Review: A Crack in Creation by Jennifer Doudna & Samuel Sternberg

The version I read actually had no illustration
at all, just a blank blue cover.

Author: Jennifer Doudna & Samuel Sternberg
Genre: Popular Science
Pages: 304
Source: College Library
Rating: ★★★☆☆




















This book has two parts; The Tool (a description of how CRISPR works mechanistically) and The Task (what CRISPR might do in the world). From the reviews I've read on Goodreads, people tend to prefer the second part as it's much less technical, but somewhat predictably, I was the opposite. 

THE TOOL

I was pleasantly surprised by the first half; I had picked up the book because I wanted to understand more about this new technology, not for a fun read, so I'd expected it to be plodding but it actually wasn't - while it wasn't as exciting as some fiction, it was a smooth and enjoyable read. I'm not sure how people with less of a background in biology would've fared with understanding the molecular biology, but it was fine for me apart from one bit I felt was not explained at all and should've been, tracrRNA. 

I also thought - and this seems to be a common opinion - that the illustrations were mostly useless and would've been better off as proper coloured (or not) textbook-style diagrams rather than the sketches they were. 

That said, I found the technology interesting and now feel I have a good handle on the technology, and was happy to see the authors refer frequently to others' work (though not Feng Zhang, perhaps because they were in a patent dispute with him) and talk about the collaborative nature of science and how contributions from many scientists ultimately lead to progress in understanding nature and in the creation of new technologies. Biologically, the CRISPR system is very cool and it's super interesting that bacteria have such advanced adaptive immune systems.

THE TASK

This half was supposed to be about the uses of CRISPR and what it could do to the world, but here I found it really quite disappointing. 

It was interesting to read about all the uses CRISPR has been put to - for example, you can make double-muscled cows and dogs by knocking out a gene regulating muscle growth, and in general there were lots of examples I'd never heard of. It did creep me out a fair bit though, because it's so incredibly exploitative and the authors didn't seem to care (or express that at least). They mention using CRISPR on goats so that the goats are simultaneously bulkier (for meat) and have more hair (for cashmere) -- woo, now we can exploit animals harder than ever! In theory that could be used to reduce the number of animals suffering, and I think the authors mention this briefly, but there were just so many examples of editing animals for our own selfish use. I do currently (though very reluctantly) support the use of animals in medical research, but this is for things like food and textiles where they just aren't necessary and yet CRISPR is touted as a great new tool to increase exploitation.

The authors made a case for why people shouldn't freak out about CRISPR like they do about GMOs, basically saying that whereas transgenic plants have a whole new foreign gene inserted into them, CRISPR-gene-edited plants would just have a small change made in their own DNA. But it felt like the more courageous thing to do would be to just say they supported GMOs (which they did) and not try to distance CRISPR from them.

Finally, and the major reason I was disappointed with the second half: it lacked substance. I was hoping for a philosophical work addressing the ethical and safety questions surrounding CRISPR, rather than just saying 'there could be risks and I organised a conference on those risks saying not to do germ-line editing in humans, but I think it'll be fine'. There's so much to discuss, between disability rights (e.g. not wanting cures), germ-line editing producing designer babies, and more - so while I acknowledge her job is to be a scientist not a philosopher, I was really hoping for some meatier philosophical writing.