13 ms·

>Doctors infused billions of microscopic structures known as nanoparticles carrying genetic instructions for the CRISPR gene-editor into four patients in London

• DoctorNick 5y ago
  The record breaking temperatures that I'm suffering in the PNW right now serves as a grim reminder that we won't have much of a future, even with all this cool tech.
  • cj 5y ago
    It’s not impossible to speculate the possibility that in 50-100 years, climate change could be reversed through a CRISPR-like technology (e.g. something that can be released and replicate in the environment, thereby changing it). Or at the very least, I can see a future where gene editing could relieve your suffering from heat by raising the threshold your body can tolerate :)
    • nr2x 5y ago
      At current rates of carbon outlay, there won’t be much of a world left to save in 100 years.
      • pkdpic_y9k 5y ago
        Not unless we all work our asses off! Engineers can do anything :^)
        • matmatmatmat 5y ago
          ... except politics, engineers are usually not very good at politics, and climate change is, in large part, a political problem.
          • pkdpic_y9k 5y ago
            again, I love me some doom trolling but only if it helps motivate work, and if software engineers can build platforms that undermine democracy I gotta believe its at least possible they can undermine bad politics too
          • dantheman 5y ago
            It's a technology problem unless you want condemn most of the world to an incredibly low standard of living.
          • ben_w 5y ago
            Yes, but what we can do is try to invent things which are better then the status quo in terms of both money and the environment — if people use those inventions for purely selfish reasons, they’re still helping the world.
      • kortilla 5y ago
        That statement isn’t backed by science
        • nr2x 5y ago
          “We are currently on track for a rise of between 6.3° and 13.3°F, with a high probability of an increase of 9.4°F by 2100” https://www.climatecentral.org/news/ipcc-predictions-then-versus-now-15340 https://www.climatecentral.org/news/ipcc-predictions-then-ve...
    • ProjectArcturis 5y ago
      You want something that replicates in the environment and removes carbon? We have those. They're called "plants."
      • nr2x 5y ago
        Even if we reforested every possible area, the current rate of carbon outlay exceeds capacity to absorb. Well explained in the Economist video: https://youtu.be/EXkbdELr4EQ https://youtu.be/EXkbdELr4EQ
        • pkdpic_y9k 5y ago
          Does this include ocean farming based carbon capture? That sounded like a pretty positive route in terms of land use limitations when I heard about it.
        • chr1 5y ago
          If we could convert Sahara back into a savannah or farms, the amount of carbon required for the new soil and plants would exceed the amount of extra carbon we have added to the atmosphere so far. And there are many viable routes to do that. E.g. building large number of ocean thermal energy conversion plants [1] to reduce temperature of the north hemisphere, recreating conditions that have caused green Sahara in the past. There are numerous possibilities to use engineering to revert adverse effects of climate change, and to actually improve the climate. The only scenario when we are doomed, is if population declines significantly so that we get runaway effect from carbon we have already produced melting permafrost, and not have large enough economy to use geoengineering on a large enough scale. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversion#Climate_control https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversio...
          • nr2x 5y ago
            So there’s one minor problem with the Sahara…
            • 5y ago
    • PixelOfDeath 5y ago
      Looking at the world right now, I hope for the best with that gene therapy against sociopathic billionaires.
    • coliveira 5y ago
      Too bad for the millions of people who will die because of the changes during these 50 years...
  • nitrogen 5y ago
    Stop with the doom trolling and get busy inventing solutions.
    • iaml 5y ago
      Technical solutions are often ineffective when faced with obstacles of politics or cutting corners to make money.
      • CapmCrackaWaka 5y ago
        Unfortunately I think technical solutions are the only thing that will save us. Most countries would rather invade others then give up their standard of living.
    • pkdpic_y9k 5y ago
      Heck yeah, this why I keep coming back the HN community. But if you gotta get that doom trolling out too its all good as long as it reminds us all how hard we gotta keep workin :^)
      • imvetri 5y ago
        In hackerrank I was expecting post like "Show:HN I injected chameleon DNA to my dog"
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • stavros 5y ago
      Without doom trolling nobody will vote for the people who want to implement the costly solutions.
      • nitrogen 5y ago
        There's a curve to most people's response to levels of advocacy. The response rises with advocacy to a point, but then past a certain point, the response drops precipitously. When the advocacy turns into over-the-top vehemence, people tend to stop responding and may even respond negatively (i.e. rebel and go full anti-whatever). As an example of a similar drastic falloff at the top of a response curve, I recall reading that people who live right next to a dam report near zero concern about the dam collapsing, but as you go further away people are very concerned, then somewhat concerned, than only little concerned. So anyway, we need more carrots, fewer sticks.
  • DoreenMichele 5y ago
    Everyone will move to Canada and similar places. Only the poor will be left behind to die in the heat and most of the world won't care and will feel like "good riddance." Edit: In case anyone thinks this is just snark, no. I'm in the PNW and I grew up in Georgia and lived in California for a lot of years, including the High Desert where I was south of Death Valley and 115 in July was not unusual. I'm dirt poor and have been for years. I spent years homeless. The heat wave per se is not a big deal to me. But it's late in the month and I'm nearly broke. If the heat kills me, it will be because I'm out of funds, not because 107 is a big damn deal per se. The world has spent a lot of years making it clear to me that it doesn't care about my welfare at all and no amount of virtue, hard work, yadda is ever enough to adequately remedy my problems.
    • DubiousPusher 5y ago
      I think you are correct. Unchecked climate change will send the wealthy and middle classes North. If History is any indicator, they will close the borders of their regions as tightly as possible and commit a pitance to "humanitarian aid" leaving the poor piling up in refugee camps on their borders. We have the examples of the U.S. border, Australia's camps on Naru, the various permeant refugee camps spread across the Eastern Mediterranean and many more as examples. As the situation becomes more intense, migrants will become more desperate and bold. The reaction from the wealthy enclaves will become more and more repressive. (Who themselves will be seeing a diminished standard of living). In my opinion, the only thing that could spare us this future is a global commitment to universal rights and more equal resource distribution. But this would require countries like the United States to write rights of non-citizens deeply into their constitutions. And that is likely unattainable at this time.
      • DoreenMichele 5y ago
        Animals are already migrating to more northerly climes as recent articles on Svalbard attest.* What prevents people from doing the same is mostly international borders, politics and money. Before we had international borders, plenty of humans lived migratory lives as well. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27479739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27479739
  • johnwheeler 5y ago
    So what then? We should throw our hands in the air and give up? Take the good news as it comes.
  • civilized 5y ago
    There are populated areas whose livability is threatened by climate change. These are in very poor, low-latitude regions like Northern India. Sorry to burst your bubble, but PNWers will have the privilege of surviving and thriving with relatively minimal issue. As always, the consequences of the environmental sins of the global wealthy, like you and me and most HNers, will be borne by the global poor in other places. We are all responsible for what they will endure in the coming decades. Eco-despair is, as always, a facile psychological defense mechanism and a luxury of the most privileged. We are responsible for the problem, and we also have the most power to solve it. We need to act accordingly. Starting with a calm, rational, comprehensive reckoning of our options, including nuclear (which has made France the low-carbon leader of the developed world). Instead of letting guilt paralyze us with delusional fantasies of a well-deserved universal doom, we should use our privilege to advance no-carbon energy and carbon capture to hopefully protect the less fortunate people whose futures truly are threatened.
    • DoctorNick 5y ago
      I don't know if you've noticed, but the political process is completely fucking broken. Good fucking luck getting any of that passed in any meaningful form.
      • civilized 5y ago
        Yes, life is hard. Yes, we have to live through it anyway. Just like everyone else who lived before us.
      • cbozeman 5y ago
        You're not going to have to worry about that. Once rich people are inconvenienced, the problem will be taken seriously. Case in point, there was no "opioid crisis" in America until some rich Senator's daughter overdosed on heroin. Then all of a sudden it's a crisis.
    • piyushpr134 5y ago
      Northern India has always been this hot. I remember in 90s and early 2000s and god it was so freaking hot in May and June. There is this thing called loo in India (not the toilet) but this is warm westerly winds which start in the afternoons. It sucks your soul (and hydration and sodium out) and leaves you fully dehydrated. Many people die of that heat stroke caused by this loo. But then monsoon comes in July and it is hot and sweaty! People don't die anymore of heat stroke but it is uncomfortable like anything. Once we reach september, we are back to normal and it is festival time! This continues till Novemeber when more festivals come like diwali, christmas etc along with wedding season (yes we have those). Then with a zip in the air, Cold season starts and soon it is freaking cold in Dec and Jan. Like really chilly winds but no snow. We have our rajai (quilts) which save us. Poor people on streets die again but rich ones have their rajai, sweaters, tea and warm bonfires and heaters. Then comes feb and it is really beautiful again. Flower bloom. And it is festival time again. April comes which tells us that we are in for a May & June again. :)
• noveltyaccount 5y ago
  Is this a one-time treatment? Does it remove all of the offending genetic material, and then when those cells divide they are cured? Or does it require ongoing treatment?
  • rolleiflex 5y ago
    It’s editing the genes of the cells of the liver, so presumably when those liver cells divide and multiply, the change would also be copied along as well. What isn’t clear to me is that if this is targeted at the liver cells in particular, or splicing it for every cell in the body. In other words, this could be a germline mutation (passed to children) or it could be a somatic mutation (no change to future children), it depends on how targeted the treatment was.
    • kaba0 5y ago
      Even if it is not specific, I would believe gametes are not affected/can be easily excludes due to the blood-testis barrier.
    • wgolsen 5y ago
      When administered IV, most LNPs of this type are highly selective for hepatocytes. This edit cannot be passed on as no germ cells will be transfected.
  • drran 5y ago
    Patient will need to do it once per 1,5-2 years. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoczYXJeMY4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoczYXJeMY4 .
• skybrian 5y ago
  Note that the liver is perhaps the easiest target since it filters the blood. See: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/20/crispr-editing-in-primates https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/20/cr...
  • trhway 5y ago
    I expected we would be doing this using viruses, and there are viruses targeting various tissues/organs. The nanites though are just really Star Trek cool.
    • siver_john 5y ago
      While nanoparticles could correspond to viral like carriers. The reason you probably wouldn't want to naively use viral particles is because any viral particle that would likely attack the body naturally would also trigger the immune system. That would decrease the efficacy and could actually increase the likelihood of side effects.
      • irthomasthomas 5y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR_gene_editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR_gene_editing Delivery of Cas9, sgRNA, and associated complexes into cells can occur via viral and non-viral systems. Electroporation of DNA, RNA, or ribonucleocomplexes is a common technique, though it can result in harmful effects on the target cells.[43] Chemical transfection techniques utilizing lipids and peptides have also been used to introduce sgRNAs in complex with Cas9 into cells.[44][45] Types of cells that are more difficult to transfect (e.g. stem cells, neurons, and hematopoietic cells) require more efficient delivery systems, such as those based on lentivirus (LVs), adenovirus (AdV), and adeno-associated virus (AAV).[46][47][48]
      • pas 5y ago
        Are these nano particles similar to the Pfizer vaccine ones? Those lipid nanoparticles do trigger the immune system.
• WheelsAtLarge 5y ago
  100%, the mRNA vaccines fall into this future category too. Being able to use RNA to direct cells to do what we need is mind blowing.
  • piyushpr134 5y ago
    A new world is beaconing upon us. Much like computers in 70s. We are in the real early phases of this technology and this would most probably make the world completely different from what it is now. Mind you, this is just the beginning. First we would have all kinds of diseases being cured using this, 1. It would change the whole medical diagnostics industry to correctly diagnose the pathogen, 2. Then destroy the pathogen using DNA cutting 3. It would cure cancers of many kind by enabling the T-cells to fight the cancer cells effectively Then we would start with reprogramming cells to do what we want. For instance, we can cure baldness, completely regenerate cardiac cells after heart attack. However, it would not stop at this. We would have bio-machines which can capture carbon dioxide, generate medicines, make clothes/cotton and food. We would have bio solar cells. We would bio light bulbs which ingest light during the day and glow at night. We would have artificial meat produced using this technology. We would have carbohydrates produced using this. Plastic and sewage eating bacteria would be a reality soon. Next 30-40 years is going to be biotechnology as last 30-40 were computing.
    • thejackgoode 5y ago
      Blowing the other horn, as an engineer I can imagine sorts of mistakes that can be made while editing DNA. We don’t fully understand life yet, but already cutting it in pieces, for a good purpose as it may be
      • WheelsAtLarge 5y ago
        True, I've read stories where researchers have done analysis of the DNA after the use of CRISPR and found that parts other than the target had been affected. But like all decisions, you weigh the good vs the bad and you make a decision. In many cases it will be the best choice by far. Additionally, the more we use it the more we will understand the down side and we can plan for it. Yup, it has a down side but we'll be able to balance the good and bad parts. Techies love to focus on the good of technology but I think it's good to point out the bad as loud as possible so we can plan for it. The fact is that the genie is out of the bottle and it won't go back in. So CRISP is part of our future.
• puchatek 5y ago
  If eating GMOs has you scared, this should be absolutely terrifying
  • alex_sf 5y ago
    All crops are GMO. The only difference is how fast they were modified.
    • karottenreibe 5y ago
      Are you saying that's not a significant difference? It seems to me.
      • laburn 5y ago
        It seems to you what?
        • hoseja 5y ago
          Probably that letting the slow-GMO survive in a natural environment for hundreds of years does wonders for ironing out the really bad bugs. I'm not anti-GMO but i've been more wary ever since I realized it will inevitably be used to make better citizens (and not by making them better humans).
          • petre 5y ago
            It depends. There's a number of dog breeds with known genetical issues. GE is a double edged sword just like nuclear energy. With great power comes great responsability.
            • hoseja 5y ago
              Those are mostly innovations of the latest century or so, bred "scientifically", regulated by dog breed foundations and chasing dog-show metrics.
• kaminar 5y ago
  Wasn't there a recent HN article about another genetic splicer that's 1000x faster than CRISPR?
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• MichaelMoser123 5y ago
  to me it sounds like McCoy from Star Trek telling our doctors that they are from the dark ages. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R_WbAhKyAk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R_WbAhKyAk