_Adora_Belle_

CRISPR/Cas hat die Genforschung revolutioniert und könnte bald in großem Stil gentechnisch eingesetzt werden. Aber was ist CRISPR und wie funktioniert es? Kurz gesagt: Teile des adaptiven Immunsystems von Bakterien werden genutzt, um Gene zu verändern. Und das funktioniert präziser als mit jedem anderen Werkzeug zuvor und offenbar in allen Tier- und Pflanzenarten. Damit ist CRISPR anders als die herkömmlichen Methoden der Gentechnik. Es ist einfach anzuwenden, preiswert, schnell, extrem vielseitig und damit in jedem Biologielabor erhältlich. Bio-Hacker haben sogar begonnen, CRISPR zu Hause zu nutzen. CRISPR wird bereits eingesetzt, um mehr über Genfunktionen und -dysfunktionen zu erfahren. So könnte es realistischerweise zur Behandlung einiger Krankheiten eingesetzt werden. Aber welche Hürden gibt es noch und welche ethischen Fragen würden sie mit sich bringen? Wie kann (oder sollte?) CRISPR in der Landwirtschaft eingesetzt werden, wenn der Klimawandel die Erträge verringert und die Biodiversität gefährdet? Unser Vortrag gibt einen Überblick darüber, was mit dem CRISPR/Cas-System möglich ist. Wir möchten genügend Informationen liefern, um zwischen Pseudowissenschaften und dem, was tatsächlich möglich ist, unterscheiden zu können.

André ist Physiker, Biochemiker und Wissenschaftskommunikator. Katrin studierte Biochemie, verpodcastete Wissenschaftsnachrichten und berät wissenschaftliche Softwareprojekte. Anna ist Biologin und hat während ihrer Doktorarbeit teilweise mit CRISPR gearbeitet. Obwohl wir aus verschiedenen Bereichen der Wissenschaft kommen, haben wir eine gemeinsame Leidenschaft: Themen aus der Wissenschaft verständlich darzustellen. Eine der vielversprechendsten neuen Technologien ist CRISPR/Cas. Dabei handelt es sich um eine Gentechnikmethode, die ein großes Potenzial für Mensch und Umwelt hat. Aber wie jedes Werkzeug kann CRISPR sowohl für Gutes als auch für Böses eingesetzt werden - und es ist nicht immer einfach zu sagen, was was ist, besonders in biologischen und ökologischen Systemen. CRISPR hilft uns, Genfunktionen und Krankheiten besser erforschen zu können. Es könnte uns auch helfen, die Folgen des Klimawandels in vielerlei Hinsicht zu bekämpfen - doch haben wir uns nicht genug in die Umwelt eingemischt? CRISPR könnte uns helfen, Krankheiten zu behandeln, vielleicht sogar bei Embryonen mit genetischen Krankheiten. Aber ist es ethisch vertretbar, die menschliche Keimbahn zu verändern? Oder sollten wir sie bei Tieren verändern, um höhere Fleisch-, Milch- oder Eiererträge zu erzielen? Was könnten wir ändern und was sollten wir besser in Ruhe lassen? Was mit CRISPR getan wird - darüber sollte es einen breiten Dialog in der Gesellschaft geben. Wir wollen versuchen die wissenschaftliche Faktenlage darzustellen, und die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von CRISPR zu beleuchten.

Other people: André Lampe KaLeiMai

In 2017, the federal states of Baden-Wurttemberg and Bavaria suggested the extension of the law on the analysis of forensic DNA. Up to now, DNA fingerprinting in forensic settings may, in addition to non-coding features of DNA, only analyze the chromosomal sex of the person, but not any other openly visible feature. Bavaria and Baden-Wurttemberg, under the leadership of CSU and the Green party, are pushing forward to analyze DNA found at crime scenes regarding hair color, eye color, skin color and in the case of Bavaria even geographical ethnicity. Extended DNA analysis, or “DNA facial composite” is seen as an impartial witness to the crime and, in the eyes of the states’ government, would help solve crimes. But would it?

Ever since TV shows such as CSI or NCIS have become popular, DNA evidence has gained a reputation for an infallible method of crime solving. However, similar to fingerprints, DNA evidence up to now only serves as a method of matching the DNA at a crime scene to a suspect. So what if there are no suspects? In theory, DNA possesses all the information on what a human being would look like. Does that mean we could construct a facial composite from blood spots, semen or saliva? While the term “DNA facial composite” may imply so, the science of it is still in its infancy. We can determine a likely eye, hair and skin color and a geographic ethnicity from the DNA. In some cases even more features. This could, depending on the case, lead investigations to the right suspect - but down a very dangerous path. Genetic information is subject to the laws of privacy. For one, instead of having a crime and finding as suspect, extended DNA analysis leads to an investigation into a crime, where there is no suspect, but a range of “non-suspect persons of interest” that are connected to the case only by their appearance. The presumption of innocence is vital to a democracy. Putting people of similar appearance – or even ethnical groups – into the focus of investigation, is likely to spark even more xenophobic movements in Germany. Information on skin color correlates with medical information such as skin cancer risk, but also risk for heart disease. This medical information is especially protected by law. What is worse, the technology could lead investigations to the wrong “non-suspect person of interest”. Just as hair color may change with age, so may for instance the appearance of a person’s gender. Not all genetic information is directly seen in the phenotype. Adding up to this, the data correlating genes to geographic ethnicity is only as good as the data of people who have contributed to the database in the first place. If DNA analysis is to be implemented in Germany – and it very well might be – we need to push for hard data protection laws and strict rules when and where it may be applied.

The genome – the final frontier – or just a complex mess of letters? Somewhere in there, our eye or skin color is hidden. But also, diseases can be diagnosed or predicted by analyzing the genome. More and more research is committed to finding clues for diseases in our genes. The opportunity is clear: If I know about a disease I might get ahead of time, I could possibly intervene before it starts. Yet: How accurate are these predictions and how meaningful are they? And more importantly: What happens to my genetic data once it has been decoded?

Genetic data is quite valuable, but not just for researchers, but also for health insurances, other insurers, law enforcement and employers. However, that genomic data can always be re-identified, since it is a unique pattern. Therefore, genomic data needs to be secured. In my talk, I would like to point out the possibilities which have arisen by whole genome sequencing, that is the complete decoding and analysis of one person’s genome. This milestone of biological research is important for medical advances such as personalized medicine. But it is also subject to commercialization. For ever more decreasing prices, one person can easily sequence their own genome and get access to information on heritage and possible risks of genetic diseases. This means that private companies are accumulating massive amounts of whole genome data. Additionally, third parties could send in probes of other people, which they can get quite easily. But how do we interpret the data? Even though people tend to believe that the genome holds many answers to diseases and risks, this has been a misconception. For most diseases, the environment, lifestyle and maybe even just bad luck play a much more important role. Still, many researchers are trying to analyze more and more genomes, especially in cancer research. Genetic predispositions for cancer are usually quite small probabilities, so a large sample size is needed to get reliable results. The limitless demand for more data is problematic on its own; however, getting informed consent from donors is also a problem. Once sequenced, one whole genome sequence can be about 150GB in size, which causes problems for transmitting and analyzing it. Today, genomes are shared via cloud or, interestingly, on hard drives via post. But international exchange of data also means that different legal and data security standards are mixed. Whole Genome Sequencing provides us with opportunities for medical and biological science, but with challenges in ethics and privacy.