The founders of this Academy were extraordinary revolutionariesmost notably, John Adamswho recognized that fulfilling the promise of their revolution would require drawing on all disciplines of knowledge. It would require intellectual and social dialogue of the broadest sort.
Today, we too are in the midst of one of the most remarkable revolutions in the history of mankind-a revolution sparked within the discipline of biology, but one whose consequences will be so far-reaching that they will touch every aspect of society. Realizing the promise of this revolution will similarly require a communication reaching across the breadth of the arts and sciences.
I refer, of course, to the revolution in genetics and genomics. It is a revolution that was born with the twentieth century. Although Gregor Mendel's experiments in 1865 were the true origin of genetics, his work was largely ignored for 35 years until it was rediscovered in the opening moments of this century. Indeed, the first of three independent papers constituting this rediscovery was published in January 1900, announcing a coming explosion in the scientific study of heredity.
Within the first quarter of the century, heredity had been given a physical basis in visible cellular structures: the chromosomes.
By mid-century, heredity had been given a molecular basis in the form of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), whose double-helical structure held the key to the faithful transmission of information. It soon became clear, at least in principle, how genetic information was encoded.
Three-quarters of the way through the century, recombinant DNA technology burst onto the scene, making it possible to read genetic information in practice and even to construct new genes and reintroduce them into organisms.
As the century draws to a close, we stand on the verge of having, within the next few years, the complete set of genetic instructions for a human being: three billion letters of genetic information encoding 100,000 or so human genes.
Our knowledge of human heredity has gone from nothing to the complete three-billion-letter code. Genetics has covered nearly ten orders of magnitude in ten decadesan incredible journey.
We will shortly have a table of the building blocks of biology that is wholly akin to chemistry's Periodic Table of the Elements. And the impact that the Biological Periodic Table will have in the twenty-first century will be as far-reaching as the impact that the Chemical Periodic Table had in the twentieth century. Indeed, it will be much farther-reaching, because it concerns human beings, not atoms,
The genetics revolution has transcended the boundaries of genetics. It holds the prospect that we will understand the molecular basis of common human diseases such as Alzheimer's disease and breast cancer, with the ultimate expectation that we can design effective therapies and prevention.
It is clear that a hundred years from now, we will look back on cancer as a treatable and often preventable disease, a distant scourge-much as we today regard polio. But it is a certainty that, for many decades, we will be able to make predictions long before we can offer interventions.
For example, of the 180 people being elected to this Academy, roughly 8 are homozygous for the "4" allele of the apolipoprotein-E gene on chromosome 19. Such individuals have a 75 percent risk of developing Alzheimer's disease. If, as each person came forward to sign the membership book, he or she simply spit into a test tube, we would be able to call the affected individuals tomorrow with the information.
How are people to react to such information? Indeed, how are people to react to the opportunity to have such information?
We speak of such concepts as "informed consent," but how should a person best become informed? By taking biology courses? By consulting statistics books? Perhaps, instead, by reading a novel on the subject?
How are we as a society to react to this information? How should persons at risk for colon cancer or schizophrenia be rated for insurance purposes? Should they pay more? Our choice will depend on our views on economics, politics, and justice.
The genetics revolution holds the prospect that we will be able to read the history of the human population in DNA. In fact, DNA studies tell its that we are a very young species-one that spilled forth from Africa a mere five thousand generations ago. We are all remarkably alike at the DNA level. Moreover, the vast majority of genetic variation is between individuals, not between ethnic or racial groups. Yet we know that information about human differences is easily seized upon for political purposesespecially in the absence of adequate scientific understanding and social discourse. It Is important that we all come to understand the implications of human genetic diversity: how all humans are so fundamentally the same, yet how each individual is unique.
The genetics revolution holds the prospect that we eventually will be able to create human beings with specific properties, whether by cloning with the aim of replicating a previous person or by germ-line gene therapy with the aim of so-called enhancementfor example, to defeat aging or improve memory.
We can delay such prospects for some time by emphasizing technical limitations and our profound ignorance of complex biological processes. But this is only a temporary fix. There will come a time when we can do such things safety, and we must discuss what we should do. Should we ever make a human being in someone's image? Would crossing this threshold transform human beings into products of manufacture? If we cross this threshold, will we be ever be able to return?
John Adams recognized that small sparks can ignite revolutions of unimaginable proportions. This Academy was one of his generation's legacies, to serve as a continuing forum for intellectual exchange about burning questions that cut across boundaries. It seems to me a function that is no less vital today.
Communication © 1999, Eric S. Lander.