Remaking Eden: How Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family

Rating:
Summary: Highly informative and imaginative, but somewhat biased
Review: I found this book to be highly original and very informative. In this book, Lee M. Silver recounts the history (both scientific and social) of reproductive technologies, relating specific cases, speculations, and ramifications. He goes beyond to explain possible technologies that are not yet available, and why these might be important. Such real and imagined technologies include having more than two parents, cloning, and genetic engineering. He goes on to show how a child might have three mothers (genetic, birth, and social) and two fathers (genetic and social), how a child could have more than one genetic mother, how and why someone might want to clone themselves, how genetic engineering might impact future generations or our species as a whole, and other possibilities.

My only qualm with the book was that it seemed somewhat biased in certain respects. He goes on giving scenarios that might occur in which a certain reproductive technology is of some aid. However, I do not think he goes in as much depth when it comes to scenarios in which these technologies will be of great harm.

Overall, I would recommend this book. The author has a lot of interesting and innovating things to say, and one does not need more previous knowledge of biology than is offered in a high school bio course.

Rating:
Summary: Educational - Big on concepts, little on factoids
Review: I purchased this book expecting an opinionated book on biotechnology, not sure what stance the author took. Quickly I realized he took the stance of a respectable scientist.What truly made this book great was that he educated people. Usually education will take away the majority of controversy on any subject. Silver clearly demystifies genetic engineering and shows how future situations will become an everyday part of our lives. Topics ranging from how the controversy of abortion is affected by the fact that 75 percent of all fertilized eggs will never be born, to how sensations of pain and thought don't occur because formation on the majority of synapses don't occur until the 25th week. His thorough explanations of how even a clone will be no different then any other person with its own thoughts and opinions, raised in a kind and loving family. Silver clears up misconceptions in science and society. His hypothetical situations gives this science book more pizazz and an insight into the future.

Rating:
Summary: overrated
Review: Lee Silver tackles genetic engineering with the creative flair that only a true scientific empiricist can muster. This is the only book of those reviewed that could be considered futuristic and unabashedly scientific in every respect. A remarkable achievement in describing what is in store for genetic engineering. Of the books reviewed, only Remaking Eden takes a futuristic look of what is available now and in the future and paints some interesting scenarios. Only Remaking Eden understands the importance of purposefully directed evolution, under the conscious control of the human intellect versus the algorithmic control of the selfish genes that have heretofore had control of human destiny. The left would like us to turn our backs on our human nature, and pretend we are somehow beyond the rules of nature and only an egalitarian universalism will solves the world's problems. Silver shows us that with the dawn of genetic engineering and eugenics, the future will be nothing like a Marxist perspective of human conflict, but will transcend the very concept of human, one that Nietzsche would have enthusiastically embraced. Silver opens with a discussion of the future GenRich class of people, those wealthy enough to provide their offspring the advantages of having designer genes inserted into their germ cells that will be passed on again to their children as well, who may have additional enhancement genes inserted, etc. Will they technically be considered a new species? How far can the genetic alterations go before breeding between the GenRich class and Naturals will no longer be possible? Is it then morally acceptable for the Naturals to kill the GenRich as a dangerous intellectual and manipulating predator class, or for the GenRich to thin the herds of the Naturals the way we thin deer herds when they do not have enough to eat. After all, they are separate species, with talents, heritable diseases, and intellects so different from each other that empathy and compassion for the new underclass will wane to the point of being replaced by contempt, like rats in the alley. The left of course will try to stop this from happening by shackling human reproductive freedom by passing laws against such practices. But of course this will only accelerate the speciation process, by restricting those with moderate to low incomes from taking advantage of genetic engineering in favor of the upper-class who will vacation and conceive their children in countries who will remain free to advance human evolution, while also being able to provide their own citizens with enhanced genes. These countries (probably Asia) will advance in their average genetic capital traits like intelligence and technical advancement while those controlled by the religious right and the old Bolshevik left will unite to deter this technology altogether, all in the name of preventing an ideology they cannot accept, evolutionary empiricism. Science will be subordinated for postmodernist propaganda about how the world should be molded into the classless state, one that will fail because it ignores the realities of human nature. Silver states that "But, as one might imagine GenRich parents put intense pressure on their children not to dilute their expensive genetic endowment in this way [intermarriage between GenRich and Naturals]. And as time passes, the mixing of the classes will become less and less frequent for reasons of both environment and genetics. The environmental reason is clear enough: GenRich and Natural children grow up and live in segregated social worlds where there is little chance for contact between them." But of course that parental pressure already exists in Jewish genetic separatism and to maintain Jewish blood purity. There is great concern among Jews regarding intermarriage, precisely because they are the forerunners of the GenRich class, the rest of whites and Asians are the Naturals, and Hispanics and blacks are [fill in the blank]. He goes on "Anyone who accepts the right of affluent parents to provide their children with an expensive private school education cannot use 'unfairness' as a reason for rejecting the use of reprogenetic technologies. So the future will just include more minority groups who will choose to maintain racial or species blood purity in order to maintain there cultural and economic superiority over other groups. The competition could become severe and violent if we are to believe human reactions to threats of dominance or subjugation, not unlike another Holocaust. Silver also has the most coherent explanation pertaining to abortion and when life begins. He divides life into human life in the special sense versus life in the general sense. Life is nothing more than a high degree of internal organization that uses energy to maintain a high level of information content. Death is when the energy gets turned off and the information and internal organization of the living thing begins to dissipate. So even death has no absolute boundary or point in time. Different parts of the body we call dead will continue to live for some time until the energy runs out. And human life in the special sense is located between our ears in our consciousness that results from a highly organized and functioning nervous system. So when does human life in the special sense begin? First, it cannot occur until the nervous system is functioning, until then they are just cells growing, not unlike bacteria. The fertilized egg is alive as organisms go, but no human essence of consciousness is present. Silver then discusses some anomalies even if some people still believe that there is a soul present at conception. If so, what happens to all of the naturally aborted embryos that are the rule rather than the exception? What about embryos that start out as one and then split into identical twins, do they share a soul or each get a new one? What about chimeras, a rare occurrence where two embryos mix there genetic content and the resulting child is really made up of parts of both beings. Do they each share part of each other's soul? And cloning. If a human life can be created without conception it is invalid to say conception must mark the beginning of each new life. Silver asks "1. Is the embryo alive? Clearly, yes. 2. Is the embryo human? Yes again, but so are the cells that fall off your skin every day. 3. Is the embryo human life? No. The embryo does not have any neurological attributes that we ascribe to human life in the special sense." When we speak of life we include consciousness, feelings, the ability to feel pain, anger, fear, etc. These are all part of animal life and it is why we suffer such pain when we finally have to put down a dog from disease. So clearly, life only truly begins with the development, connection, and functioning of a cerebral cortex at about the 24th week. Before then, human life in the special sense is not yet present, and the fetus is just a living parasite. And even the Catholic Church held this view, that males became ensouled at six weeks and females at thirteen weeks, as developed by Aquinas, and remained church doctrine until 1869. Silver does a good job of clarifying how competing forces can alter the outcome of evolutionary mechanisms once humans acquired the ability to reason and became subject to social or personal indoctrination, or taking on belief systems that run counter to natural instincts. He states, "People whose genes programmed them with reproductive desire (separate from sexual desire) would be more likely to engage in activities that promoted successful pregnancy, childbirth, and parenting. Their children, in turn, would inherit the same genes and do the same for their children, and so on through each generation. Ultimately, the emotional desire to have children would spread throughout the entire species. Of course, most of us know people who are childless by choice. How does biology explain this? The explanation comes from the single attribute that uniquely defines us as human beings. We alone--among all animal species--have evolved the intellectual capacity to comprehend and, at times, counteract the natural predispositions provided to us by our genes. And under certain circumstances of environment, culture, or intellect, reproductive desires can be rejected in favor of other desires centered more on the self, on other human beings, or other life goals." This is a very important dilemma for any eugenics movement and also explains why society is now practicing deleterious social dysgenics that will further reduce the average level of intelligence genes in the population. Intelligent people have the ability to plan and carry out long range goals, weighing options, calculating what is the best course of action. They will refrain from early pregnancy in favor of getting an education, establishing themselves financially in an occupation, and then only will they plan and have children, sometimes. For many, the excitement and rewards of an active intellectual or financially rewarding occupation makes having children less of a need and more often a burden. They can understand children and nurturing

Rating:
Summary: Human Genetic Engineering
Review: This book is an excellent read for anyone with an interest in reproductive technologies. I submit that it is important for everyone as the issues in the book are rapidly becoming less science-fiction and more reality. Cloning and genetic selection are especially important. Both positive and negative scenarios resulting from the use of these and other technologies are presented. They may seem far-fetched at times but nonetheless possible.
I had the privilege of taking Prof. Silver's class at Princeton and listen to him lecture on this book and others on the subject, and I am so glad that I did.
Right now most people are terrified of the unknown future of cloning, genetic engineering, and other technologies. Please, read this book before making up your mind!
The best part about this book is that it does not get too bogged down in technical details. A non-scientist can read it and understand, but someone who knows more about the scientific aspects can still learn from it. There's something for everyone!

Rating:
Summary: A must-read for everyone!
Review: This book is an excellent read for anyone with an interest in reproductive technologies. I submit that it is important for everyone as the issues in the book are rapidly becoming less science-fiction and more reality. Cloning and genetic selection are especially important. Both positive and negative scenarios resulting from the use of these and other technologies are presented. They may seem far-fetched at times but nonetheless possible.
I had the privilege of taking Prof. Silver's class at Princeton and listen to him lecture on this book and others on the subject, and I am so glad that I did.
Right now most people are terrified of the unknown future of cloning, genetic engineering, and other technologies. Please, read this book before making up your mind!
The best part about this book is that it does not get too bogged down in technical details. A non-scientist can read it and understand, but someone who knows more about the scientific aspects can still learn from it. There's something for everyone!

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant in every way
Review: With the announcement today of the completion of mapping of the human genome, this book takes on particular importance. The book was published in 1997, and as further evidence of the technological hyperdrive of the 21st century and the incredible advances in sequencing technology since 1997, the author predicts on page 244 that the Human Genome Project would take 23 more years, and be completed by 2020!

The book is excellent, for the author gives brilliant arguments both supporting genetic technologies and countering many that don't. In addition, the author discusses possibilities in reproductive technologies that may be unknown to a reader, like myself, who is not an expert in embryology. For example, he discusses the occurrence (although rare) of natural-born chimeric human beings, who arose from the fusion of two embryos that resulted from the fertilization of two eggs that had been ovulated simultaneously by their mother. Another example discussed is the possibility of a fertilized egg winding up in the peritoneal cavity (in the abdomen essentially). This example was discussed in the context of whether indeed a man could carry a pregnancy.

Some of the other interesting arguments and discussions in the book include: 1. When addressing the assertion that it is unfair for only the wealthy to take advantage of genetic technologies for enhancing their progeny, the author agrees that it is, but he then states correctly that a society that accepts the right of wealthy parents to provide their children with a top-notch private education cannot use "unfairness" as a reason for denying the use of genetic technologies. 2. His discussion of the status of the embryo as human life, which he argues, brilliantly, is not. "If a human life can begin in the absence of conception" he says, "then it is scientifically invalid to say that conception must mark the beginning of each human life. It is as simple as that". 3. The discussion of the history of in vitro fertilization, the ethical issues surrounding it, and the technologies needed to bring it about. The author regards IVF as a pivotal point in history, in which humans took charge of their reproductive destiny. 4. The discussion of cloning, elaborating naturally on the cloning of Dolly the sheep. He states that the cloning of Dolly "broke the technological barrier" and that there is "no reason to expect that the technology couldn't be transferred to human cells." Recent experiments in the last few months however have cast doubt on the ability to do cloning of primates, and so human cloning could therefore be problematic. The author though counters very successfully the arguments against the practice of human cloning.

The author has a refreshing optimism throughout the book, and he remains confident in the human ability to both understand the world and change it with proven and safe technologies. In light of the completion of the mapping of the human genome, his optimism is certainly justified. The technologies discussed in this book, coupled with the information obtained from the complete human genome, promise an incredibly interesting future for biology. Both the author and the individuals behind the human genome project are excellent examples of the ingenuity and mental discipline of the human species.