Colorado College Bulletin

Breaking the DNA Code

By SHAWNETTE ERDOS '99

I lived in a household where discussing the morphology of mitochondria was normal dinner conversation. Much of science was second nature to me; I was practically weaned on bedtime stories of how little creatures called bacteria cause illnesses, or how caterpillars pupate into butterflies. However, one element of biology was always missing from my informal parental education -- genetics. Perhaps that is why I began to seek out my own answers to the mysterious molecule called DNA. When I was a 12-year-old seventh grade student in Ithaca, N.Y., I vividly remember going to Cornell University one Saturday morning in 1990 for a science program called “Expanding Your Horizons.” I had the unusual opportunity to stick my hand inside a fistula in the stomach of a living cow, and even perform ultrasound on a pregnant sheep. Yet neither experience was as memorable, nor as intriguing, as isolating DNA from fruit flies. It was such a feeling of awe. An hour earlier these tiny flies were buzzing around inside a jar. Then after adding some chemicals and centrifuging a few times, I was able to hold the blueprint of their design in my hands -- the genome of the fruit fly. Inside my tightly sealed 1.5ml tube were thin strands of DNA, barely visible as opaque strings suspended in a buffer. I took that tube home with me, and kept it on my desk for the next five years. My mother kept trying to get me to throw it away, but it was somehow too precious for me to part with, even after the DNA degraded into a cloudy solution.

That same year an extraordinary and controversial project was officially launched -- the Human Genome Project (HGP). It was a joint initiative by the Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to sequence the entire human genome. That also marked the beginning of a genetic race. A 10+ year sequencing marathon, between the government-funded HGP and the privately funded sequencing by Celera Genomics. A vicious rivalry ensued between discovery for the public good and discovery motivated by monetary gains. The heads of both teams, Dr. Francis Collins (NIH) and Dr. Craig Venter (Celera), were constantly at odds. The goal of the public consortium was to involve labs around the world in the Human Genome Project, while making all of the data open and free to the public. As each lab deciphered a new segment of DNA, they uploaded the sequence onto an NIH Web site. The rational behind making all of the genomic data available was that if scientists could directly download the data onto their computers, they would then have a quicker and easier time making genetic breakthroughs, such as finding the genes associated with particular diseases.  Celera, however, decided to charge an exorbitant amount of money for the use of their information -- information that was in part based on the HGP’s free data.

On June 26, 2000, the two put aside their personal and professional rivalry to meet with mutual respect at a White House ceremony. That day they made the monumental announcement that the rough draft of the human genome was complete. They did not dwell on the differences between the two teams or the fact that Celera had completed the project before the NIH consortium. Instead, Collins and Venter praised the work of both teams.

This was an amazing announcement to me, despite the fact that I have grown up in the molecular age. Tremendous strides have been made in genetics in such a relatively short period of time. In 1953 the famous duo of Watson and Crick deciphered the structure of DNA. In less than half a century, we now know how DNA codes for protein synthesis and how many of those proteins function to create characteristic traits such as blue eyes or diseases such as breast cancer. We can now transfer genes into bacteria and use them as reproductive machines to create millions of clones of the genes. We can even create transgenic organisms, such as Dolly, a cloned sheep that has been engineered to produce a human protein in her milk.

Such amazing feats in biotechnology are what my generation has grown up with. Molecular biology was integrated into nearly every biology and chemistry class I took at Colorado College. Because of this, it is almost impossible for me to imagine a time when we, as scientists, did not understand how genetic material is inherited or how to clone genes using bacteria, even though such discoveries are still quite novel. However, my mother’s perception of genetics is quite different. In 1984 my mother, Karen Andersen Medville ‘85, was a biology major at Colorado College. Although by this time the first organism (the bacteriophage) had its genome sequenced, molecular genetics was not yet a major component of my mother’s education.

“I remember learning about DNA -- the double helix, the A, T, C and G bases.  But I did not know how any of that related to the Punnett squares we did,” Karen recalls.  “At that time it was inconceivable that scientists would decipher the entire human genome in my lifetime. Now, as an assistant professor in a life science department, it is essential that I have a foundation in such a pivotal aspect of biological research.  Ironically, most of the genetic advancements I have learned about have been from my daughter.  Throughout her years at Colorado College, as a student and paraprofessional, she has gradually imparted knowledge of molecular techniques, and the legal and social implications of such innovations, as she learned or helped teach them in various classes."

Much remains to be discovered about the human genome. At this point in time, biologists have translated the book containing “the language in which God created life,” as President Clinton so eloquently put it. Now much work needs to be done by laboratories throughout the world to understand this ancient dialect. We all have big dreams and hopes about the “miracles” encrypted in these 80,000 compact disks of As, Ts, Cs and Gs. We are entering a revolution -- a revolution in medicine, a revolution in how we view humanity.

However we cannot enter this revolution with blind aspirations. We must take precautions against the misuse of such rapidly evolving technology. We need to create a balance between profits, fads and ethics. Molecular biotechnology is undeniably where the money is, both in academia and industry.  To a large extent, money is what has fueled the high-speed train of discoveries since 1953. Yet it could also have terrifying results if the sole motivation is monetary gain.  Insurance companies may drop the coverage of clients whom they discover have the genetic propensity toward developing particular conditions. Likewise, businesses might base employment decisions on such genetic predispositions. As genetic engineering will inevitably take on a more predominant role in developing treatments and cures for diseases, we must be cautious when utilizing such techniques. As a society, we need to set guidelines that prohibit fads and parental prejudices from influencing the genetic alteration of human embryos. It is paramount that we educate everyone, now and in generations to follow, in genetic ethics. Genetics can no longer be a discipline understood only by a few expert scientists. Everyone must have an understanding of the implications of the Human Genome Project so they can make informed choices. And those in powerful decision-making positions need to be grounded in their values, as well as informed about the actual science surrounding the HGP. Perhaps we can look to Dr. Venter and Dr. Collins as role models. They took a big step in bridging the gaps and finding a middle ground between the dichotomous set of values they embody -- values that are innate to society.

Back to Index