
• "MAGISTERIUM: The living, teaching office of the Church, whose task it is to give as authentic interpretation of the word of God, whether in its written form (Sacred Scripture), or in the form of Tradition. The Magisterium ensures the Church's fidelity to the teaching of the Apostles in matters of faith and morals (85, 890, 2033)."
• "TRADITION: The living transmission of the message of the Gospel in the Church. The oral preaching of the Apostles, and the written message of salvation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (Bible), are conserved and handed on as the deposit of faith through the apostolic succession in the Church. Both the living Tradition and the written Scriptures have their common source in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ (75-82). The theological, liturgical, disciplinary, and devotional traditions of the local churches both contain and can be distinguished from this apostolic Tradition (83)."

We should be thinking about ideas, old and new; not assuming that old is good and new is bad:

"...Let all the other sons of the Church bear in mind that the efforts of these resolute laborers in the vineyard of the Lord should be judged not only with equity and justice, but also with the greatest charity; all moreover should abhor that intemperate zeal which imagines that whatever is new should for that very reason be opposed or suspected...."
("Divino Afflante Spiritu," "Inspired by the Holy Spirit," Pius XII (September 30, 1943))

Part of that's quoted in the New American Bible's Preface. Pius XII was writing about about scriptural studies, but I'm pretty sure that applying the principle to new technologies makes sense.

---

1. Deer DNA Proves Poacher's Guilt

(From ThinkStock, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)

"Deer DNA used for first time in UK to prosecute poacher"
BBC News (February 4, 201)

"DNA from a red deer has been used for the first time in the UK to help prosecute a poacher.

"James Kennedy, 70, illegally shot and killed and then removed a deer from the Glenfinnan Estate in Lochaber.

"He claimed to having shot it lawfully at another location, but scientists matched a blood stain in his van to remains he had left on the estate.

"Kennedy was fined £100 and ordered to pay compensation of £70 at Fort William Sheriff Court on Tuesday...."

Maybe spending public funds on DNA testing in this case was overkill: or maybe not. Wildlife management is important here in Minnesota, where I live: and some of the most active supporters of game and wildlife laws are hunters.

I don't hunt, but quite a few of my kinfolk do: and I don't see that as a problem. Animals are God's creatures, but so are we: and part of our job is taking care of this world. (Catechism, 2415-2418)

Here in Minnesota, that job includes managing the populations of wolves, deer, and trout; and dealing with zebra mussels. I'm getting off-topic again. (March 17, 2013; August 17, 2009)

Apparently the odds of DNA profiles like these matching is one in 40 million: so either Mr. Kennedy is guilty, we're looking at a wildly improbable coincidence — or something else is going on. My guess is that Mr. Kennedy shot the deer on protected land.

Poaching isn't the worst crime in the world: but it's nice, having a tool that can help sort out what's true and what's not in these cases.

---

2. Science, Technology, and "Rational Reflection"

"MPs say yes to three-person babies"
James Gallagher, BBC News (February 3, 2015)

"MPs have voted in favour of the creation of babies with DNA from two women and one man, in a historic move.

"The UK is now set to become the first country to introduce laws to allow the creation of babies from three people.

"In a free vote in the Commons, 382 MPs were in favour and 128 against the technique that stops genetic diseases being passed from mother to child.

"During the debate, ministers said the technique was 'light at the end of a dark tunnel' for families.

"A further vote is required in the House of Lords. It everything goes ahead then the first such baby could be born next year.

"Proponents said the backing was 'good news for progressive medicine' but critics say they will continue to fight against the technique that they say raises too many ethical and safety concerns....

"...Prime Minister David Cameron said: 'We're not playing god here, we're just making sure that two parents who want a healthy baby can have one.'...

"...Estimates suggest 150 three-person babies could be born each year...."

James Gallagher's article doesn't say whether "...150 three-person babies could be born each year..." in England, or worldwide. Either way, it reminded me of the expert who figured that England would need three computers, tops. That was in 1951. (January 27, 2013)

Sooner or later we'll probably see something like "Jurrasic Park Meets The Boys from Brazil" hit the silver screen. Then there's "The_Clones_of_Bruce_Lee," and that's — not quite another topic, actually.

We already have headlines like "Churches oppose three-person baby plan." Here's an excerpt:

"...The Church of England and the Catholic Church in England and Wales said it was not clear the technique - adding a donor woman's mitochondria to another woman's egg - was safe or ethical.

"But a group of scientists has urged MPs to approve the procedure - intended to stop deadly mitochondrial diseases...."
(BBC News (January 30, 2015))

I'm not surprised that scientists who developed this technique want Parliamentary permission: and am pretty sure that they don't see safety or ethical problems. Unless they're daft, the scientists wouldn't ask for human testing until they were confident that their tech would work: and wasn't unethical, by their cultural standards.

Preventing lethal mitochondrial diseases, disease of any sort, is a good idea. (Catechism, 1503-1510)

However:

"...what is technically possible is not for that very reason morally admissible. Rational reflection on the fundamental values of life and of human procreation is therefore indispensable for formulating a moral evaluation of such technological interventions on a human being from the first stages of his development...."
("Instruction Dignitas Personae on Certain Bioethical Questions," William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (September 8, 2008)) [Emphasis mine]

It'd be easy to be excited by the prospect of a world without birth defects, where tragedies like Sharon Bernardi losing all seven of her children to mitochondrial disease didn't happen.

This is a personal issue for me. A friend and classmate died in her teens of a cancer that might have involved an inherited metabolic glitch.

My defective hips may be inherited, or could have happened for other reasons. My quirky neurochemistry is almost certainly inherited: my father was the same way, although less so; and two of my kids enjoy — or suffer — what I do.

The good news with the kids is that we knew what to look for: and this isn't the 1950s, for which I'm duly grateful.

I'm not sure that I'd want to be 'cured' of what makes my brain work the way it does, though. Like what Aristotle said: "There is no great genius without a mixture of madness."

Not that I'm a "great genius," but I am one of those creative types: and if being "normal" meant losing that — thanks; but no, thanks. I'd rather work with what I've got. (January 23, 2015)

Mitochondria

Mitochondria are little modules embedded in the cells of most eukaryotes — a five-dollar word for plants, animals, fungi, and critters with hard-to-pronounce names. Mitochondria do or control quite a bit of a cell's chemical processing, so bad things happen when they don't work.

Mitochondria have their own DNA, and may have started as independent organisms: moving into or getting absorbed by eukaryotes some 1,500,000,000 years back. If that's what happened, they're fully integrated into eukaroytes by now.

Therapy and Death

(From HFEA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("1) Two eggs are fertilised with sperm, creating an embryo from the intended parents and another from the donors 2) The pronuclei, which contain genetic information, are removed from both embryos but only the parents' are kept 3) A healthy embryo is created by adding the parents' pronuclei to the donor embryo, which is finally implanted into the womb[.]"
(James Gallagher, BBC News)


(From HFEA, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("1) Eggs from a mother with damaged mitochondria and a donor with healthy mitochondria are collected 2) The majority of the genetic material is removed from both eggs 3) The mother's genetic material is inserted into the donor egg, which can be fertilised by sperm."
(James Gallagher, BBC News)

Again, I must believe that human life is sacred: and that humans are people; no matter how young, old, or sick we are. (Catechism, 2258, 2270, 2276-2279)

That's why I'm pretty sure that "method one" isn't acceptable. You'd start with two people: one from the parents, and a donor. You'd wind up with one person: with the donor's mitochondria and the parent's DNA in his or her cells' nuclei.

I could rationalize that half a person is better than none, or that two halves make a whole, or dive into metaphysical gibberish. I won't, because I'm pretty sure that when two living people go into an operating room, and one comes out — someone's missing, and the leftover parts suggest that one of the originals died.

Somehow, that doesn't quite seem right.

Happily, the church doesn't insist that every bit of material with human DNA is a person.

If that were true — it's not — someone would die during every woman's cycle. Men produce about 100,000,000 viable sperm daily, replacing those generated about three months previously.

Thinking that enough people to populate California, Florida, New York state, Illinois, and Texas, every day in every man is — "silly" seems a mild term.

That's why I think "method two" may, in at least some cases, be acceptable. The procedure would start with two eggs — not people — and ultimately end with a person. Nobody dies: and that's a good thing.

Problems — and Opportunities — Ahead

As I said last month, I think we've got problems — and opportunities — ahead. Strictly therapeutic genetic manipulation may, in some cases, be okay: and a blessing to folks with inherited disorders.

The same technologies could be used to purge "undesirable" traits from humanity. Since many of my ancestors are of an 'inferior race,' I can hardly be expected to show enthusiasm for eugenics. And that's yet again another topic. (January 23, 2015; December 5, 2014)

Catholic viewpoints:

• Bioethics
  • "Instruction Dignitas Personae on Certain Bioethical Questions"
    William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (September 8, 2008)
    (From www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html (February 12, 2015))
  • "Document of the Holy See on Human Cloning"
    From the Vatican (September 27, 2004)"
    (From www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretariat_state/2004/documents/rc_seg-st_20040927_cloning_en.html (February 12, 2015))
  • "Reflections on Cloning"
    Prof. Juan de Dios Vial Correa, President; Monsignor Elio Sgreccia, Vice-President; Pontificia Academia Pro Vita; Libreria Editrice Vaticana (1997)"
    (From www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_30091997_clon_en.html (February 12, 2015))
  • "Instruction on Respect for Human Life In Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation Replies to Certain Questions of the Day"
    William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (February 22, 1987))
    (From www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documentd/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html (February 12, 2015))
• Sacred Scripture and being human
  • "Divino Afflante Spiritu"
    Pius XII (September 30, 1943)
    (From w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_30091943_divino-afflante-spiritu.html (February 10, 2015))
  • "Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God"
    International Theological Commission (July 23, 2004)"
    (From www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html (February 12, 2015))

My take on science, faith, and getting a grip:

• "Mutant Malaria, Designer Babies, and Ethics"
  (January 23, 2015)
  Particularly
  • Technology and Using Our Brains
  • Thinking, Curiosity, and Ulysses
  • Mad Scientists and Ethics
  • Getting a Grip About Designer Babies
    • 'Curing' Creativity?
• "Regeneration: Getting Closer to Growing Lost Organs"
  (August 29, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Brand-New Tech, Same Old Challenges
  • New Tech, New Rules, Same Old Principles
  • Living in 'The Future'
• "Getting a Grip About Dr. Moreau, Pigs, and Human Dignity"
  (February 14, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Olive Trees, Parapets, and All That
  • Serious News, Sensationalist Prose
  • The Pancreas of Pig 29
• "Science, Technology, and Being Human"
  (January 27, 2013)
  • Fear and Change
  • Learning the Right Lesson
  • Change and Choice
  • Blink, and You'll Miss Something
  • Faith and Science
• "Transhumanism, Bioethics, and Me"
  (April 8, 2012)
  Particularly
  • Eugenics, Enhanced Humans: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
  • Stronger, Smarter, Prettier: But Should We?
  • Ethics: Simple, Sort of

Mutant Malaria, Designer Babies, and Ethics

Malaria that's resistant to a very successful anti-malaria drug is spreading. The good news is that scientists know where this particular strain's immunity came from.

Other scientists say that "society needs to be prepared" for designer babies, and that "it is time for a serious public debate on the issue."

1. Malaria: Keeping Ahead of the Microbes
   • Mosquitoes and Microbes
2. Getting a Grip About Designer Babies
   • 'Curing' Creativity?

---

Technology and Using Our Brains

Maybe liking technology runs in the family. I've mentioned Arba Zeri Campbell, the first person in his part of the country to have a telephone, before. (August 12, 2012)

My first impulse is not fearing that we'll offend God by making lightning rods, or using the Internet. (January 25, 2014; April 27, 2014)

We've got brains, and are expected to use them. Part of our job is learning about the universe, and using that knowledge. Thinking is not a sin. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 154-159, 2292-2296)

Sometimes our curiosity gets us killed. Georg Wilhelm Richmann, for example, found out how an insulated rod reacts to a nearby thunderstorm. More accurately, other scientists did.

Professor Richmann is probably the first person to die while conducting electrical experiments.

Then there was the time scientists learned why "tickling the dragon's tail" is a bad idea. It wasn't a real dragon, survivors learned quite a bit about what extreme radiation levels do to humans, and that's another topic. (Apathetic Lemming of the North (October 17, 2014))

Thinking, Curiosity, and Ulysses

(From Google Maps, used w/o permission.)
(Casinal Pio IV, currently home of the Pontifical Academies of Sciences and Social Sciences, and the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas.)

I've run into the notion that religion, Christianity in particular, is against science — and pretty much any tech invented in the last few centuries. Some of my fellow-Christians seem dedicated to maintaining this stereotype. (April 4, 2014)

Folks who express concern about thinking 'too much' are, I'm sure, sincere.

We can use our brains to rationalize acts which are not good, like slavery or genocide. The problem isn't thinking. It's part of the mess we call "original sin." (Catechism, 396-412, 2313, 2414)

Curiosity isn't a sin, either. Yes, Dante's Inferno shows Ulysses in Hell: but Dante's Malebolge is where "simple" fraud is punished. That's fraud committed without particularly malicious intent.

Ulysses shows up in the eighth trench, reserved for deceivers. He's not there because he 'tampered with things man was not supposed to know.' (January 9, 2015; August 1, 2014)

Reasoning — thinking — is part of being human. We can use our ability to reason for good or ill. It's our decisions that make a difference. (Catechism, 35-39, 1704-1707, 1950-1960)

I didn't become a Catholic because there's a science academy at the Vatican. But I don't have to check my brain at the door when I go to church. (April 27, 2012)

Mad Scientists and Ethics

Mad scientists in the movies can be entertaining.

Their real-life counterparts, like Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov: not so much.

Medical experiments at Auschwitz and Dachau, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, and Willowbrook State School's Hepatitis studies don't show that science is evil.

They are, however, reminders that ethics apply to science: or should. (Catechism, 2292-2295, 2415-2418)

Since I'm a Catholic, I must believe that human life is sacred: all human life. (Catechism, 2258, 2270, 2273, 2276-2279)

A big problem with in vitro fertilization, for example, is that usually only one of the people conceived live. The 'extras' — don't. (Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the dignity of procreation — Replies to Certain Questions of the Day, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1987))

Wanting a child and not being able to conceive is distressing. Wanting to raise children is a good thing: but "the end does not justify the means." (Catechism, 1753, 2201-2203)

Expecting knowledge, or anything else, to take God's place would be daft: and against the rules. That doesn't make seeking knowledge bad. Being curious and developing new tools is part of being human. (Catechism, 2113, 2292-2295)

We're made in the image of God, rational creatures whose job description includes stewardship of the physical world. (Genesis 1:27-28, Psalms 19:2; Wisdom 7:17; Catechism, 282-289, 341, 373, 1730, 2375)

The trick is remembering that ethics matter: no matter how curious we are, or how much we want something.

"...if methodical investigation within every branch of learning is carried out in a genuinely scientific manner and in accord with moral norms, it never truly conflicts with faith, for earthly matters and the concerns of faith derive from the same God...."
("Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern Word-Gaudium et Spes," 36 (December 7, 1965))

---

1. Malaria: Keeping Ahead of the Microbes

(From Science Photo Library, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("Malaria parasites - seen tightly packed in this red blood cell - have evolved resistance to artemisinin"
(BBC News))

"Genetics of malaria drug resistance revealed"
Rebecca Morelle (January 19, 2015)

"The genetics underpinning resistance to a frontline malaria drug, artemisinin, have been revealed, scientists say.

"In South East Asia, malaria parasites have developed tolerance to the treatment, and there are fears that this will spread.

"Now, in the largest genetic study to date, scientists have identified mutations in the parasite genome that are linked to resistance.

"The study is published in Nature Genetics.

"The researchers say the findings will help them to identify areas where artemisinin resistance could spread.

"Lead author Dr Olivo Miotto from the Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Research Unit (MORU), in Thailand, said: 'Artemisinin is the best drug we have had for a very long time, and we want to continue this success story.

"'And for that its effectiveness has to be protected and sustained.'

"When the first malaria drug, chloroquine, was developed, researchers thought that the disease would be eradicated within years.

"But the malaria parasite has proved far tougher than they ever imagined. Drug after drug has been rendered useless as the parasite has evolved to evade treatment...."

"Evolved?" I've been told that evolution is the "religion of the antichrist," some folks think the Pope is the Antichrist, and that's another yet topic. (January 2, 2014; July 17, 2011)

I'm a Catholic, so I believe that God created a good world: one that's getting better, changing. Scientists use the word "evolution" when discussing one facet of this "state of journeying." (Genesis 1:31; Catechism, 282-308)

That gets me back to malaria, almost.

Microbes evolve quickly, partly because their generations are very short. On top of that, bacteria can swap genes with quite a few other critters. It's called conjugation, transformation, and transduction: so bacteria evolve really fast.

About a century back, antibiotics looked like the ultimate answer to disease: then we found out about viruses, and microbes developed resistance to the drugs. Informed speculation about viruses started around 1880s, and that's yet again another topic.

Ancient Romans thought malaria was caused by noxious fumes form swamps. Folks in the Renaissance apparently figured the same thing. "Malaria" means "bad air," "mal aria" in Medieval Italian.

The Romans were right, sort of. Most mosquitoes lay eggs in stagnant water, and Anopheles mosquitoes spread malaria. Malaria was around long before we were. Scientists found malaria microbes in 30,000,000-year-old mosquitoes.

Mosquitoes and Microbes

Mosquitoes have been around a lot longer: about 260,000,000 years. Anopheles mosquitoes branched off upwards of 120,000,000 years ago. Anopheles is the type that carries Plasmodium microbes that cause malaria. (June 13, 2014)

The four or five species of Plasmodium that cause malaria in humans aren't bacteria. They're parasitic Protozoans: unicellular eukaryotic critters.

In other words, one Protozoa is a single cell with a membrane around its nucleus. There will not be test on this. I'm a recovering English teacher — emphasis on 'recovering.'

Malaria starts out feeling like the flu. Some folks who get malaria recover, some die. The disease messes with the brain, spleen, liver, lungs - - - among other major systems.

The BBC article focuses on efforts to understand an artemisinin-resistant sort of malaria microbe. It looks like mutations on a gene called kelch13 give microbes this resistance.

So far, these resistant microbes have reached Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Myanmar/Burma. The BBC article says that resistant malaria parasites show up in the same place: the Cambodia-Thailand border.

Preventing, or at least slowing down, the spread of artemisinin-resistant malaria seems like a good idea.

So, I think, is finding a way so eradicate malaria entirely. We've done that before, with smallpox: and I'm pretty sure that life on Earth will continue, even if we kill off one more disease microbe, or the five species of mosquito that infect humans with it. (February 12, 2014)

Was eradicating smallpox the right thing to do? After all, Edmund Massey, an English preacher, said that God wants us to be scared of getting sick. I am not making this up:

"...The fear of disease is a happy restraint to men. If men were more healthy, 'tis a great chance they would be less righteous. Let the Atheist and the Scoffer inoculate. Their hope is in and for only this life. Let us bless God for the Afflictions He sends upon us, and grant us patience under them...."
("Against the Dangerous and Sinful Practice of Inoculation," Edmund Massey (1722))

Then there was Pope Pius VII, who said vaccination is "a precious discovery which ought to be a new motive for human gratitude to Omnipotence." That was in 1814. (February 12, 2014)

Life and health are "precious gifts." We're expected to keep ourselves healthy: within reason. Healing folks who are ill is a good idea, too. So is caring for folks who are dying. (Catechism, 2278-2279, 2288-2289)

That reminds me of Father Damien of Molokai. He's Saint Damien now, and that's still another topic. (May 11, 2010)

---

2. Getting a Grip About Designer Babies

(From BBC News, used w/o permission.)

"'Designer babies' debate should start, scientists say"
James Gallagher, BBC News (January 18, 2015)

"Rapid progress in genetics is making 'designer babies' more likely and society needs to be prepared, leading scientists have told the BBC.

"Dr Tony Perry, a pioneer in cloning, has announced precise DNA editing at the moment of conception in mice.

"He said huge advances in the past two years meant 'designer babies' were no longer HG Wells territory.

"Other leading scientists and bioethicists argue it is time for a serious public debate on the issue.

"Designer babies - genetically modified for beauty, intelligence or to be free of disease - have long been a topic of science fiction.

"Dr Perry, who was part of the teams to clone the first mice and pigs, said the prospect was still fiction, but science was rapidly catching up to make elements of it possible.

"In the journal Scientific Reports, he details precisely editing the genome of mice at the point DNA from the sperm and egg come together...."

At first glance, 'designer babies' sounds like a wonderful idea. Someone would go to a doctor, specify hair and eye color, intelligence, level of attractiveness, athletic prowess, and other traits: and get a 'perfect child.'

Maybe the kids would even come with a guarantee: so if they didn't meet expectations, they could be returned. Another, more expensive, option might be to order twins: take one home, and have the health service keep the other one as a source of spare parts, in case the 'real' child had a serious accident or disease.

Either way, that approach would treat people as commodities: property. That's unacceptable. Humans, no matter how old we are, are people. (Catechism, 357, 1929, 2258, 2270-2279)

Wanting to raise a child is a good thing. But children are people, not property. Nobody has a 'right to a child.' (Catechism, 2207-2208, 2378)

So, do I see research aimed at changing human genetic code as evil? It's not that simple.

'Curing' Creativity?

I see problems — and opportunities — with 'designer babies.'

Some genetic disorders like haemophilia and Tay-Sachs disease, are often fatal. Others, like Muenke and Williams are more like disorders or disabilities.

ADD, Asperger syndrome, or whatever it is I've got, may be a genetic glitch, too. So may be whatever went wrong with my hips. From some viewpoints, I'm a mess. (February 12, 2011)

I don't think I'd mind having lived with two normal hip sockets: but I'd have missed many learning experiences along the way.

At first glance, being 'cured' of ADD/Asperger's/whatever seems like a good idea. Maybe it would be. My attitude toward major depression is much less ambivalent. I'm certainly not going to stop taking the powerful antidepressant and other drugs that help me control my brain. (December 14, 2014; August 17, 2014)

But I wouldn't want to be "normal" if it meant losing the way I see the world.

I'm not in the same league as Paddy Considine, Johnny Dean, and Luke Jackson, but I suspect that some quirky neurological kits have an 'up' side. (September 1, 2013; December 9, 2012)

Then there's what Aristotle said: "There is no great genius without a mixture of madness," except my language wouldn't exist for a couple thousand years in his day. I don't think he'd have used Latin, either, although it sounds cool in that language: "Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementia."

Wrenching myself back on-topic: Since I'm Catholic, I must see humans as equal; and diverse. Each of us is a person, made in the image of God, creatures with rational souls. We're not all alike, though: and that's how it's supposed to be. (Catechism, 1934-1938)

I agree with Dr. Tony Perry: "...it is time for a serious public debate on the issue" of 'designer babies.'

I suppose discussion of genetics and bioethics among Catholics isn't 'public.' It's certainly not the sort of thing you're likely to hear on talk radio, and that's — what else? — another topic.

As far as I can tell, none of what I'll quote near the end of this post is definitive: but I think it makes sense.

Basically, learning more about how our genes work is a good idea. We're getting to the point where people conceived with disorders like Tay-Sachs disease can live past childhood. This is a good thing.

We're also close to being able to purge unwanted traits from humanity. This looks good on paper. In practice, applied eugenics has a bad track record. Really bad. (December 5, 2014; November 5, 2012)

Finally, here's part of what I found on the Vatican's website:

"...In theory, it is possible to use gene therapy on two levels: somatic cell gene therapy and germ line cell therapy. Somatic cell gene therapy seeks to eliminate or reduce genetic defects on the level of somatic cells, that is, cells other than the reproductive cells, but which make up the tissue and organs of the body. It involves procedures aimed at certain individual cells with effects that are limited to a single person. Germ line cell therapy aims instead at correcting genetic defects present in germ line cells with the purpose of transmitting the therapeutic effects to the offspring of the individual....

"...For a moral evaluation the following distinctions need to be kept in mind. Procedures used on somatic cells for strictly therapeutic purposes are in principle morally licit. Such actions seek to restore the normal genetic configuration of the patient or to counter damage caused by genetic anomalies or those related to other pathologies....

"...The moral evaluation of germ line cell therapy is different. Whatever genetic modifications are effected on the germ cells of a person will be transmitted to any potential offspring. Because the risks connected to any genetic manipulation are considerable and as yet not fully controllable, in the present state of research, it is not morally permissible to act in a way that may cause possible harm to the resulting progeny....

"...The question of using genetic engineering for purposes other than medical treatment also calls for consideration. Some have imagined the possibility of using techniques of genetic engineering to introduce alterations with the presumed aim of improving and strengthening the gene pool. ... Apart from technical difficulties and the real and potential risks involved, such manipulation would promote a eugenic mentality and would lead to indirect social stigma with regard to people who lack certain qualities, while privileging qualities that happen to be appreciated by a certain culture or society...."
("Instruction Dignitas Personae on Certain Bioethical Questions," William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (September 8, 2008))

---

"...The uniqueness of each human person, in part constituted by his biogenetic characteristics and developed through nurture and growth, belongs intrinsically to him and cannot be instrumentalized in order to improve some of these characteristics...."

"...Therapeutic interventions serve to restore the physical, mental and spiritual functions, placing the person at the center and fully respecting the finality of the various levels in man in relation to those of the person. Possessing a therapeutic character, medicine that serves man and his body as ends in themselves respects the image of God in both...."
("Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God, International Theological Commission (July 23, 2004))

Cloning, gene therapy, and being human; Catholic viewpoints:

• "Instruction Dignitas Personae on Certain Bioethical Questions"
  William Cardinal Levada, Prefect; Luis F. Ladaria, S.I., Titular Archbishop of Thibica, Secretary; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (September 8, 2008)
• "Document of the Holy See on Human Cloning"
  From the Vatican (September 27, 2004)
• "Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God"
  International Theological Commission (July 23, 2004)
• "Reflections on Cloning"
  Prof. Juan de Dios Vial Correa, President; Monsignor Elio Sgreccia, Vice-President; Pontificia Academia Pro Vita; Libreria Editrice Vaticana (1997)

My take on what we can do, and what we're learning to do:

• "DNA Test Hype; and Studying Life's Origins"
  (December 5, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Applied Genetics: Technology is Technology
  • Social Darwinism, Eugenics, and Me
  • Being human
• "Regeneration: Getting Closer to Growing Lost Organs"
  (August 29, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Brand-New Tech, Same Old Challenges
  • New Tech, New Rules, Same Old Principles
  • Living in 'The Future'
• "Mutant Mosquitoes and a Made-to-Order Cancer Treatment"
  (June 13, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Health and Using the Brains God Gave Us
  • Mutant Mosquitoes: When Swatting Isn't Good Enough
    • Malaria, Mosquitoes, and Living in Minnesota
  • Made-to-Order Cancer Treatment
  • Biomarkers, Cancer, and the FDA
• "Getting a Grip About Dr. Moreau, Pigs, and Human Dignity"
  (February 14, 2014)
  Particularly
  • Olive Trees, Parapets, and All That
  • Serious News, Sensationalist Prose
  • The Pancreas of Pig 29
• "Transhumanism, Bioethics, and Me"
  (April 8, 2012)
  Particularly
  • Eugenics, Enhanced Humans: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
  • Stronger, Smarter, Prettier: But Should We?
  • Ethics: Simple, Sort of