Current Events > 2 Female Scientists Win Nobel Chemistry Prize for Gene-Editing Tool

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://apnews.com/article/nobel-prizes-chemistry-archive-stockholm-14ba023fa7a90b34df2d7a6d0314c796

STOCKHOLM (AP) Two scientists won the Nobel Prize in chemistry Wednesday for developing molecular scissors to edit genes, offering the promise of one day curing inherited diseases.

Working on opposite sides of the Atlantic, Frenchwoman Emmanuelle Charpentier and American Jennifer A. Doudna came up with a method known as CRISPR-cas9 that can be used to change the DNA of animals, plants and microorganisms. It was only the fourth time that a Nobel in the sciences was awarded exclusively to women, who have long received less recognition for their work than men in the prizes 119-year history.

Charpentier and Doudnas work allows for laser-sharp snips in the long strings of DNA that make up the code of life, enabling scientists to precisely edit specific genes to remove errors that lead to disease in humans and is already being used for that purpose.

There is enormous power in this genetic tool, which affects us all, said Claes Gustafsson, chair of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry. It has not only revolutionized basic science, but also resulted in innovative crops and will lead to groundbreaking new medical treatments.

Gustafsson said that, as a result, any genome can now be edited to fix genetic damage.

Dr. Francis Collins, who led the drive to map the human genome, said the technology has changed everything about how to approach diseases with a genetic cause, such as sickle cell disease.

You can draw a direct line from the success of the human genome project to the power of CRISPR-cas to make changes in the instruction book, said Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, which helped fund Doudnas work.

But many also cautioned that the technology raises serious ethical questions and must be used carefully. Much of the world became more aware of CRISPR in 2018, when Chinese scientist He Jiankui revealed he had helped make the worlds first gene-edited babies, to try to engineer resistance to future infection with the AIDS virus. His work was denounced as unsafe human experimentation because of the risk of causing unintended changes that could pass to future generations, and hes been sentenced to prison in China.

In September, an international panel of experts issued a report saying its still too soon to try to make genetically edited babies because the science isnt advanced enough to ensure safety, but they mapped a pathway for countries that want to consider it.

Being able to selectively edit genes means that you are playing God in a way, said American Chemistry Society President Luis Echegoyen, a chemistry professor at the University of Texas El Paso.

Charpentier, 51, spoke of the shock of winning.

Strangely enough I was told a number of times (that Id win), but when it happens youre very surprised and you feel that its not real, she told reporters by phone from Berlin after the award was announced in Stockholm by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. But obviously its real, so I have to get used to it now.

When asked about the significance of two women winning, Charpentier said that while she considers herself first and foremost a scientist, its reflective of the fact that science becomes more modern and involves more female leaders.

I do hope that it will remain and even develop more in this direction, she said, adding that its more cumbersome to be a woman in science than to be a man in science.

Three times a woman has won a Nobel in the sciences by herself; this is the first time an all-female team won a science prize. In 1911, Marie Curie was the sole recipient of the chemistry award, as was Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin in 1963. In 1983, Barbara McClintock won the Nobel for medicine.

Doudna told The Associated Press of her own surprise including that she learned shed won from a reporter.

I literally just found out, Im in shock, she said. I was sound asleep.

My greatest hope is that its used for good, to uncover new mysteries in biology and to benefit humankind, said Doudna, who is affiliated with the University of California, Berkeley and is paid by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which also supports APs Health and Science Department.

The breakthrough research done by Charpentier and Doudna was published in 2012, making the discovery very recent compared to much Nobel-wining research, which is often only honored after decades have passed.

Speaking to reporters from the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens in Berlin, which she leads, Charpentier said despite how recently it was developed, the method is now widely used by scientists researching diseases, developing drugs and engineering new plants.

Among the most promising therapies already being developed are for eye diseases and blood disorders, such as sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia, she said. It could also have applications in the growing field of cancer immunotherapy.

Developing hardy crops is another promising direction, said Charpentier. I think this is very important considering the challenge we are facing of climate change, she said.

The Broad Institute at Harvard and MIT have been in a long court fight over patents on CRISPR technology, and many other scientists did important work on it, but Doudna and Charpentier have been most consistently honored with prizes for turning it into an easily usable tool.

The prestigious award comes with a gold medal and prize money of 10 million kronor (more than $1.1 million), courtesy of a bequest left more than a century ago by the prizes creator, Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel. The amount was increased recently to adjust for inflation.

On Monday, the Nobel Committee awarded the prize for physiology and medicine for discovering the liver-ravaging hepatitis C virus. Tuesdays prize for physics honored breakthroughs in understanding the mysteries of cosmic black holes.

The other prizes are for outstanding work in the fields of literature, peace and economics.

It begins

---

CRISPR is what was used to make those genetically altered babies that are immune to HIV. It's a technology that could do a lot of good for people in the future, but currently that incident with the Chinese children raised a lot of ethical issues so it is hard to say what the timeline for these things looks like. An example of a disease with no cure that could be fixed by this is Huntington's disease.

---

Know what I like to call "female scientists?"

Scientists.

Tenlaar posted...

Know what I like to call "female scientists?"

Scientists.

It's weird to pretend like it's not noteworthy.

---

Ethics are just those things you need to give up on halfway through a scifi novel. Edit the humans, kill disease.

---

COVxy posted...

It's weird to pretend like it's not noteworthy.

its an attempt to maintain the status quo by downplaying achievements
---

Born too soon to not get schizophrenia, damn

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

its an attempt to maintain the status quo by downplaying achievements

I am definitely not reading it like that, what with the purpose of the article to make note of achievement.

---

At the end of the day, even were this to become common practice it will be only the wealthy who can afford to do it. Imagine living in the film Gattaca.

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

At the end of the day, even were this to become common practice it will be only the wealthy who can afford to do it. Imagine living in the film Gattaca.

Of course it will happen and of course only the wealthy will be able to afford it at first. That's how these things go. Organ transplants were considered extremely unethical at first and only the wealthy could afford them (and that is still the case to a large degree). This will be the same.

---

Tenlaar posted...

Know what I like to call "female scientists?"

Scientists.

how many female scientists were historically given recognition for their work, let alone given nobel peace prizes? it's notable in that way

---

ThyCorndog posted...

how many female scientists were historically given recognition for their work, let alone given nobel peace prizes? it's notable in that way

Do we get skin colour dubbed scientists?

---

Cobra1010 posted...

Do we get skin colour dubbed scientists?

No, though we do get races.

---

Tenlaar posted...

Know what I like to call "female scientists?"

Scientists.

Historically, male scientists have taken credit for the work of female scientists and claimed a Nobel Peace Prize. So yeah, its fucking worth noting.
---

Smashingpmkns posted...

Historically, male scientists have taken credit for the work of female scientists and claimed a Nobel Peace Prize. So yeah, its fucking worth noting.

This.

---

Good genes

---

A moving Gundam, designer babies, a global pandemic...

Bring on the Cosmic Era

---

It speaks to how revolutionary CRISPR is that it took less than a decade for it to win them the Nobel Prize.

---

Tldr can they make my dick bigger now

---

Cobra1010 posted...

Do we get skin colour dubbed scientists?

Yes, for the same reasons.

---

So I can pokehex my baby to have max IVs? Hell yeah!

---

I hope I live long enough to become a cyborg with the power of 5 gorillas in the future.

---

COVxy posted...

It's weird to pretend like it's not noteworthy.

Agreed. Its like it shows a complete lack of understanding in history.

---

Also, to those talking of the benefits of genetic engineering, I highly recommend reading Hacking Darwin so you can get a better informed laymans view on how powerful this new technology is, both in regards to extreme benefits and extreme detriments. I feel it is extremely important for the average American to be aware of where this can go so we can prevent the worst case scenarios.

---

dinosaurs when?

---

ssjevot posted...

CRISPR is what was used to make those genetically altered babies that are immune to HIV. It's a technology that could do a lot of good for people in the future, but currently that incident with the Chinese children raised a lot of ethical issues so it is hard to say what the timeline for these things looks like. An example of a disease with no cure that could be fixed by this is Huntington's disease.

I thought that Chinese doctor incident was not really an issue about the ethics of the gene editing itself but rather it was because he used unapproved technology without the proper licenses. Essentially just bureaucracy problems.

---

they've opened the doors to a brand new class system, in another couple generations you'll start to see 'genetically improved' babies for the wealthy and elite.

its like eugenics has come back again...

---

---

so this is how the future becomes female
by female scientists editing our genes to be all female

---

The Trent posted...

so this is how the future becomes female
by female scientists editing our genes to be all female

don't forget the cat ears
---

teepan95 posted...

don't forget the cat ears

they already made cat eyes ubiquitous, the sons of bitches

---

FreedomEtrtment posted...

That's interesting. I remember when there was an international panic when China had that incident with a gene editor. Glad attitudes have changed since then.

They haven't changed at all. That guy is in jail and the majority of people are still opposed to using it on human babies. These women were not involved with that nor did they advocate it.

---

Based

can they edit my genes to turn me into a cute catgirl

---

Editing someone's genetics is disgusting tbh.

I don't just mean on a religious, or moral basis either.

People still don't fucking know what they're doing with genetics, at all.

"Yeah, this one is the one that give you sickle cell immunities. Oh wait, you can't speak correctly or walk well even? Could be worse i suppose."

---

Mark of the beast.
---

ScazarMeltex posted...

At the end of the day, even were this to become common practice it will be only the wealthy who can afford to do it. Imagine living in the film Gattaca.

Yup, this is what I worry about. The rich only having access to it and breeding "super babies" while the rest of us suffer.

---