Reprinted from SCIENCE
BOOK REVIEWS

18 June 1965

w

AFR & 1966

Ju me

Modifying Man: Muller’s
Eugenics and Lederberg’s Euphenics

Two recent volumes are records of
symposia devoted to discussion and
consideration of man’s future and the
way it is likely to be influenced, for
better or for worse, by technological
and scientific advances. Both include
outstanding intellects—persons ‘who
are thought to be sufficiently interesting
to be invited from great distances.”
Both make very enjoyable reading;
they are also important reading. They
both carry a plea for more public
awareness and discussion of the pos-
sibilities inherent in the tremendous
advances in scientific knowledge, pos-
sibilities that may become realities
soon enough to catch most of us by
surprise. The two books are Man and
His Future (Little, Brown, Boston,
1964. 416 pp. $6), a Ciba Foundation
volume edited by Gordon Wolsten-
holme, and The Control of Human
Heredity and Evolution (Macmillan,
New York, 1965. 141 pp. Paper,
$1.95), edited by T. M. Sonneborn.

The Control of Human Heredity
and Evolution is the edited record of a
symposium held on 6 April 1963, as
part of the dedication of a new biology
building at Ohio Wesleyan University.
Organized by T. M. Sonneborn, the
symposium reflects some of his per-
sonal characteristics. It stays close to
the subject, it is well organized, the
individual papers complement one an-
other, and for the most part the dis-
cussion is disciplined and to the point.
The main emphasis is on possible ways
by which molecular and cell biology
may be used to influence heredity, and
on how soon this can be done and how
practical it might be.

The new knowledge of molecular
genetics and the possibilities offered
thereby are presented by S. E. Luria
and E. L. Tatum. This is followed by
a discussion of human cell cultures by
%. DeMars and G. Pontecorvo. There

‘e several suggestions, some quite

wginative, as to how removal, addi-

and replacement of genes might

NE 1965

take place through the application of
methods that microbial genetics sug-
gests may some day be feasible. Similar
possibilities are offered for genetic in-
tervention through manipulation of
cells. Inventive and thoughtful contri-
butions to the discussions are made by
Kimball Atwood, George Klein, W.
Szybalski, and Rollin Hotchkiss, who
comment on biological possibilities and
on the ethical problems raised there-
by.

All such suggestions have one thing
in common: they are not yet practical.
In contrast to such future possibilities
for genetic engineering, H. J. Muller
develops his arguments for the appli-
cation of artificial insemination as a
eugenic technique. His paper begins
with characteristic forthrightness: “The
main thesis I wish to uphold in this
paper is the following. For any group
of people who have a rational attitude
toward matters of reproduction, and
who also have a genuine sense of their
own responsibility to the next and sub-
sequent generations, the means exist
right now of achieving a much greater,
speedier, and more significant genetic
improvement of the population, by the
use of selection, than could be effected
by the most sophisticated methods of
treatment of the genetic material that
might be available in the twenty-first
century.”

Muller fears that too much discussion
of such possibilities as cell transplants,
DNA transformations, directed muta-
tion, or suitably designed episomes
may result in escapism and postpone-
ment and foster a “do nothing” atti-
tude: “It would be intellectually dis-
honest and morally reprehensible of
us to exploit the hope of mankind’s
eventual success in this enterprise as
an excuse for not giving our support
to the great re-educational process that
could make possible, by means now
physically available, a most significant
advance in the genetic constitution of
our species.” Genetic engineering, if

it becomes practical, is most likely to
be effective for traits determined by
single genes, as is the case for many
genetic diseases. But the hereditary
component of many of the most im-
portant human traits—intelligence, gen-
eral health, emotional stability, and dis-
position—is likely to be polygenic. The
principle that like begets like is likely
to be the best guide to prediction for
some time to come, and selection the
most efficacious means of genetic im-
provement. Muller’s deep concern for
human dignity and his belief that man-
kind can be willing to act responsibly
in regard to its genetic future are ap-
parent throughout, for example, when
he registers his disagreement with “the
stultifying assumption that people
would have to be forced, rather than
inspired, to engage in any effective
kind of genetic betterment.”

Muller’s thesis is also presented and
discussed in the Ciba symposium vol-
ume Man and His Future. But here
Joshua Lederberg brings out a con-
trasting view. Whereas the Ohio sym-
posium dealt with molecular and cellu-
lar engineering versus selection in the
control of genetic properties of future
generations, Lederberg regards the real
impact of molecular biology as being
in the engineering of human develop-
ment. Experimental modification of the
developing human by physiological and
embryological alterations has its ef-
fect in the same generation, not in
future generations. Therefore, as such
methods become applicable, they will
have an immediate, not a long term,
impact. Lederberg’s view is that such
possibilities can become rea] very soon.
For developmental (as opposed to
genetic) engineering, Lederberg pro-
poses the term euphenics, and it is a
measure of the impact of this book that
the word has already come into general
usage. In my view, Lederberg’s eu-
phenics and Muller’s eugenics are not
antithetical but complementary. Some
traits may best be modified develop-
mentally, others by selection.

Lederberg’s and Muller’s papers are
both followed by considerable discus-
sion of both the efficacy and the de-
sirability of attempts to improve the
hereditary endowment of future gen-
erations. It will come as no surprise
that there was no great unanimity of
opinion among the discussants.

The Ciba symposium volume in-
cludes many other topics. It begins
with a paper by Julian Huxley on
human evolution, the main thesis be-

1579

Copyright © 1965 by the American Association for the Advancement of Sclence
ing that future human evolution will
emphasize the psychosocial and cul-
tural aspects. ‘In psychosocial evolution
the struggle for existence has been re-
placed by what might be called the
striving for fulfilment.” Huxley gets the
symposium off to a fine start, although
I could do with less of Teilhard de
Chardin and fewer neologisms (for ex-
ample, psychedelics, teleonomic, noo-
sphere, and psychometabolism).

The first problem discussed is that
of the world food supply and over-
population. John F. Brock describes
some possibilities for more sophisti-
cated diets that could support larger
populations, though perhaps running
counter to many people’s gustatory
preferences. Colin Clark repeats his
familiar eccentricity of simply deny-
ing the existence of the problem. His
view, as described by N. W. Pirie, is
that “the world food shortage is really
a figment of Boyd Orr’s imagination.”
Needless to say, Clark gets very little
support in the discussion. Gregory Pin-
cus discusses new possibilities in chem-
ical methods of birth control. Alan
Parkes discusses the change in sex ratio
at marriage ages being brought about
by greater survival, which permits the
neonatal male excess to be carried into
young adulthood. He points out that
“Women are beginning to have the
scarcity value previously held by men”
and wonders whether this might even-
tually lead to legal and religious recog-
nition of polyandry.

Social groups, environmental pres-
sures, and the impact of machines are
discussed by Carleton Coon, Artur
Glikson, and D. M. MacKay. There is
the usual discussion of the limitations
of machines (“can machines think”)
and of the effect of prediction of an
event on the probability of its occur-
rence. I enjoyed J. B. S. Haldane’s rec-
ipe for happiness in an increasingly
sophisticated technological society; he
simply migrated to India. “I could not
keep up with modern technology, es-
pecially electronics, so I moved to a
situation where the technology is at
about the same level of development as
it was when I was 20 years old.”

The future of medical science, of in-
fectious and malignant diseases, and of
longevity are considered by A. Szent-
Gyoérgi, H. Koprowski, and Alex Com-
fort. Koprowski’s essay is both thought-
ful and poetic, a major theme being
that the natural balance of micro-
organisms in the body should not be
upset more than necessary. (Two of

1580

his maxims: “Employ only vaccines
which, while protecting against one
pathogen, do not spread another”; “If
a umiversal antibiotic is found, im-
mediately organize societies to prevent
its use. It should be dealt with as we
should have treated, and did not treat,
the atomic bomb.”) The book main-
tains its high standard to the end with
papers on human behavior and the
mind by H. Hoagland and Brock Chis-
holm and a brilliant final essay, “Bio-
logical possibilities for the human spe-
cies in the next ten thousand years,”
by Haldane.

I am usually skeptical of the value
of publishing verbatim, or only slightly
edited, reports of free-wheeling discus-
sions. But in this case I often found
myself reading the discussions with
more interest than the prepared papers.
The remarks were provocative, some-
times witty, occasionally trivial or ir-
relevant, but surprisingly often pro-
found and original. Sometimes there
were nonsequiturs as if the talking was
too good for the listening. But it must
have been exciting for the participants,
and the reader of this volume is given
a chance to share in the experience.

The ethical problems considered here
are not entirely new. We have already

developed and use the techniques of
blood transfusion, kidney transplants,
and artificial heart valves. We are to-
day confronted by serious ethical prob-
lems when lifesaving artificial kidney
dialysis is available to only a small
fraction of those who could be kept
alive by this procedure. We have
troublesome by-products of medical
advances—drug-resistant bacteria and
iatrogenic diseases. The scientific pos-
sibilities raised in this book do not
alter the basic nature of these prob-
lems, but they do greatly magnify both
the difficulties and the benefits.

The great value of these books is
that they call to the attention of the
public how real, how rapid, and how
full of possibilities, for good and for
evil, are the great transformations be-
ing brought about by modern science.
It is good to know what some of our
most sophisticated men say in their
uninhibited discussions and specula-
tions. To quote one participant: “Pub-
lic information on the possibilities of
human modification is not widely avail-
able or prevalent, particularly in the
seats of high political power.”

JAMES F. Crow
Department of Genetics,
University of Wisconsin