DNA scientist speaks on future of genetics field

By Kiyoshi Tomono

Daily Bruin Contributor

A small crowd of students and educators packed a room in Young
Hall late Tuesday to hear a lecture about DNA and genes from one of
the field’s pioneers.

James Watson, half of the famed Watson and Crick duo who
proposed the structure of DNA in 1953 and the first director of the
National Center for Human Genome Research at the National
Institutes of Health, came not only to give a short talk, but to
sign copies of his new book, “A Passion for DNA, Genes,
Genomes, and Society.”

Co-sponsored by the departments of Organismic Biology, Ecology
and Evolution and the Molecular Biology Institute, the event
allowed the predominantly student-filled audience to learn about
molecular biology and the Human Genome Project from more than just
books.

“They said “˜It’s too dangerous to do, so
don’t do it unless you can prove that it’s
safe,'” Watson said about early critics of the genome
project. “But I thought, “˜How can you prove it’s
safe before you do it?'”

Though a consummate scientist, Watson is not new to the world of
writing. The Nobel Laureate’s previous book, “The
Double Helix,” was essentially a memoir of Watson’s
interactions with others in the process of discovering the
structure of DNA.

His more recent book, on the other hand, is a collection of 25
essays that highlight his more recent work as an advocate for
genetic research.

James Lake, a professor of molecular, cell, and developmental
biology, said the road Watson and others took to get the project
started was not without its bumps.

“Many of you don’t realize it, but the Human Genome
Project was resisted by very prominent people ““ by very
powerful scientific forces,” Lake said. “Watson was a
voice who argued strongly that we needed these projects. I think
now, we are provided with the benefit of seeing this incredible
resource.”

One of the major bumps to overcome, Watson said, was trying to
discuss ethical problems regarding genetics that he thought did not
exist.

“When we started the project, 3 percent of the money was
spent on ethical discussion,” Watson said. “Only now do
I think we have an ethical problem, and the problem involving
genetic data is not so much misuse, as it is disuse.”

Particularly, Watson said current information about genetic
disorders should be used to help predict the likelihood that a
parent would pass on those diseases to their children. But such
counseling, Watson said, is not without criticism.

“I think people think genes are bad and (genetic)
screening is bad. But, I don’t think it’s wrong to want
to improve ourselves and to want to help each other,” Watson
said. “People say “˜We are playing God.’ I say,
“˜How lucky it is that we can play it because no one else
can?'”

At UCLA and elsewhere, where studies into DNA and genetics are
ongoing, researchers’ major concerns have largely moved
beyond ethics.

“The biggest challenge is trying to redesign the old 1954
building in modern ways to allow faculty to do everything from the
study of individual molecules to evolution and ecology based on the
understanding of DNA that Watson was critical in bringing
about,” Frederick Eiserling, a professor and dean of the
Division of Life Sciences.

Watson, in the meantime, worries not so much about the pace of
the research, as he does the research’s acceptance.

“I try to tell people that we are all better off when we
can predict the weather two days ahead,” Watson said.

“You can see what’s over the horizon ““
that’s good ““ you can decide whether or not to go
camping,” he added.