The New Fatalism

The fault might lie not in our stars but in our handed-down selves. Fatalism found a scientific basis last week as never before, but with a twist. We might be no more than an assembly of our genes, and our conduct only an expression of that configuration, but through a reading of the genes scientists have found a genetic recipe for change. We can be fixed, mixed and remixed like those songs these days if we can last another decade or two-and if we then have the money.

A scientific wonder, of course. But it's thrown up overwhelming ethical questions around what can and should be done and who has the means to do it. Scientists have found "the language in which God created life", President Clinton announced in satellite-linked company of British Prime Minister Tony Blair. God's language is now being patented by corporate America. Remember that other American President Ronald Reagan who said that when good people die and go to Heaven they'll find the gates guarded by the US marines. On earth, meanwhile, there are big bucks waiting to be made through this reading of God's ways.

Those one-way trips to Heaven could stand significantly postponed for some. The life expectancy of Tony Blair's new-born son Leo "has just gone up by about 25 years", Clinton said in the course of that televised Anglo-Saxon bonding across the Atlantic. Great for Leo, the world wishes him well. It might be quite another story for Leo's fellow newly-born in Africa and Asia. According to Elizabeth Chapman of the University of Cambridge, inhabitants of western Europe and the US, because of their "access to new drugs or the possibility of genetic tests, will benefit more than those who do not (Africans and Asians)". Chapman is an authority on the implications of genetics on society.

All these issues are relevant though premature. That old Fate is still around. The discovery is "too awesome to comprehend", Blair said. It might also just be too terrible to accept. Only the rich shall inherit the Kingdom of God. Jesus!

The discovery has been proclaimed the most dramatic scientific advance since the invention of the wheel. It could change life more than the wheel did and that may not take decades. Just two days after Clinton and Blair boasted to the world what their scientists had been getting up to, scientists in Scotland announced that they have begun precise genetic engineering of large animals, what The Guardian described as "patented designer animals". It might not be long before you see humans made to order.

There is talk of limiting the manufacturing of man but no agreement to do it. The Clinton-Blair silence on that was heard loud around the world. The debate is about money and patents. What's wrong with that, The Times argued. After all the money for this research came from corporate patents. And patents take time coming. When they do they hold for just 17 years. The debate is all about sharing among the haves. It will take a round or two of the World Trade Organisation to determine how exactly to patent the essence of life. Genetic colonisation seems round the corner, and promises to be far more inexorable than the earlier one.

The Wellcome Trust which funded a chunk of the research has acknowledged that individuals can be advantaged or disadvantaged because of their genetic makeup. They can, at least theoretically in the future, remix a human's level of optimism, her ability to dash 100 metres, the shape of her nose or even her capacity to imagine. Some children won't take after their mother or father but after an idea. What will be will be what we want. It all comes after all from the 38,000 to 115,000 controlling genes among the 3. 1 billion listed. Chapman, however, strikes a note of disagreement: "In theory, in the future, it might be possible to begin to change certain human characteristics over many generations by manipulation of certain genes. It's unlikely that any superpower would try to do this because of the complexities involved in altering bits of the genome and because it would be far easier to change people through manipulation of the environment rather than genes. For example, psychological or physical measures are much easier to put in place to influence the thinking of large numbers of people rather than attempting to change their genes through breeding."

Mike Stratton, director of the Sanger Centre in Cambridge which was involved in the research says: "It will surprise me enormously if in 20 years the treatment of cancer is not transformed." Michael Morgan, director of the Wellcome Trust, has spoken of "personalised medicine in the near future". That means a genetic diagnosis and gene replacement. In a culture where cosmetic surgery is routine, fundamental alterations are the next inevitable step. The brave new world ahead will almost certainly be peopled at places with half-robotic reproductions of the self. Our destiny lies not in our hands but in their labs.