WEBVTT
00:00:00.560 --> 00:00:01.439
Chapter 6.
00:00:01.679 --> 00:00:02.640
Enhancing You.
00:00:04.080 --> 00:00:10.080
In Bernard Williams' 1970 paper, The Self and the Future, he sets out a thought experiment.
00:00:10.720 --> 00:00:15.599
Imagine you are a prisoner and your captor tells you that you are going to be tortured tomorrow.
00:00:15.759 --> 00:00:23.039
But he also tells you that you will not directly experience or remember it as your mind will be replaced with someone else's beforehand.
00:00:23.679 --> 00:00:28.399
Despite that caveat, most of us would still be scared for our physical self.
00:00:28.640 --> 00:00:37.359
As Williams put it, no amount of change in my character or beliefs would seem to affect substantially the nastiness of tortures applied to me.
00:00:37.600 --> 00:00:47.679
Correspondingly, no degree of predicted change in character and beliefs can unseek the fear of torture, which, together with those changes, is predicted for me.
00:00:48.079 --> 00:00:56.079
That being the case, perhaps our identity is not associated only with our mind, as suggested by Locke in chapter 5.
00:00:56.320 --> 00:01:04.480
Indeed, we are reminded of the physicality of identity by the touching stories that surround successful transplant operations.
00:01:04.719 --> 00:01:19.680
Sadly, many of the healthy organs required for such operations come from young people who have been killed in some kind of accident, and it is common for the donor's relatives to say that they feel their loved one is still present in the world thanks to the transplant.
00:01:20.079 --> 00:01:30.480
As one bereaved parent put it, after using a stethoscope to listen to their little boy's heart beating in another child's chest, part of him is still going to be living on.
00:01:30.879 --> 00:01:38.560
And that part of their child's identity is contained in the tangible physical organ that remains very much alive.
00:01:39.359 --> 00:01:45.760
There is nothing especially surprising about the way we associate our physical makeup with our sense of identity.
00:01:46.079 --> 00:01:54.480
If asked to differentiate ourselves from others, it is natural to point to our age, gender, and height, and the colour of our eyes, hair, or skin.
00:01:54.719 --> 00:02:02.319
Indeed, this association is perhaps stronger than ever thanks to one of the most significant scientific breakthroughs in modern times.
00:02:02.640 --> 00:02:07.359
The publication in 2003 of a fully sequenced human genome.
00:02:08.080 --> 00:02:17.840
Often described as the body's instruction manual, your genome is the sequence of over 3 billion genetic variants that give you your biological uniqueness.
00:02:18.159 --> 00:02:31.039
There is a copy of it in every healthy cell in your body, and to a greater or lesser degree, it determines your eye colour, height, propensity to disease, and even how long you may be able to stay on this Earth.
00:02:31.360 --> 00:02:42.879
In some cases, analysis of your genome can also be used to detect any predisposition you might have for a specific disease or to predict how well you will respond to a particular medical treatment.
00:02:43.520 --> 00:02:48.639
It is, in a sense, a treasure trove of data on what makes you you.
00:02:49.039 --> 00:02:54.719
And data is what lies behind the drive towards ever more precise and personalised healthcare.
00:02:55.360 --> 00:03:03.439
We have already seen a huge increase in the amount of personal biological data that we can capture, store and analyse about our bodies.
00:03:03.680 --> 00:03:22.400
Today, thanks to the advent of wearable technology, wireless communication and data processing power, we can keep this kind of information flowing and updating throughout every minute of every day, giving us new insight into our patterns of behaviour and the way that our decisions and our surrounding environment affect our health over time.
00:03:22.960 --> 00:03:34.719
Chris Dancy, often referred to as the most connected man on earth, due to the amount of wearable tracking technology he uses, believes that this is changing the way we think about our identity.
00:03:35.599 --> 00:03:45.199
I realized very quickly, he says, that my identity was being captured and catalogued and narrated in so many ways and moments, and those moments were data-rich.
00:03:45.439 --> 00:03:51.759
Wearables are popular not because they are counting steps, but because they are showing you who you are.
00:03:52.560 --> 00:04:15.919
Given the trend for data-driven healthcare and the fact that the cost of sequencing a whole human genome has fallen dramatically from$10 million in 2006 to somewhere around$500 today, it is no surprise that people are being encouraged to have their genetic data assessed to understand their own genealogy, propensity to disease, and personal well-being.
00:04:16.160 --> 00:04:34.079
Thanks to services such as Ancestry.com and 23andMe, there is a growing market for direct to consumer testing to enable anything from tracing a family tree, determining paternity, or quantifying your risk of developing a degenerative disease such as Alzheimer's or Parkinson's.
00:04:34.319 --> 00:05:04.480
As the Nuffield Council on Bioethics noted in its submission to the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in April 2019, quote, developments in commercial genomics can provide tools to enable people to take more responsibility for their health, adding that it has the potential to, quote, allow early intervention, give more personal control over one's health, save public healthcare resources, and alert relatives to important genetic conditions or predispositions.
00:05:04.800 --> 00:05:21.920
To find out more, I decided to take a genetic test which incorporated hormonal and nutritional analysis with Pippa Campbell, a UK-based nutritionist and practitioner in functional medicine, whose popular information-packed posts about health, wellness and nutrition attract many fans on Instagram.
00:05:22.160 --> 00:05:32.160
She partners with a company called Life Code GX to offer DNA testing via a simple cheek swab and a support package covering a variety of targeted tests.
00:05:32.480 --> 00:05:41.040
I found the results of my analysis fascinating and feel far more informed about how my particular body works, especially in relation to my liver and my adrenals.
00:05:41.439 --> 00:05:55.519
I learned, for example, that although my estrogen levels are dropping, what is being produced is not being eliminated in the right way, and that my body is finding it hard to detoxify it, partly because of a particular mutation in one of my genes.
00:05:56.240 --> 00:06:04.720
Coupled with the discovery that my estrogen receptors are too sensitive, this means that I now know not to ever undertake hormone replacement therapy.
00:06:04.879 --> 00:06:11.600
It would simply flood my body with additional estrogen that I can't detoxify, which would be the very worst thing for me.
00:06:11.920 --> 00:06:18.639
Following my analysis and armed with DNA-informed advice on food, nutrition and supplements, I lost nearly two-stone.
00:06:18.800 --> 00:06:23.759
And according to Pipper, there can be advantages where it comes to mental health advice too.
00:06:24.000 --> 00:06:35.680
A lot of psychiatrists are now training with LifeCode GX, she says, which have some very specific genes that help us understand medications and painkillers and how quickly different people detoxify them.
00:06:35.920 --> 00:06:41.839
Then the psychiatrists can use these reports to understand what will work and what dosing to prescribe.
00:06:42.319 --> 00:06:49.199
This is the kind of personalised health analysis I think we all want, and that national governments would do well to offer their citizens.
00:06:49.519 --> 00:06:59.279
In the UK, the NHS's long-term plan does envisage a more personalised care model, and such an approach is being piloted in some parts of England.
00:06:59.519 --> 00:07:05.519
But it is focused on the management of existing illnesses rather than a preventative health program.
00:07:06.000 --> 00:07:22.480
In the long run, it is surely more economical to provide individuals with their own analysis and design personalised nutritional, supplemental, and fitness programs for each rather than spending billions telling everyone not to eat too much and to get on a bike instead of taking the car.
00:07:22.879 --> 00:07:39.439
In 2012, the UK government announced the launch of the 100,000 Genomes Project, an ambitious scheme to sequence the genomes of 100,000 NHS patients, both children and adults, something that no one in the world had yet attempted.
00:07:40.000 --> 00:07:51.600
By December 2018, it had reached its goal, amassing a huge amount of genomic data, with a particular focus on patients with rare diseases and some common kinds of cancer.
00:07:51.839 --> 00:08:04.319
The primary aim of the project was not to provide diagnostic benefits to the patients who took part, but to provide a research resource that would help scientists harness the power of genomics to the benefit of all future patients.
00:08:04.800 --> 00:08:10.399
It was an enormous undertaking, but it also involved a good deal of ethical complexity.
00:08:10.720 --> 00:08:28.399
For example, parents whose child was participating in the project could, for the first time, opt to find out not only whether their child had the genetic variants associated with their specific condition, but also whether they had variants relating to their susceptibility to other diseases.
00:08:28.720 --> 00:08:42.639
And this has raised questions about how this kind of data could and should be used, not least because the same technology could pave the way for parents and practitioners to embark on the production of genetically designed offspring.
00:08:42.960 --> 00:08:59.120
Joyce Harper, professor of reproductive science at University College London, has worked in the field of in vitro fertilisation and specifically pre-implantation genetic testing for about 25 years.
00:08:59.360 --> 00:09:10.639
She explains that when embryos are created in the lab, they are also tested for any genetic disease that the parents could carry, so that only embryos free from disease are transferred back to the mother.
00:09:10.879 --> 00:09:19.039
In some cases, where there are viable embryos of both sexes, a couple may also be given the option to select the sex of their child.
00:09:19.279 --> 00:09:35.519
Professor Harper thinks that in the future, just as adults can pay commercial firms to have their genome sequence today, every embryo may have its genome sequence so that decisions can be made about what characteristics, traits, and skills the parents are looking for in their child.
00:09:35.840 --> 00:09:46.720
Speaking at an Oxford University Union debate, she highlighted some of the issues involved by using the example of two concert pianists who want a child with perfect pitch.
00:09:47.039 --> 00:09:53.360
Perhaps it would be possible in the future to only select the embryos that are carrying absolute pitch, she said.
00:09:53.600 --> 00:09:56.639
But what if that child doesn't ever want to play piano?
00:09:56.799 --> 00:09:59.200
What if they want to be a footballer instead?
00:09:59.440 --> 00:10:06.879
As she points out, we all know parents who force their own expectations onto a child, but this would take it to another level.
00:10:07.600 --> 00:10:19.840
We are presented with a similar scenario in Hacking Darwin, a book by Jamie Metzel, who was appointed in 2019 to the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Human Genome Editing.
00:10:20.159 --> 00:10:32.320
Metzel asks us to imagine a scene in a fertility clinic of the future, where an IVF patient and doctor are discussing how far the pre-implantation genetic testing of her embryos should be taken.
00:10:32.559 --> 00:10:46.720
The conversation moves from an everyday discussion about single gene mutation disorders like Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis to the less ethically straightforward notion of influencing traits such as gender and hair colour.
00:10:46.960 --> 00:10:58.879
And based on his belief that we will eventually know much more about the effects of multiple genes working together, Metzel then takes the discussion into even more complex territory, such as IQ.
00:10:59.440 --> 00:11:08.080
Surely, he suggests, any parent would want to give their child the best possible chance in life by giving it advantages such as a high IQ?
00:11:08.480 --> 00:11:15.360
According to Metzel, the decisions we would make in such a scenario are likely to be motivated by loss aversion.
00:11:15.600 --> 00:11:21.840
If you had the chance to increase your child's future chances in all these ways and more, wouldn't you do it?
00:11:22.159 --> 00:11:30.480
Wouldn't not giving your child these possible advantages at this stage be tantamount to disadvantaging it later in life?
00:11:30.720 --> 00:11:38.879
Because every other parent in a similar position would most likely be opting to enhance their child's traits, talents and life changes at this stage too.
00:11:39.440 --> 00:11:46.639
Right now, these are hypothetical questions, but the scenario that Metzel presents to us is nonetheless a plausible one.
00:11:46.879 --> 00:11:52.320
We need to consider what effects these kinds of decisions will have on the way we think about identity.
00:11:52.559 --> 00:12:04.639
Is it desirable or even ethical to design a person in this way, choosing features and characteristics for them that will affect not only who they are, but how they think about themselves?
00:12:04.960 --> 00:12:17.120
On the one hand, the idea that we could use genetic intervention to right a child's future can be seen as a way of opening up that child's opportunity to live a more fulfilling, rich, long and healthy life.
00:12:17.360 --> 00:12:22.000
But on the other, it has the potential to close down future possibilities.
00:12:22.240 --> 00:12:32.879
There may be characteristics that parents today might perceive to be valuable and to fit our present-day norms that in the future their children might come to regard as a disadvantage.
00:12:33.200 --> 00:12:41.759
As Joyce Harper muses, will parents become like programmers designing their children around particular characteristics that they desire?
00:12:42.000 --> 00:12:46.080
What about if we have fashions like the body shape of the Kardashians?
00:12:46.240 --> 00:12:50.159
But then when the children grow up, these fashions are no longer in mode.
00:12:50.399 --> 00:12:53.840
Will the children sue their parents for lack of judgment?
00:12:54.639 --> 00:12:59.200
American futurist Roy Amara came up with what is known as Amara's law.
00:12:59.360 --> 00:13:05.679
It states the tendency to overestimate the short-term effects of technology and underestimate the long-term effects.
00:13:05.919 --> 00:13:19.759
So while there is plenty of water to go under the bridge before individuals are faced with making such decisions, not least because we are only just beginning to understand how our genomes work, we should start considering the longer-term implications now.
00:13:20.159 --> 00:13:30.159
It is one thing, for example, to try to fix a disease caused by a mutation in a single gene or to alleviate functional problems that might be caused by genetic pathways.
00:13:30.320 --> 00:13:31.519
But as futurist Dr.
00:13:31.679 --> 00:13:39.039
Ian Pearson explains, the vast majority of human traits are governed by a much more complex genetic picture.
00:13:39.360 --> 00:13:43.200
The problem is that most things in your body aren't just covered by one gene.
00:13:43.360 --> 00:13:46.480
They're caused by the interactions of a number of genes.
00:13:46.639 --> 00:13:53.120
That number could be two, or it could be twenty, or it could be two hundred, and in most cases we just don't know.
00:13:53.360 --> 00:13:58.960
It's quite easy to discover that a particular gene is associated with eye colour or hair colour.
00:13:59.200 --> 00:14:05.840
It is not very easy to know whether that gene might be involved in anything else as well, he explained.
00:14:06.080 --> 00:14:17.679
Despite these complexities, scientists have succeeded in developing biological techniques to identify and characterize genomic targets and then make edits to those target cells.
00:14:17.919 --> 00:14:23.279
More than one technology exists to carry this out, but one in particular has stolen the limelight.
00:14:23.600 --> 00:14:37.759
It's called CRISPR, which stands for clustered, interspaced, short, palindromic repeats, or more technically, CRISPR-Cas9, where CAS stands for CRISPR associated protein.
00:14:38.000 --> 00:14:57.440
Pioneered by Jennifer Dudner and Emmanuel Charpentier, earning them the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2020, the CRISPR technique makes use of the Cas9 protein to add and remove genes from the cells of living organisms, and it does so in a way that has proved efficient, accurate, and, to quote, easy to use.
00:14:57.840 --> 00:14:59.120
Perhaps too easy.
00:14:59.360 --> 00:15:10.080
In 2018, Chinese scientist He Jiangqi claimed to have used CRISPR-Cas9 to edit the genes of two fetuses in order to give them resistance to HIV.
00:15:10.320 --> 00:15:18.879
More than that, he had gone on to implant both fetuses, leading to the birth of twin girls, the world's first gene-edited humans.
00:15:19.360 --> 00:15:34.080
Given that the CRISPR technique is still in the earliest stages of basic research, he Jiangqui's decision to use it for reproductive purposes was a gross violation of ethics, regulations and laws, and it provoked outrage from experts around the world.
00:15:34.399 --> 00:15:39.200
Jiangqui has since been fired from his job and sentenced to three years in prison.
00:15:39.360 --> 00:15:44.960
But perhaps he has given us a glimpse of a possible future, whether it's one we want or not.
00:15:46.080 --> 00:15:56.399
Back in the West, technology is changing the way we think about some of the most fundamental aspects of reproduction, sex and gender, both as individuals and as societies.
00:15:56.799 --> 00:16:00.799
And this in turn is changing the way we think about identity.
00:16:01.679 --> 00:16:10.399
Take, for example, Martin Rothblatt, the American entrepreneur and top-earning CEO of the biopharmaceutical industry in 2018.
00:16:10.639 --> 00:16:16.799
She believes that technology is putting paid to what she calls, to quote, the age-old apartheid of sex.
00:16:17.200 --> 00:16:21.279
That we will one day stop labelling people as male or female at birth.
00:16:21.519 --> 00:16:22.399
How so?
00:16:22.639 --> 00:16:33.039
Because in her view, to quote, sex lies at the heart of biology, and yet in transcending biology, technology has given us an explosion of sexual identities.
00:16:33.279 --> 00:16:34.240
End quote.
00:16:34.639 --> 00:16:42.159
We are living in a world where more and more people, like Rothblatt, are questioning the traditional binary approach to gender labelling.
00:16:42.399 --> 00:16:54.480
Transgender people, for example, have a gender identity or expression that differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, and medical science has now made it possible for transgender people to transition from one sex to another.
00:16:54.639 --> 00:17:01.519
But while people can make a great many changes to their biology, they cannot yet adopt different reproductive abilities.
00:17:01.759 --> 00:17:16.319
So while pregnancy is possible for a transgender man who has undergone female to male transitioning, as long as there is a functioning uterus ovaries and vagina, it is not yet possible for a transgender woman following male to female transitioning.
00:17:16.559 --> 00:17:19.359
However, that too might change in the future.
00:17:19.759 --> 00:17:34.240
In 2017, a US woman successfully gave birth to a baby after receiving a uterus transplant, and a further 15 women are known to have had the same surgery since, with eight giving birth all in Sweden.
00:17:34.960 --> 00:17:50.400
It is still early days for this form of surgery and there are considerable potential complications for mother and baby, but it opens up the possibility that the same treatment might one day be available to implant a uterus and then a baby in a transgender woman.
00:17:50.720 --> 00:17:58.319
The implications of this would be huge and would undoubtedly spark a great deal of serious discussion and debate at a societal level.
00:17:58.559 --> 00:18:00.480
But what would it mean for our purposes?
00:18:00.640 --> 00:18:03.920
How would it affect the way we think about individual identity?
00:18:04.319 --> 00:18:15.119
We got a taste of the questions we will have to wrestle with back in 2007, when transgender man Thomas Beattie hit the headlines as, in the words of the press, the pregnant man.
00:18:15.359 --> 00:18:23.680
As many asked at the time, after he successfully gave birth to a baby girl, can someone capable of giving birth be considered male?
00:18:24.319 --> 00:18:27.359
Is Thomas the baby's father or mother?
00:18:27.599 --> 00:18:28.400
Or both?
00:18:28.640 --> 00:18:29.599
Or neither?
00:18:29.839 --> 00:18:38.960
Perhaps as these traditional labels begin to fall short, we will have to define motherhood and fatherhood by something other than the chromosomes and sex organs of the person involved.
00:18:39.200 --> 00:18:49.519
Some argue that we will talk less about nouns and more about verbs such as mothering and fathering, actions that can be carried out by all, regardless of gender or sex.
00:18:49.920 --> 00:18:56.240
Or perhaps we'll need some new vocabulary to transcend biology altogether.
00:18:56.960 --> 00:19:07.920
Certainly Martin Rothblatt, a self-declared transhumanist, has talked about technology liberating us from our biology in relation to, though not confined to, our sex and gender.
00:19:08.720 --> 00:19:12.480
Ideas about transhumanism have been around for about a century.
00:19:12.720 --> 00:19:25.039
They were first advanced in 1923 by the British geneticist JBS Haldane, who was interested in how the field of genetics could over time be used to alter human characteristics.
00:19:25.279 --> 00:19:37.359
But evolutionary biologist Julian Huxley is generally considered to be the founder of the field after publishing an influential essay in 1957 on the future of humanity.
00:19:38.240 --> 00:19:47.599
At the time, of course, there were growing fears that humanity may not have much of a future, thanks to the heightening political and military tensions of the Cold War.
00:19:47.680 --> 00:19:55.759
And it was in the aftermath of the Cold War that transhumanist theory began to translate into intentional policy.
00:19:56.400 --> 00:20:16.559
According to Professor Steve Fuller, one of the world's foremost academic proponents of transhumanism, this tipping point came with the publication in 2002 of a report called Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance by the US National Science Foundation and Department of Commerce.
00:20:17.440 --> 00:20:33.519
Examining the potential for the fields of biotechnology, information technology, nanotechnology, and cognitive science to improve our mental and physical performance, the report recommended that such endeavours should become a national priority.
00:20:34.079 --> 00:20:44.480
This is the transhuman moment, says Professor Fuller, pointing also to the influential Converging Technologies report published by the EU in 2006.
00:20:45.039 --> 00:20:58.240
Both reports focus on how we can harness technology to enhance the human condition, whether it's helping people to live longer and healthier lives, or seeking to make populations immune to the threat of biological warfare.
00:20:58.400 --> 00:21:10.960
And in Fuller's interpretation, that is what transhumanism is about: a way to enhance our humanity, to prolong our life in a way that ensures we aren't holding ourselves back and squandering our potential.
00:21:11.200 --> 00:21:23.200
It is founded on the principle that humans are not just one of many species in nature, but a privileged kind of species, capable of much more resilience and progression than any other.
00:21:23.759 --> 00:21:27.920
And if we have that capability, why wouldn't we use it?
00:21:28.480 --> 00:21:37.279
Given that transhumanism is all about redefining what it means to be human, it obviously has a great deal of relevance to the question of identity.
00:21:37.519 --> 00:21:48.799
Professor Fuller points in particular to the idea of morphological freedom, which he describes as the idea that human beings have the right to be in whatever form they want.
00:21:49.039 --> 00:21:59.759
Explaining what this means, Professor Fuller suggests that we might think of our physical bodies as just one possible platform for living our lives, and that we could consider the possibility that we can.
00:22:00.160 --> 00:22:04.559
Migrate across platforms in order to enhance or extend our existence.
00:22:05.039 --> 00:22:07.599
If you want to upload your mind, you can do that.
00:22:07.759 --> 00:22:10.720
If you want to stay in your own body, you can do that.
00:22:10.960 --> 00:22:14.880
It's a very ontologically tolerant position, he said.
00:22:15.279 --> 00:22:19.119
It certainly seems as if the tide of public opinion is turning that way.
00:22:19.359 --> 00:22:36.000
A survey carried out by market research and insight company Opinium in 2020 suggested that 63% of people in Western European countries would consider augmenting their bodies with technology, with most believing that it would improve their quality of life.
00:22:36.799 --> 00:22:46.079
My own point of view is that many of the people born into the world today will by the middle of the century actively identify as transhumanists.
00:22:46.319 --> 00:22:55.279
One of them, I strongly suspect, will be the baby boy born to technology entrepreneur Elon Musk and musician Grimes in May 2020.
00:22:55.599 --> 00:23:02.799
Announcing the birth, the proud parents revealed that they were calling the boy XAA-12.
00:23:03.119 --> 00:23:12.559
Admittedly, no one seems to know how to pronounce this, including Musk himself, but at least Grimes explained what each of the symbols mean via Twitter.
00:23:12.880 --> 00:23:15.039
X is the unknown variable.
00:23:15.359 --> 00:23:20.880
AE, my elven spelling of AI, love and or artificial intelligence.
00:23:21.200 --> 00:23:26.720
And A12 is the precursor to SR17, our favourite aircraft.
00:23:26.960 --> 00:23:29.200
No weapons, no defences, just speed.
00:23:29.440 --> 00:23:31.920
Great in battle, but non-violent.
00:23:32.319 --> 00:23:37.359
If ever there has been a transhumanist baby name, then this must surely be it.
00:23:37.759 --> 00:23:59.039
Naming a newborn using mathematical symbols, fantastical languages, and military machinery may seem like a mere gesture, but I think it hints at the way in which innovative people with unusual sensibilities are starting to envisage a different type of future human, a more technological being.
00:23:59.680 --> 00:24:03.200
It is certainly a first, and perhaps the world isn't ready for it.
00:24:03.359 --> 00:24:18.240
The baby's name was later changed to XAEAXII, when it fell foul of state law in California, which states that only the 26 letters of the English alphabet can be used to register a name on a birth certificate.
00:24:18.400 --> 00:24:24.160
Another case perhaps of our governance structures lagging behind and restricting our human potential.
00:24:24.720 --> 00:24:29.599
The idea of a more technological human has long been a staple of science fiction.
00:24:29.759 --> 00:24:33.519
But the truth is that such humans are already living among us.
00:24:33.759 --> 00:24:40.559
Kevin Warwick, for example, is a longtime cyborg, a professor of cybernetics at Reading University in the UK.
00:24:40.799 --> 00:24:48.880
In 1998, he became the first person in the world, as far as we know, to have a silicon chip surgically implanted in his body.
00:24:49.200 --> 00:24:55.920
He saw it as a permanent smart card that would never be lost or stolen because it had become part of his self.
00:24:56.160 --> 00:25:11.119
And he imagined that it could one day include information about his blood type, national insurance number, qualifications, and even criminal convictions or speeding fines, creating a biological version of the kind of digital identity credentials that we discussed in Chapter 1.
00:25:11.359 --> 00:25:18.079
At the time of the surgery, Warwick was quoted as saying, Human intelligence needs to keep up with the intelligence of machines.
00:25:18.240 --> 00:25:22.079
If we implant silicon chips into humans, humans can stay ahead.
00:25:22.319 --> 00:25:32.960
And speaking in December 2019 on the Futures podcast, hosted by science communicator Luke Robert Mason, he reiterated that he couldn't see a reason why he wouldn't be chipped from birth.
00:25:33.200 --> 00:25:42.079
Just as an RFID, radio frequency identification chip, as a passport has benefits, you might need an upgrade from time to time.
00:25:42.240 --> 00:25:44.400
But it would be good to have it at birth.
00:25:44.720 --> 00:25:51.279
As a person develops at birth, they develop with that new sense as though it's always been there, he said.
00:25:51.680 --> 00:25:57.599
He then went even further, saying that he believed it was human nature to embrace such technology.
00:25:57.839 --> 00:26:07.839
To quote, People will say, well, I have the right to upgrade as an individual, to upgrade if I want an implant like this, to have some of those abilities.
00:26:08.079 --> 00:26:12.480
And humans, from when humans first appeared, have gone on to improve ourselves.
00:26:12.640 --> 00:26:18.160
We started to fly, we drive cars, we have all sorts of technology, so humans will go for it.
00:26:18.400 --> 00:26:20.480
Humans will go for the upgrade.
00:26:20.799 --> 00:26:29.039
One man who has already opted for the upgrade is Nicholas Badminton, a futurist in Canada, who decided to get a microchip implanted into his arm.
00:26:29.279 --> 00:26:39.519
Manufactured by a company called Dangerous Things, the chip can be used to connect the key fobs and swipecards, password readers, and other devices through passive RFID.
00:26:39.759 --> 00:26:43.680
When I spoke to him, Nicholas told me that he doesn't even notice that the chip is there.
00:26:43.839 --> 00:26:54.720
He said, The idea of implanting a microchip is more than just the current idea of turning a human into an access control device, key code, URL, Bitcoin cipher or otherwise.
00:26:54.960 --> 00:27:12.079
It's the beginning of a journey towards human 3.0, where we may realize true human biological symbiosis with technology and develop the abilities to upload information, augment our intellect, and extend our bodies, physical abilities or become biological depositories of data.
00:27:12.400 --> 00:27:20.640
When it comes to enhancing our bodies, I think it's likely that the initial technology of choice will be smart glasses rather than implanted chips.
00:27:21.039 --> 00:27:37.759
One of the other questions in the poll conducted by Opinium asked what physical attributes people would most want to enhance, and while 40% of respondents opted for overall physical health, the most popular area for specific improvement was eyesight, at 33%.
00:27:38.640 --> 00:27:44.319
I think this demand might help to make smart glasses the gateway tech to augmented humans.
00:27:44.559 --> 00:27:56.799
Unlike a smartphone in your pocket, they would always be on your face, surveying the environment, capable of recording and storing all you see and hear, and even uploading clips straight to your social feed.
00:27:57.039 --> 00:28:08.880
But while many of us find this kind of technology exciting to talk about, we are less inclined to get into a discussion about who would own the hardware and software involved, or the wealth of associated data.
00:28:09.119 --> 00:28:27.440
In the same way that the fictional Tyrrell Corporation asserted ownership of its bio-enhanced quasi-human replicants in the Blade Runner films, it is quite possible that a technology-enhanced human will have very little independence from the corporation that will own and enable his or her enhancements.
00:28:27.759 --> 00:28:35.440
After all, as consumers, we are extremely lackadaisical about reading the terms and conditions for a new smartphone before we sign up to use it.
00:28:35.599 --> 00:28:37.680
Why should it be any different in the future?
00:28:37.920 --> 00:28:44.799
Perhaps you would opt to have a shiny new chip implanted without fully realizing quite what you were agreeing to.
00:28:45.039 --> 00:28:53.839
It might include having to pay for routine upgrades to keep your implant functioning properly and allowing the company to make use of your data for commercial purposes.
00:28:54.079 --> 00:29:02.880
In a case such as this, who would have control of your data and the services that the technology enables, you or the corporation?
00:29:03.279 --> 00:29:08.720
Is this transhumanist libertarian road really a route to freedom at all?
00:29:09.839 --> 00:29:24.799
In July 2020, the World Economic Forum published a report intriguingly entitled Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies, which sketched out all the different ways in which medical and non-medical enhancements might lead to a brand new set of governance challenges.
00:29:25.039 --> 00:29:37.599
On the question of how the data associated with these enhancements might be used, the report says, to quote, some experts advocate a solidarity approach to health data governance, one focused on societal and community good.
00:29:37.759 --> 00:29:46.000
This shifts the focus to the shared societal benefits and responsibilities, which motivates people to share data for the collective and individual good.
00:29:46.240 --> 00:29:50.319
Biobanks are a good example for sharing biological data.
00:29:50.720 --> 00:30:03.200
In other words, this suggests that while it may not be deemed mandatory, there will be pressure on individuals from some quarters to make their biological data available to the technology platform or the state system for the common good.
00:30:04.160 --> 00:30:12.480
Setting aside these potential future issues of governance, transhumanists have other hurdles to overcome before their ideas become more mainstream.
00:30:12.799 --> 00:30:20.559
Sultan Istvan outlined three main challenges that are preventing the transhumanist philosophy from becoming more widely accepted.
00:30:20.880 --> 00:30:26.559
The first, he said, is religion, which he thinks tells us don't touch the body, it's sacred.
00:30:26.799 --> 00:30:35.680
But he is hopeful that the coronavirus pandemic might help people realise just how life-limiting it is, not to prioritize science.
00:30:36.480 --> 00:30:47.920
The second is a lack of understanding of the technology that already exists today and how quickly it is developing, which means that people are too quick to dismiss transhumanism as a science fiction.
00:30:48.160 --> 00:31:01.119
He said, for example, that people don't realize that by 2028 there's a very good chance that a quadriplegic in an exoskeleton suit will run dramatically faster than the fastest runner on planet Earth.
00:31:01.599 --> 00:31:09.519
A third factor that Zoltan identified is the way that institutional conservatism serves to hold up technological advancement.
00:31:10.000 --> 00:31:14.480
Genetic editing could be beneficial for every single person alive, he said.
00:31:14.720 --> 00:31:17.680
Yet what you hear is that this is something dangerous.
00:31:17.839 --> 00:31:21.519
We need a moratorium on it, we need years of considering it.
00:31:22.400 --> 00:31:34.000
But such delays are harmful in themselves, according to Zoltan, who argues that by holding back from the use of genetic technology we are causing unnecessary deaths of 150,000 people every day.
00:31:34.240 --> 00:31:45.279
It is a thought-provoking claim, but critics would argue that such caution is necessary when we are talking about technology that could lead to such a fundamental change in what it means to be human.
00:31:45.519 --> 00:31:53.759
One of the key issues for transhumanists to contend with is how the adoption of technology might lead to greater social inequality.
00:31:54.079 --> 00:32:04.240
In 2015, I attended the World Future Society Conference in San Francisco, where I heard a talk by one of the most renowned futurists living today, Peter Schwartz.
00:32:04.480 --> 00:32:25.599
Talking about precisely this subject, Schwartz predicted that one of the biggest disruptions to take place over the next hundred years would be the speciation of the human species, which he defined as the intentional differentiation, not just between species, but within species, to create a greater variety of forms.
00:32:26.240 --> 00:32:44.000
He said that he anticipated that the human species would, for the first time ever, be able to control its evolution and that the next big evolutionary step would be how technologies such as genetic engineering could be used to increase the diversity of future populations.
00:32:45.440 --> 00:32:51.920
According to the website Space.com, this extraordinary vision of our future has since moved closer.
00:32:52.160 --> 00:33:03.759
In June 2020, it reported on the first summary results of a study conducted by scientists on how to genetically engineer humans capable of surviving a mission to Mars.
00:33:04.160 --> 00:33:13.200
The study, which concentrated on twin American astronauts Mark and Scott Kelly, was designed to explore the effect of space on our genetics.
00:33:13.440 --> 00:33:24.720
It did so by comparing Scott's DNA before and after he spent a year on the International Space Station with the DNA of his twin brother Mark, who spent the same year on Earth.
00:33:25.359 --> 00:33:39.680
Now, having uncovered various insights from those experiments, the team of scientists is exploring ways to mitigate the effects of long-term space travel, with one possibility being to combine human DNA with that of another species.
00:33:40.000 --> 00:33:46.880
Among the candidate species are some aquatic invertebrates called tardigrades, also known as water bears.
00:33:47.279 --> 00:34:00.319
Tardigrades have the resilience to survive in all sorts of extreme conditions, and the scientists are hoping to pinpoint whether there is something in their genetic makeup that helps them to better protect and repair their DNA.
00:34:00.559 --> 00:34:10.000
If so, it might be possible to transfer that trait to human cells so that astronauts can withstand, for example, the effects of exposure to radiation.
00:34:10.639 --> 00:34:17.679
And of course, that would not only be immensely helpful for space travel, but for other aspects of our lives here on Earth.
00:34:17.920 --> 00:34:24.320
As one of the lead scientists on the project puts it, it's not if we evolve, it's when we evolve.
00:34:24.639 --> 00:34:30.159
But how will we evolve and perhaps more importantly, which of us will get to do so?
00:34:30.400 --> 00:34:37.039
Once such technological enhancements become available, isn't it likely that they will only be available to the wealthy?
00:34:37.360 --> 00:34:50.320
This is already true of IVF treatment today, which in the UK, unless you are lucky enough to receive NHS funding, can cost around£7,000 per round and around£5,000 to freeze your eggs.
00:34:50.559 --> 00:34:58.960
If genomic editing in search of preferred characteristics does become a trend, I imagine we can expect to see a similar pattern in terms of affordability.
00:34:59.199 --> 00:35:08.800
This then begs the question whether the wealthy will start to think of their prospective children as some kind of consumer choice, something to be customised with no expense spared.
00:35:09.039 --> 00:35:20.320
And if you aren't wealthy, well, your children will be left behind, unenhanced and potentially uncompetitive, struggling to match the biological advantages conferred on their more fortunate peers.
00:35:20.719 --> 00:35:31.440
In other words, this would be survival of the fittest, but where fittest might refer to qualities that are as much technological in origin as they are biological.
00:35:32.239 --> 00:35:53.440
Another concern is that in our money-oriented societies, every upgrade that people might opt for will in the end be designed to give them higher and higher productivity, until in the end the technologically enhanced human becomes little more than a unit of capitalism, creating and producing and forever upgrading to keep up with their expected output.
00:35:53.679 --> 00:36:08.559
We saw in chapter two that even a simple immunisation certificate has the potential to drive the wedge between different groups in society, between those who have some kind of technological access to what life offers and those who don't.
00:36:08.880 --> 00:36:22.079
Imagine how much of this kind of inequality would be magnified if there were different versions of humans within a society, some who have the resources to pay for their regular technology upgrades, and some who don't.
00:36:22.320 --> 00:36:30.239
Suddenly the idea of being 100% human would be seen as a disadvantage, an inferior form of being.
00:36:30.480 --> 00:36:40.239
Consider too the possibility that technologically enabled humans might one day be able to increase this gap by downloading additional educational abilities.
00:36:40.480 --> 00:36:44.960
Is transhumanism for us all or just for a wealthy elite?
00:36:45.440 --> 00:36:54.719
Conversely, those who do choose to be technologically enhanced could face a different kind of disadvantage: the loss of privacy and personal freedom.
00:36:54.960 --> 00:37:02.239
Once you start weaving any kind of technology into your biological makeup, you are running the risk of that technology being hacked.
00:37:02.480 --> 00:37:12.719
Uval Noah Harari outlined just such a scenario in an explosive speech in a meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos in January 2020.
00:37:13.199 --> 00:37:22.400
If you know enough biology and have enough computing power and data, you can hack my body and my brain and my life, and you can understand me better than I understand myself.
00:37:22.639 --> 00:37:30.159
You can know my personality type, my political views, my sexual preferences, my mental weaknesses, my deepest fears and hopes.
00:37:30.400 --> 00:37:39.679
In the past, many governments and tyrants wanted to do it, but soon, at least some corporations and governments will be able to systematically hack all the people.
00:37:40.000 --> 00:37:46.079
We humans should get used to the idea that we are no longer mysterious souls, we are now hackable animals.
00:37:46.239 --> 00:37:48.480
That's what we are, he said.
00:37:48.960 --> 00:38:05.440
Asking his audience to imagine what would happen if this power were to fall into the hands of a 21st century Stalin, Harari warned that if we do not grasp the new hell of digital dictatorships quickly enough, we will find ourselves trapped with no way to escape.
00:38:05.760 --> 00:38:08.079
It is a warning that we should take seriously.
00:38:08.239 --> 00:38:22.480
After all, governments already know more about us now than they ever did before, whether through surveillance or through the kind of genetic data that we willingly give up through health-driven initiatives, such as the Hundred Thousand Human Genome Project.
00:38:22.800 --> 00:38:26.079
But when does health management become citizen management?
00:38:26.320 --> 00:38:42.559
In June 2020, the New York Times reported that police in China have been collecting blood samples from men and boys, including those of preschool age, across the country to build up a genetic database of its 700 million-strong male population.
00:38:43.039 --> 00:38:52.000
The collection, storage and use of genomic data in this way is illegal, according to international law and even China's own criminal law.
00:38:52.159 --> 00:39:11.119
But the report also alleges that China's Ministry of Public Security began building a forensic genetic database as far back as 2003, and that it has been collecting DNA samples from those unconnected to criminal activity and without their consent since 2013.
00:39:12.079 --> 00:39:17.920
Setting aside the question of legality, what could be the purpose of collecting such a database?
00:39:18.480 --> 00:39:24.639
Perhaps it could be used for the speedy and accurate identification of criminals and so deter such behaviour.
00:39:24.880 --> 00:39:28.320
But it could also be put to much more sinister uses.
00:39:28.880 --> 00:39:39.599
Having such a comprehensive database would help enormously, for example, in the manufacture of viruses, bacteria, and other bioweapons to target specific groups.
00:39:39.840 --> 00:39:49.360
Not only that, but if a citizen's DNA were to be linked to their social credit score, the state would effectively have created a biological breeding score.
00:39:49.920 --> 00:39:50.800
Futurist Dr.
00:39:50.960 --> 00:40:04.159
Ian Pearson outlines a frightening scenario in which, he says, you might not be allowed to breed unless you've got particular genes the state wants, which would mean the government could decide what your population looks like.
00:40:04.400 --> 00:40:11.119
And this dystopian scenario could apply to any country in the world that is governed by an autocratic regime.
00:40:11.440 --> 00:40:32.480
If a government wanted to implicitly or explicitly favour or oppress particular groups in society, whether related to race, class, sexuality, gender, religion, immigration status, physical abilities, mental health, and even body shape and size, it might soon have the power to do so more effectively than ever before.
00:40:32.719 --> 00:40:49.840
With a powerful genetic database, rapid advancements in genetic editing, the development of chemicals to target particular gene carriers, the outcome could be a population that expresses only the characteristics and traits that the state deems acceptable.
00:40:50.480 --> 00:40:59.280
Your identity would no longer be something that you can evolve for yourself over time, nor even anything your community can bestow on you.
00:40:59.519 --> 00:41:05.440
It would be whatever successfully survived the environmental conditions set by a malevolent state.
00:41:06.079 --> 00:41:19.360
It seems then that technology has the power to liberate our human identity from the constraints of our biological origins, that our human selves could be enhanced to become something more than human, something transhuman.
00:41:19.599 --> 00:41:30.320
But it also has the power to introduce a form of biological inequality so fundamental that we could evolve into subspecies that can barely relate to each other at all.
00:41:30.719 --> 00:41:36.800
At the heart of the matter is how we choose to look at identity, what it means to be human.
00:41:37.199 --> 00:41:41.519
How much of it is a biological construct, how much of it social.
00:41:42.239 --> 00:41:49.920
And it's for that reason that I think we all need to engage with the new frontier being explored by the science of genetics today.
00:41:50.239 --> 00:42:04.000
We need to participate actively in the discussion and debate about how much of who we are is in our nurture and in our nature, and whether in the future we will need nature at all.
00:00:00.560 --> 00:00:01.439
Chapter 6.
00:00:01.679 --> 00:00:02.640
Enhancing You.
00:00:04.080 --> 00:00:10.080
In Bernard Williams' 1970 paper, The Self and the Future, he sets out a thought experiment.
00:00:10.720 --> 00:00:15.599
Imagine you are a prisoner and your captor tells you that you are going to be tortured tomorrow.
00:00:15.759 --> 00:00:23.039
But he also tells you that you will not directly experience or remember it as your mind will be replaced with someone else's beforehand.
00:00:23.679 --> 00:00:28.399
Despite that caveat, most of us would still be scared for our physical self.
00:00:28.640 --> 00:00:37.359
As Williams put it, no amount of change in my character or beliefs would seem to affect substantially the nastiness of tortures applied to me.
00:00:37.600 --> 00:00:47.679
Correspondingly, no degree of predicted change in character and beliefs can unseek the fear of torture, which, together with those changes, is predicted for me.
00:00:48.079 --> 00:00:56.079
That being the case, perhaps our identity is not associated only with our mind, as suggested by Locke in chapter 5.
00:00:56.320 --> 00:01:04.480
Indeed, we are reminded of the physicality of identity by the touching stories that surround successful transplant operations.
00:01:04.719 --> 00:01:19.680
Sadly, many of the healthy organs required for such operations come from young people who have been killed in some kind of accident, and it is common for the donor's relatives to say that they feel their loved one is still present in the world thanks to the transplant.
00:01:20.079 --> 00:01:30.480
As one bereaved parent put it, after using a stethoscope to listen to their little boy's heart beating in another child's chest, part of him is still going to be living on.
00:01:30.879 --> 00:01:38.560
And that part of their child's identity is contained in the tangible physical organ that remains very much alive.
00:01:39.359 --> 00:01:45.760
There is nothing especially surprising about the way we associate our physical makeup with our sense of identity.
00:01:46.079 --> 00:01:54.480
If asked to differentiate ourselves from others, it is natural to point to our age, gender, and height, and the colour of our eyes, hair, or skin.
00:01:54.719 --> 00:02:02.319
Indeed, this association is perhaps stronger than ever thanks to one of the most significant scientific breakthroughs in modern times.
00:02:02.640 --> 00:02:07.359
The publication in 2003 of a fully sequenced human genome.
00:02:08.080 --> 00:02:17.840
Often described as the body's instruction manual, your genome is the sequence of over 3 billion genetic variants that give you your biological uniqueness.
00:02:18.159 --> 00:02:31.039
There is a copy of it in every healthy cell in your body, and to a greater or lesser degree, it determines your eye colour, height, propensity to disease, and even how long you may be able to stay on this Earth.
00:02:31.360 --> 00:02:42.879
In some cases, analysis of your genome can also be used to detect any predisposition you might have for a specific disease or to predict how well you will respond to a particular medical treatment.
00:02:43.520 --> 00:02:48.639
It is, in a sense, a treasure trove of data on what makes you you.
00:02:49.039 --> 00:02:54.719
And data is what lies behind the drive towards ever more precise and personalised healthcare.
00:02:55.360 --> 00:03:03.439
We have already seen a huge increase in the amount of personal biological data that we can capture, store and analyse about our bodies.
00:03:03.680 --> 00:03:22.400
Today, thanks to the advent of wearable technology, wireless communication and data processing power, we can keep this kind of information flowing and updating throughout every minute of every day, giving us new insight into our patterns of behaviour and the way that our decisions and our surrounding environment affect our health over time.
00:03:22.960 --> 00:03:34.719
Chris Dancy, often referred to as the most connected man on earth, due to the amount of wearable tracking technology he uses, believes that this is changing the way we think about our identity.
00:03:35.599 --> 00:03:45.199
I realized very quickly, he says, that my identity was being captured and catalogued and narrated in so many ways and moments, and those moments were data-rich.
00:03:45.439 --> 00:03:51.759
Wearables are popular not because they are counting steps, but because they are showing you who you are.
00:03:52.560 --> 00:04:15.919
Given the trend for data-driven healthcare and the fact that the cost of sequencing a whole human genome has fallen dramatically from$10 million in 2006 to somewhere around$500 today, it is no surprise that people are being encouraged to have their genetic data assessed to understand their own genealogy, propensity to disease, and personal well-being.
00:04:16.160 --> 00:04:34.079
Thanks to services such as Ancestry.com and 23andMe, there is a growing market for direct to consumer testing to enable anything from tracing a family tree, determining paternity, or quantifying your risk of developing a degenerative disease such as Alzheimer's or Parkinson's.
00:04:34.319 --> 00:05:04.480
As the Nuffield Council on Bioethics noted in its submission to the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in April 2019, quote, developments in commercial genomics can provide tools to enable people to take more responsibility for their health, adding that it has the potential to, quote, allow early intervention, give more personal control over one's health, save public healthcare resources, and alert relatives to important genetic conditions or predispositions.
00:05:04.800 --> 00:05:21.920
To find out more, I decided to take a genetic test which incorporated hormonal and nutritional analysis with Pippa Campbell, a UK-based nutritionist and practitioner in functional medicine, whose popular information-packed posts about health, wellness and nutrition attract many fans on Instagram.
00:05:22.160 --> 00:05:32.160
She partners with a company called Life Code GX to offer DNA testing via a simple cheek swab and a support package covering a variety of targeted tests.
00:05:32.480 --> 00:05:41.040
I found the results of my analysis fascinating and feel far more informed about how my particular body works, especially in relation to my liver and my adrenals.
00:05:41.439 --> 00:05:55.519
I learned, for example, that although my estrogen levels are dropping, what is being produced is not being eliminated in the right way, and that my body is finding it hard to detoxify it, partly because of a particular mutation in one of my genes.
00:05:56.240 --> 00:06:04.720
Coupled with the discovery that my estrogen receptors are too sensitive, this means that I now know not to ever undertake hormone replacement therapy.
00:06:04.879 --> 00:06:11.600
It would simply flood my body with additional estrogen that I can't detoxify, which would be the very worst thing for me.
00:06:11.920 --> 00:06:18.639
Following my analysis and armed with DNA-informed advice on food, nutrition and supplements, I lost nearly two-stone.
00:06:18.800 --> 00:06:23.759
And according to Pipper, there can be advantages where it comes to mental health advice too.
00:06:24.000 --> 00:06:35.680
A lot of psychiatrists are now training with LifeCode GX, she says, which have some very specific genes that help us understand medications and painkillers and how quickly different people detoxify them.
00:06:35.920 --> 00:06:41.839
Then the psychiatrists can use these reports to understand what will work and what dosing to prescribe.
00:06:42.319 --> 00:06:49.199
This is the kind of personalised health analysis I think we all want, and that national governments would do well to offer their citizens.
00:06:49.519 --> 00:06:59.279
In the UK, the NHS's long-term plan does envisage a more personalised care model, and such an approach is being piloted in some parts of England.
00:06:59.519 --> 00:07:05.519
But it is focused on the management of existing illnesses rather than a preventative health program.
00:07:06.000 --> 00:07:22.480
In the long run, it is surely more economical to provide individuals with their own analysis and design personalised nutritional, supplemental, and fitness programs for each rather than spending billions telling everyone not to eat too much and to get on a bike instead of taking the car.
00:07:22.879 --> 00:07:39.439
In 2012, the UK government announced the launch of the 100,000 Genomes Project, an ambitious scheme to sequence the genomes of 100,000 NHS patients, both children and adults, something that no one in the world had yet attempted.
00:07:40.000 --> 00:07:51.600
By December 2018, it had reached its goal, amassing a huge amount of genomic data, with a particular focus on patients with rare diseases and some common kinds of cancer.
00:07:51.839 --> 00:08:04.319
The primary aim of the project was not to provide diagnostic benefits to the patients who took part, but to provide a research resource that would help scientists harness the power of genomics to the benefit of all future patients.
00:08:04.800 --> 00:08:10.399
It was an enormous undertaking, but it also involved a good deal of ethical complexity.
00:08:10.720 --> 00:08:28.399
For example, parents whose child was participating in the project could, for the first time, opt to find out not only whether their child had the genetic variants associated with their specific condition, but also whether they had variants relating to their susceptibility to other diseases.
00:08:28.720 --> 00:08:42.639
And this has raised questions about how this kind of data could and should be used, not least because the same technology could pave the way for parents and practitioners to embark on the production of genetically designed offspring.
00:08:42.960 --> 00:08:59.120
Joyce Harper, professor of reproductive science at University College London, has worked in the field of in vitro fertilisation and specifically pre-implantation genetic testing for about 25 years.
00:08:59.360 --> 00:09:10.639
She explains that when embryos are created in the lab, they are also tested for any genetic disease that the parents could carry, so that only embryos free from disease are transferred back to the mother.
00:09:10.879 --> 00:09:19.039
In some cases, where there are viable embryos of both sexes, a couple may also be given the option to select the sex of their child.
00:09:19.279 --> 00:09:35.519
Professor Harper thinks that in the future, just as adults can pay commercial firms to have their genome sequence today, every embryo may have its genome sequence so that decisions can be made about what characteristics, traits, and skills the parents are looking for in their child.
00:09:35.840 --> 00:09:46.720
Speaking at an Oxford University Union debate, she highlighted some of the issues involved by using the example of two concert pianists who want a child with perfect pitch.
00:09:47.039 --> 00:09:53.360
Perhaps it would be possible in the future to only select the embryos that are carrying absolute pitch, she said.
00:09:53.600 --> 00:09:56.639
But what if that child doesn't ever want to play piano?
00:09:56.799 --> 00:09:59.200
What if they want to be a footballer instead?
00:09:59.440 --> 00:10:06.879
As she points out, we all know parents who force their own expectations onto a child, but this would take it to another level.
00:10:07.600 --> 00:10:19.840
We are presented with a similar scenario in Hacking Darwin, a book by Jamie Metzel, who was appointed in 2019 to the World Health Organization Expert Advisory Committee on Human Genome Editing.
00:10:20.159 --> 00:10:32.320
Metzel asks us to imagine a scene in a fertility clinic of the future, where an IVF patient and doctor are discussing how far the pre-implantation genetic testing of her embryos should be taken.
00:10:32.559 --> 00:10:46.720
The conversation moves from an everyday discussion about single gene mutation disorders like Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis to the less ethically straightforward notion of influencing traits such as gender and hair colour.
00:10:46.960 --> 00:10:58.879
And based on his belief that we will eventually know much more about the effects of multiple genes working together, Metzel then takes the discussion into even more complex territory, such as IQ.
00:10:59.440 --> 00:11:08.080
Surely, he suggests, any parent would want to give their child the best possible chance in life by giving it advantages such as a high IQ?
00:11:08.480 --> 00:11:15.360
According to Metzel, the decisions we would make in such a scenario are likely to be motivated by loss aversion.
00:11:15.600 --> 00:11:21.840
If you had the chance to increase your child's future chances in all these ways and more, wouldn't you do it?
00:11:22.159 --> 00:11:30.480
Wouldn't not giving your child these possible advantages at this stage be tantamount to disadvantaging it later in life?
00:11:30.720 --> 00:11:38.879
Because every other parent in a similar position would most likely be opting to enhance their child's traits, talents and life changes at this stage too.
00:11:39.440 --> 00:11:46.639
Right now, these are hypothetical questions, but the scenario that Metzel presents to us is nonetheless a plausible one.
00:11:46.879 --> 00:11:52.320
We need to consider what effects these kinds of decisions will have on the way we think about identity.
00:11:52.559 --> 00:12:04.639
Is it desirable or even ethical to design a person in this way, choosing features and characteristics for them that will affect not only who they are, but how they think about themselves?
00:12:04.960 --> 00:12:17.120
On the one hand, the idea that we could use genetic intervention to right a child's future can be seen as a way of opening up that child's opportunity to live a more fulfilling, rich, long and healthy life.
00:12:17.360 --> 00:12:22.000
But on the other, it has the potential to close down future possibilities.
00:12:22.240 --> 00:12:32.879
There may be characteristics that parents today might perceive to be valuable and to fit our present-day norms that in the future their children might come to regard as a disadvantage.
00:12:33.200 --> 00:12:41.759
As Joyce Harper muses, will parents become like programmers designing their children around particular characteristics that they desire?
00:12:42.000 --> 00:12:46.080
What about if we have fashions like the body shape of the Kardashians?
00:12:46.240 --> 00:12:50.159
But then when the children grow up, these fashions are no longer in mode.
00:12:50.399 --> 00:12:53.840
Will the children sue their parents for lack of judgment?
00:12:54.639 --> 00:12:59.200
American futurist Roy Amara came up with what is known as Amara's law.
00:12:59.360 --> 00:13:05.679
It states the tendency to overestimate the short-term effects of technology and underestimate the long-term effects.
00:13:05.919 --> 00:13:19.759
So while there is plenty of water to go under the bridge before individuals are faced with making such decisions, not least because we are only just beginning to understand how our genomes work, we should start considering the longer-term implications now.
00:13:20.159 --> 00:13:30.159
It is one thing, for example, to try to fix a disease caused by a mutation in a single gene or to alleviate functional problems that might be caused by genetic pathways.
00:13:30.320 --> 00:13:31.519
But as futurist Dr.
00:13:31.679 --> 00:13:39.039
Ian Pearson explains, the vast majority of human traits are governed by a much more complex genetic picture.
00:13:39.360 --> 00:13:43.200
The problem is that most things in your body aren't just covered by one gene.
00:13:43.360 --> 00:13:46.480
They're caused by the interactions of a number of genes.
00:13:46.639 --> 00:13:53.120
That number could be two, or it could be twenty, or it could be two hundred, and in most cases we just don't know.
00:13:53.360 --> 00:13:58.960
It's quite easy to discover that a particular gene is associated with eye colour or hair colour.
00:13:59.200 --> 00:14:05.840
It is not very easy to know whether that gene might be involved in anything else as well, he explained.
00:14:06.080 --> 00:14:17.679
Despite these complexities, scientists have succeeded in developing biological techniques to identify and characterize genomic targets and then make edits to those target cells.
00:14:17.919 --> 00:14:23.279
More than one technology exists to carry this out, but one in particular has stolen the limelight.
00:14:23.600 --> 00:14:37.759
It's called CRISPR, which stands for clustered, interspaced, short, palindromic repeats, or more technically, CRISPR-Cas9, where CAS stands for CRISPR associated protein.
00:14:38.000 --> 00:14:57.440
Pioneered by Jennifer Dudner and Emmanuel Charpentier, earning them the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2020, the CRISPR technique makes use of the Cas9 protein to add and remove genes from the cells of living organisms, and it does so in a way that has proved efficient, accurate, and, to quote, easy to use.
00:14:57.840 --> 00:14:59.120
Perhaps too easy.
00:14:59.360 --> 00:15:10.080
In 2018, Chinese scientist He Jiangqi claimed to have used CRISPR-Cas9 to edit the genes of two fetuses in order to give them resistance to HIV.
00:15:10.320 --> 00:15:18.879
More than that, he had gone on to implant both fetuses, leading to the birth of twin girls, the world's first gene-edited humans.
00:15:19.360 --> 00:15:34.080
Given that the CRISPR technique is still in the earliest stages of basic research, he Jiangqui's decision to use it for reproductive purposes was a gross violation of ethics, regulations and laws, and it provoked outrage from experts around the world.
00:15:34.399 --> 00:15:39.200
Jiangqui has since been fired from his job and sentenced to three years in prison.
00:15:39.360 --> 00:15:44.960
But perhaps he has given us a glimpse of a possible future, whether it's one we want or not.
00:15:46.080 --> 00:15:56.399
Back in the West, technology is changing the way we think about some of the most fundamental aspects of reproduction, sex and gender, both as individuals and as societies.
00:15:56.799 --> 00:16:00.799
And this in turn is changing the way we think about identity.
00:16:01.679 --> 00:16:10.399
Take, for example, Martin Rothblatt, the American entrepreneur and top-earning CEO of the biopharmaceutical industry in 2018.
00:16:10.639 --> 00:16:16.799
She believes that technology is putting paid to what she calls, to quote, the age-old apartheid of sex.
00:16:17.200 --> 00:16:21.279
That we will one day stop labelling people as male or female at birth.
00:16:21.519 --> 00:16:22.399
How so?
00:16:22.639 --> 00:16:33.039
Because in her view, to quote, sex lies at the heart of biology, and yet in transcending biology, technology has given us an explosion of sexual identities.
00:16:33.279 --> 00:16:34.240
End quote.
00:16:34.639 --> 00:16:42.159
We are living in a world where more and more people, like Rothblatt, are questioning the traditional binary approach to gender labelling.
00:16:42.399 --> 00:16:54.480
Transgender people, for example, have a gender identity or expression that differs from the sex they were assigned at birth, and medical science has now made it possible for transgender people to transition from one sex to another.
00:16:54.639 --> 00:17:01.519
But while people can make a great many changes to their biology, they cannot yet adopt different reproductive abilities.
00:17:01.759 --> 00:17:16.319
So while pregnancy is possible for a transgender man who has undergone female to male transitioning, as long as there is a functioning uterus ovaries and vagina, it is not yet possible for a transgender woman following male to female transitioning.
00:17:16.559 --> 00:17:19.359
However, that too might change in the future.
00:17:19.759 --> 00:17:34.240
In 2017, a US woman successfully gave birth to a baby after receiving a uterus transplant, and a further 15 women are known to have had the same surgery since, with eight giving birth all in Sweden.
00:17:34.960 --> 00:17:50.400
It is still early days for this form of surgery and there are considerable potential complications for mother and baby, but it opens up the possibility that the same treatment might one day be available to implant a uterus and then a baby in a transgender woman.
00:17:50.720 --> 00:17:58.319
The implications of this would be huge and would undoubtedly spark a great deal of serious discussion and debate at a societal level.
00:17:58.559 --> 00:18:00.480
But what would it mean for our purposes?
00:18:00.640 --> 00:18:03.920
How would it affect the way we think about individual identity?
00:18:04.319 --> 00:18:15.119
We got a taste of the questions we will have to wrestle with back in 2007, when transgender man Thomas Beattie hit the headlines as, in the words of the press, the pregnant man.
00:18:15.359 --> 00:18:23.680
As many asked at the time, after he successfully gave birth to a baby girl, can someone capable of giving birth be considered male?
00:18:24.319 --> 00:18:27.359
Is Thomas the baby's father or mother?
00:18:27.599 --> 00:18:28.400
Or both?
00:18:28.640 --> 00:18:29.599
Or neither?
00:18:29.839 --> 00:18:38.960
Perhaps as these traditional labels begin to fall short, we will have to define motherhood and fatherhood by something other than the chromosomes and sex organs of the person involved.
00:18:39.200 --> 00:18:49.519
Some argue that we will talk less about nouns and more about verbs such as mothering and fathering, actions that can be carried out by all, regardless of gender or sex.
00:18:49.920 --> 00:18:56.240
Or perhaps we'll need some new vocabulary to transcend biology altogether.
00:18:56.960 --> 00:19:07.920
Certainly Martin Rothblatt, a self-declared transhumanist, has talked about technology liberating us from our biology in relation to, though not confined to, our sex and gender.
00:19:08.720 --> 00:19:12.480
Ideas about transhumanism have been around for about a century.
00:19:12.720 --> 00:19:25.039
They were first advanced in 1923 by the British geneticist JBS Haldane, who was interested in how the field of genetics could over time be used to alter human characteristics.
00:19:25.279 --> 00:19:37.359
But evolutionary biologist Julian Huxley is generally considered to be the founder of the field after publishing an influential essay in 1957 on the future of humanity.
00:19:38.240 --> 00:19:47.599
At the time, of course, there were growing fears that humanity may not have much of a future, thanks to the heightening political and military tensions of the Cold War.
00:19:47.680 --> 00:19:55.759
And it was in the aftermath of the Cold War that transhumanist theory began to translate into intentional policy.
00:19:56.400 --> 00:20:16.559
According to Professor Steve Fuller, one of the world's foremost academic proponents of transhumanism, this tipping point came with the publication in 2002 of a report called Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance by the US National Science Foundation and Department of Commerce.
00:20:17.440 --> 00:20:33.519
Examining the potential for the fields of biotechnology, information technology, nanotechnology, and cognitive science to improve our mental and physical performance, the report recommended that such endeavours should become a national priority.
00:20:34.079 --> 00:20:44.480
This is the transhuman moment, says Professor Fuller, pointing also to the influential Converging Technologies report published by the EU in 2006.
00:20:45.039 --> 00:20:58.240
Both reports focus on how we can harness technology to enhance the human condition, whether it's helping people to live longer and healthier lives, or seeking to make populations immune to the threat of biological warfare.
00:20:58.400 --> 00:21:10.960
And in Fuller's interpretation, that is what transhumanism is about: a way to enhance our humanity, to prolong our life in a way that ensures we aren't holding ourselves back and squandering our potential.
00:21:11.200 --> 00:21:23.200
It is founded on the principle that humans are not just one of many species in nature, but a privileged kind of species, capable of much more resilience and progression than any other.
00:21:23.759 --> 00:21:27.920
And if we have that capability, why wouldn't we use it?
00:21:28.480 --> 00:21:37.279
Given that transhumanism is all about redefining what it means to be human, it obviously has a great deal of relevance to the question of identity.
00:21:37.519 --> 00:21:48.799
Professor Fuller points in particular to the idea of morphological freedom, which he describes as the idea that human beings have the right to be in whatever form they want.
00:21:49.039 --> 00:21:59.759
Explaining what this means, Professor Fuller suggests that we might think of our physical bodies as just one possible platform for living our lives, and that we could consider the possibility that we can.
00:22:00.160 --> 00:22:04.559
Migrate across platforms in order to enhance or extend our existence.
00:22:05.039 --> 00:22:07.599
If you want to upload your mind, you can do that.
00:22:07.759 --> 00:22:10.720
If you want to stay in your own body, you can do that.
00:22:10.960 --> 00:22:14.880
It's a very ontologically tolerant position, he said.
00:22:15.279 --> 00:22:19.119
It certainly seems as if the tide of public opinion is turning that way.
00:22:19.359 --> 00:22:36.000
A survey carried out by market research and insight company Opinium in 2020 suggested that 63% of people in Western European countries would consider augmenting their bodies with technology, with most believing that it would improve their quality of life.
00:22:36.799 --> 00:22:46.079
My own point of view is that many of the people born into the world today will by the middle of the century actively identify as transhumanists.
00:22:46.319 --> 00:22:55.279
One of them, I strongly suspect, will be the baby boy born to technology entrepreneur Elon Musk and musician Grimes in May 2020.
00:22:55.599 --> 00:23:02.799
Announcing the birth, the proud parents revealed that they were calling the boy XAA-12.
00:23:03.119 --> 00:23:12.559
Admittedly, no one seems to know how to pronounce this, including Musk himself, but at least Grimes explained what each of the symbols mean via Twitter.
00:23:12.880 --> 00:23:15.039
X is the unknown variable.
00:23:15.359 --> 00:23:20.880
AE, my elven spelling of AI, love and or artificial intelligence.
00:23:21.200 --> 00:23:26.720
And A12 is the precursor to SR17, our favourite aircraft.
00:23:26.960 --> 00:23:29.200
No weapons, no defences, just speed.
00:23:29.440 --> 00:23:31.920
Great in battle, but non-violent.
00:23:32.319 --> 00:23:37.359
If ever there has been a transhumanist baby name, then this must surely be it.
00:23:37.759 --> 00:23:59.039
Naming a newborn using mathematical symbols, fantastical languages, and military machinery may seem like a mere gesture, but I think it hints at the way in which innovative people with unusual sensibilities are starting to envisage a different type of future human, a more technological being.
00:23:59.680 --> 00:24:03.200
It is certainly a first, and perhaps the world isn't ready for it.
00:24:03.359 --> 00:24:18.240
The baby's name was later changed to XAEAXII, when it fell foul of state law in California, which states that only the 26 letters of the English alphabet can be used to register a name on a birth certificate.
00:24:18.400 --> 00:24:24.160
Another case perhaps of our governance structures lagging behind and restricting our human potential.
00:24:24.720 --> 00:24:29.599
The idea of a more technological human has long been a staple of science fiction.
00:24:29.759 --> 00:24:33.519
But the truth is that such humans are already living among us.
00:24:33.759 --> 00:24:40.559
Kevin Warwick, for example, is a longtime cyborg, a professor of cybernetics at Reading University in the UK.
00:24:40.799 --> 00:24:48.880
In 1998, he became the first person in the world, as far as we know, to have a silicon chip surgically implanted in his body.
00:24:49.200 --> 00:24:55.920
He saw it as a permanent smart card that would never be lost or stolen because it had become part of his self.
00:24:56.160 --> 00:25:11.119
And he imagined that it could one day include information about his blood type, national insurance number, qualifications, and even criminal convictions or speeding fines, creating a biological version of the kind of digital identity credentials that we discussed in Chapter 1.
00:25:11.359 --> 00:25:18.079
At the time of the surgery, Warwick was quoted as saying, Human intelligence needs to keep up with the intelligence of machines.
00:25:18.240 --> 00:25:22.079
If we implant silicon chips into humans, humans can stay ahead.
00:25:22.319 --> 00:25:32.960
And speaking in December 2019 on the Futures podcast, hosted by science communicator Luke Robert Mason, he reiterated that he couldn't see a reason why he wouldn't be chipped from birth.
00:25:33.200 --> 00:25:42.079
Just as an RFID, radio frequency identification chip, as a passport has benefits, you might need an upgrade from time to time.
00:25:42.240 --> 00:25:44.400
But it would be good to have it at birth.
00:25:44.720 --> 00:25:51.279
As a person develops at birth, they develop with that new sense as though it's always been there, he said.
00:25:51.680 --> 00:25:57.599
He then went even further, saying that he believed it was human nature to embrace such technology.
00:25:57.839 --> 00:26:07.839
To quote, People will say, well, I have the right to upgrade as an individual, to upgrade if I want an implant like this, to have some of those abilities.
00:26:08.079 --> 00:26:12.480
And humans, from when humans first appeared, have gone on to improve ourselves.
00:26:12.640 --> 00:26:18.160
We started to fly, we drive cars, we have all sorts of technology, so humans will go for it.
00:26:18.400 --> 00:26:20.480
Humans will go for the upgrade.
00:26:20.799 --> 00:26:29.039
One man who has already opted for the upgrade is Nicholas Badminton, a futurist in Canada, who decided to get a microchip implanted into his arm.
00:26:29.279 --> 00:26:39.519
Manufactured by a company called Dangerous Things, the chip can be used to connect the key fobs and swipecards, password readers, and other devices through passive RFID.
00:26:39.759 --> 00:26:43.680
When I spoke to him, Nicholas told me that he doesn't even notice that the chip is there.
00:26:43.839 --> 00:26:54.720
He said, The idea of implanting a microchip is more than just the current idea of turning a human into an access control device, key code, URL, Bitcoin cipher or otherwise.
00:26:54.960 --> 00:27:12.079
It's the beginning of a journey towards human 3.0, where we may realize true human biological symbiosis with technology and develop the abilities to upload information, augment our intellect, and extend our bodies, physical abilities or become biological depositories of data.
00:27:12.400 --> 00:27:20.640
When it comes to enhancing our bodies, I think it's likely that the initial technology of choice will be smart glasses rather than implanted chips.
00:27:21.039 --> 00:27:37.759
One of the other questions in the poll conducted by Opinium asked what physical attributes people would most want to enhance, and while 40% of respondents opted for overall physical health, the most popular area for specific improvement was eyesight, at 33%.
00:27:38.640 --> 00:27:44.319
I think this demand might help to make smart glasses the gateway tech to augmented humans.
00:27:44.559 --> 00:27:56.799
Unlike a smartphone in your pocket, they would always be on your face, surveying the environment, capable of recording and storing all you see and hear, and even uploading clips straight to your social feed.
00:27:57.039 --> 00:28:08.880
But while many of us find this kind of technology exciting to talk about, we are less inclined to get into a discussion about who would own the hardware and software involved, or the wealth of associated data.
00:28:09.119 --> 00:28:27.440
In the same way that the fictional Tyrrell Corporation asserted ownership of its bio-enhanced quasi-human replicants in the Blade Runner films, it is quite possible that a technology-enhanced human will have very little independence from the corporation that will own and enable his or her enhancements.
00:28:27.759 --> 00:28:35.440
After all, as consumers, we are extremely lackadaisical about reading the terms and conditions for a new smartphone before we sign up to use it.
00:28:35.599 --> 00:28:37.680
Why should it be any different in the future?
00:28:37.920 --> 00:28:44.799
Perhaps you would opt to have a shiny new chip implanted without fully realizing quite what you were agreeing to.
00:28:45.039 --> 00:28:53.839
It might include having to pay for routine upgrades to keep your implant functioning properly and allowing the company to make use of your data for commercial purposes.
00:28:54.079 --> 00:29:02.880
In a case such as this, who would have control of your data and the services that the technology enables, you or the corporation?
00:29:03.279 --> 00:29:08.720
Is this transhumanist libertarian road really a route to freedom at all?
00:29:09.839 --> 00:29:24.799
In July 2020, the World Economic Forum published a report intriguingly entitled Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies, which sketched out all the different ways in which medical and non-medical enhancements might lead to a brand new set of governance challenges.
00:29:25.039 --> 00:29:37.599
On the question of how the data associated with these enhancements might be used, the report says, to quote, some experts advocate a solidarity approach to health data governance, one focused on societal and community good.
00:29:37.759 --> 00:29:46.000
This shifts the focus to the shared societal benefits and responsibilities, which motivates people to share data for the collective and individual good.
00:29:46.240 --> 00:29:50.319
Biobanks are a good example for sharing biological data.
00:29:50.720 --> 00:30:03.200
In other words, this suggests that while it may not be deemed mandatory, there will be pressure on individuals from some quarters to make their biological data available to the technology platform or the state system for the common good.
00:30:04.160 --> 00:30:12.480
Setting aside these potential future issues of governance, transhumanists have other hurdles to overcome before their ideas become more mainstream.
00:30:12.799 --> 00:30:20.559
Sultan Istvan outlined three main challenges that are preventing the transhumanist philosophy from becoming more widely accepted.
00:30:20.880 --> 00:30:26.559
The first, he said, is religion, which he thinks tells us don't touch the body, it's sacred.
00:30:26.799 --> 00:30:35.680
But he is hopeful that the coronavirus pandemic might help people realise just how life-limiting it is, not to prioritize science.
00:30:36.480 --> 00:30:47.920
The second is a lack of understanding of the technology that already exists today and how quickly it is developing, which means that people are too quick to dismiss transhumanism as a science fiction.
00:30:48.160 --> 00:31:01.119
He said, for example, that people don't realize that by 2028 there's a very good chance that a quadriplegic in an exoskeleton suit will run dramatically faster than the fastest runner on planet Earth.
00:31:01.599 --> 00:31:09.519
A third factor that Zoltan identified is the way that institutional conservatism serves to hold up technological advancement.
00:31:10.000 --> 00:31:14.480
Genetic editing could be beneficial for every single person alive, he said.
00:31:14.720 --> 00:31:17.680
Yet what you hear is that this is something dangerous.
00:31:17.839 --> 00:31:21.519
We need a moratorium on it, we need years of considering it.
00:31:22.400 --> 00:31:34.000
But such delays are harmful in themselves, according to Zoltan, who argues that by holding back from the use of genetic technology we are causing unnecessary deaths of 150,000 people every day.
00:31:34.240 --> 00:31:45.279
It is a thought-provoking claim, but critics would argue that such caution is necessary when we are talking about technology that could lead to such a fundamental change in what it means to be human.
00:31:45.519 --> 00:31:53.759
One of the key issues for transhumanists to contend with is how the adoption of technology might lead to greater social inequality.
00:31:54.079 --> 00:32:04.240
In 2015, I attended the World Future Society Conference in San Francisco, where I heard a talk by one of the most renowned futurists living today, Peter Schwartz.
00:32:04.480 --> 00:32:25.599
Talking about precisely this subject, Schwartz predicted that one of the biggest disruptions to take place over the next hundred years would be the speciation of the human species, which he defined as the intentional differentiation, not just between species, but within species, to create a greater variety of forms.
00:32:26.240 --> 00:32:44.000
He said that he anticipated that the human species would, for the first time ever, be able to control its evolution and that the next big evolutionary step would be how technologies such as genetic engineering could be used to increase the diversity of future populations.
00:32:45.440 --> 00:32:51.920
According to the website Space.com, this extraordinary vision of our future has since moved closer.
00:32:52.160 --> 00:33:03.759
In June 2020, it reported on the first summary results of a study conducted by scientists on how to genetically engineer humans capable of surviving a mission to Mars.
00:33:04.160 --> 00:33:13.200
The study, which concentrated on twin American astronauts Mark and Scott Kelly, was designed to explore the effect of space on our genetics.
00:33:13.440 --> 00:33:24.720
It did so by comparing Scott's DNA before and after he spent a year on the International Space Station with the DNA of his twin brother Mark, who spent the same year on Earth.
00:33:25.359 --> 00:33:39.680
Now, having uncovered various insights from those experiments, the team of scientists is exploring ways to mitigate the effects of long-term space travel, with one possibility being to combine human DNA with that of another species.
00:33:40.000 --> 00:33:46.880
Among the candidate species are some aquatic invertebrates called tardigrades, also known as water bears.
00:33:47.279 --> 00:34:00.319
Tardigrades have the resilience to survive in all sorts of extreme conditions, and the scientists are hoping to pinpoint whether there is something in their genetic makeup that helps them to better protect and repair their DNA.
00:34:00.559 --> 00:34:10.000
If so, it might be possible to transfer that trait to human cells so that astronauts can withstand, for example, the effects of exposure to radiation.
00:34:10.639 --> 00:34:17.679
And of course, that would not only be immensely helpful for space travel, but for other aspects of our lives here on Earth.
00:34:17.920 --> 00:34:24.320
As one of the lead scientists on the project puts it, it's not if we evolve, it's when we evolve.
00:34:24.639 --> 00:34:30.159
But how will we evolve and perhaps more importantly, which of us will get to do so?
00:34:30.400 --> 00:34:37.039
Once such technological enhancements become available, isn't it likely that they will only be available to the wealthy?
00:34:37.360 --> 00:34:50.320
This is already true of IVF treatment today, which in the UK, unless you are lucky enough to receive NHS funding, can cost around£7,000 per round and around£5,000 to freeze your eggs.
00:34:50.559 --> 00:34:58.960
If genomic editing in search of preferred characteristics does become a trend, I imagine we can expect to see a similar pattern in terms of affordability.
00:34:59.199 --> 00:35:08.800
This then begs the question whether the wealthy will start to think of their prospective children as some kind of consumer choice, something to be customised with no expense spared.
00:35:09.039 --> 00:35:20.320
And if you aren't wealthy, well, your children will be left behind, unenhanced and potentially uncompetitive, struggling to match the biological advantages conferred on their more fortunate peers.
00:35:20.719 --> 00:35:31.440
In other words, this would be survival of the fittest, but where fittest might refer to qualities that are as much technological in origin as they are biological.
00:35:32.239 --> 00:35:53.440
Another concern is that in our money-oriented societies, every upgrade that people might opt for will in the end be designed to give them higher and higher productivity, until in the end the technologically enhanced human becomes little more than a unit of capitalism, creating and producing and forever upgrading to keep up with their expected output.
00:35:53.679 --> 00:36:08.559
We saw in chapter two that even a simple immunisation certificate has the potential to drive the wedge between different groups in society, between those who have some kind of technological access to what life offers and those who don't.
00:36:08.880 --> 00:36:22.079
Imagine how much of this kind of inequality would be magnified if there were different versions of humans within a society, some who have the resources to pay for their regular technology upgrades, and some who don't.
00:36:22.320 --> 00:36:30.239
Suddenly the idea of being 100% human would be seen as a disadvantage, an inferior form of being.
00:36:30.480 --> 00:36:40.239
Consider too the possibility that technologically enabled humans might one day be able to increase this gap by downloading additional educational abilities.
00:36:40.480 --> 00:36:44.960
Is transhumanism for us all or just for a wealthy elite?
00:36:45.440 --> 00:36:54.719
Conversely, those who do choose to be technologically enhanced could face a different kind of disadvantage: the loss of privacy and personal freedom.
00:36:54.960 --> 00:37:02.239
Once you start weaving any kind of technology into your biological makeup, you are running the risk of that technology being hacked.
00:37:02.480 --> 00:37:12.719
Uval Noah Harari outlined just such a scenario in an explosive speech in a meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos in January 2020.
00:37:13.199 --> 00:37:22.400
If you know enough biology and have enough computing power and data, you can hack my body and my brain and my life, and you can understand me better than I understand myself.
00:37:22.639 --> 00:37:30.159
You can know my personality type, my political views, my sexual preferences, my mental weaknesses, my deepest fears and hopes.
00:37:30.400 --> 00:37:39.679
In the past, many governments and tyrants wanted to do it, but soon, at least some corporations and governments will be able to systematically hack all the people.
00:37:40.000 --> 00:37:46.079
We humans should get used to the idea that we are no longer mysterious souls, we are now hackable animals.
00:37:46.239 --> 00:37:48.480
That's what we are, he said.
00:37:48.960 --> 00:38:05.440
Asking his audience to imagine what would happen if this power were to fall into the hands of a 21st century Stalin, Harari warned that if we do not grasp the new hell of digital dictatorships quickly enough, we will find ourselves trapped with no way to escape.
00:38:05.760 --> 00:38:08.079
It is a warning that we should take seriously.
00:38:08.239 --> 00:38:22.480
After all, governments already know more about us now than they ever did before, whether through surveillance or through the kind of genetic data that we willingly give up through health-driven initiatives, such as the Hundred Thousand Human Genome Project.
00:38:22.800 --> 00:38:26.079
But when does health management become citizen management?
00:38:26.320 --> 00:38:42.559
In June 2020, the New York Times reported that police in China have been collecting blood samples from men and boys, including those of preschool age, across the country to build up a genetic database of its 700 million-strong male population.
00:38:43.039 --> 00:38:52.000
The collection, storage and use of genomic data in this way is illegal, according to international law and even China's own criminal law.
00:38:52.159 --> 00:39:11.119
But the report also alleges that China's Ministry of Public Security began building a forensic genetic database as far back as 2003, and that it has been collecting DNA samples from those unconnected to criminal activity and without their consent since 2013.
00:39:12.079 --> 00:39:17.920
Setting aside the question of legality, what could be the purpose of collecting such a database?
00:39:18.480 --> 00:39:24.639
Perhaps it could be used for the speedy and accurate identification of criminals and so deter such behaviour.
00:39:24.880 --> 00:39:28.320
But it could also be put to much more sinister uses.
00:39:28.880 --> 00:39:39.599
Having such a comprehensive database would help enormously, for example, in the manufacture of viruses, bacteria, and other bioweapons to target specific groups.
00:39:39.840 --> 00:39:49.360
Not only that, but if a citizen's DNA were to be linked to their social credit score, the state would effectively have created a biological breeding score.
00:39:49.920 --> 00:39:50.800
Futurist Dr.
00:39:50.960 --> 00:40:04.159
Ian Pearson outlines a frightening scenario in which, he says, you might not be allowed to breed unless you've got particular genes the state wants, which would mean the government could decide what your population looks like.
00:40:04.400 --> 00:40:11.119
And this dystopian scenario could apply to any country in the world that is governed by an autocratic regime.
00:40:11.440 --> 00:40:32.480
If a government wanted to implicitly or explicitly favour or oppress particular groups in society, whether related to race, class, sexuality, gender, religion, immigration status, physical abilities, mental health, and even body shape and size, it might soon have the power to do so more effectively than ever before.
00:40:32.719 --> 00:40:49.840
With a powerful genetic database, rapid advancements in genetic editing, the development of chemicals to target particular gene carriers, the outcome could be a population that expresses only the characteristics and traits that the state deems acceptable.
00:40:50.480 --> 00:40:59.280
Your identity would no longer be something that you can evolve for yourself over time, nor even anything your community can bestow on you.
00:40:59.519 --> 00:41:05.440
It would be whatever successfully survived the environmental conditions set by a malevolent state.
00:41:06.079 --> 00:41:19.360
It seems then that technology has the power to liberate our human identity from the constraints of our biological origins, that our human selves could be enhanced to become something more than human, something transhuman.
00:41:19.599 --> 00:41:30.320
But it also has the power to introduce a form of biological inequality so fundamental that we could evolve into subspecies that can barely relate to each other at all.
00:41:30.719 --> 00:41:36.800
At the heart of the matter is how we choose to look at identity, what it means to be human.
00:41:37.199 --> 00:41:41.519
How much of it is a biological construct, how much of it social.
00:41:42.239 --> 00:41:49.920
And it's for that reason that I think we all need to engage with the new frontier being explored by the science of genetics today.
00:41:50.239 --> 00:42:04.000
We need to participate actively in the discussion and debate about how much of who we are is in our nurture and in our nature, and whether in the future we will need nature at all.
