Message from the Director
Environmental Genomics
Huntington F. Willard, PhD
To paraphrase Bill Clinton, "It's the environment, stupid!"
Geneticists are fond of invoking the environment when genes don't behave as they "should." "Gene-environment interactions" is the blanket explanation for why some people get a disease when others don't or why some gene effects are apparent only some of the time. Viewed more globally, however, the interplay of genes and environment promises to reveal much about how our genome gets translated into action and how the expression of some genes may be either stimulated or repressed due to various environmental exposures. As detailed in this month's lead article and as shown by David Schwartz and his colleagues in the Program in Environmental Genomics, the ability of environmental factors to alter gene expression appears to be almost unlimited.
"... the ability of environmental factors to alter gene expression appears to be almost unlimited."Notwithstanding the legitimate excitement about programs such as this, however, it's clear that advances in the genome sciences can be used not just to advance the cause of medicine, as is the case here, but also to do potential harm or simply to be marketed as novelties.
That's why I am struck by the contrasts between the glowing fish generated by Elwood Linney to study gene-environment interactions (see page 3) and the GloFish™, a bioengineered fish that glows in the dark and is now available for public sale. If nothing else, these fish are a sure sign that the public phase of the Genome Revolution has begun.
Like Linney's fish, GloFish™ are zebrafish. Yorktown Technologies, the maker of the GloFish™, likes to point out that the extra gene inserted into their fish was originally used to make a fish that fluoresced in the presence of environmental pollutants. "It was only recently," says Yorktown on their website, "that scientists realized the public's interest in sharing the benefits of this research."
The public’s interest? As my kids would say: "Whatever."
My objections to the GloFish™ do not stem from any Luddite ideology about tampering with nature or playing God. Nor have they to do with aesthetics. The problem I have is that selling GloFish™ tends to undermine the argument that public support for the pursuit of scientific discoveries is ultimately justified by the great potential that such discoveries have to improve life, not just trivialize it.
The inventor of the GloFish™ contends that the fish will be a way to teach the public that biotechnology needn't be dangerous. Perhaps, but any negative outcome from introducing a biotech product – especially a frivolous one – into the natural world will do more to set back the cause of legitimate genome research than whatever good the GloFish™ merchants hope to achieve. Moreover, there are legitimate concerns that release of the unregulated GloFish™ into the public sewer system may do more than just make your septic tank glow in the dark.
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to make a fish that glows, and he’ll probably make a boatload of money. In the meantime, I'll put my money on the Program in Environmental Genomics, the real "public's interest."
Huntington F. Willard
Director