Author David Duncan, in The Geneticist Who Played Hoops With My DNA, spotlights the ongoing research in biotechnology. This effort is fueled by "an unprecedented surge of funding from government and the private sector, and supported by a society that loves gadgets, the medical miracles, and the standard of living afforded by modern science."(7) Duncan questions how "we [society] know for sure what they [scientists] -and we- are doing, and what will its impact be?"(10) The consequences of unraveling the human genetic code, while hopefully beneficial, could prove harmful. Scientist's reassurances notwithstanding, breakthroughs in biotechnology, as in all cutting edge discoveries, necessarily involves risks. Searching for the balance between caution and progress, Duncan assesses the motivations and personalities of nine scientists involved in this groundbreaking work.
Duncan compares his subjects to biblical, mythological, or literary figures. His "Eve" is Cynthia Kenyon; an able communicator who cautions that "we shouldn't be taken by surprise"(79) by the potential for extending life. "Paul," Francis Collins, is a scientist as well as being a devout Christian. Duncan's "Faustus," Craig Venter, heralds his innocence from profiteering, proclaiming "it was the tools we were out to sell, not the genome itself."(135) The chief of Greek gods, "Zeus," is James Watson, the overseer of the Cold Spring Harbor research facility. The devilish "Puck," Sydney Brenner, sees "science as a great game."(182)
One eminent scientist, Paul Berg, is characterized by Duncan as the wise "Moses" leading his flock to the Promised Land because Berg delayed an experiment until he was certain it could be conducted safely. The Asilomar Conference in1975, addressed this and other issues that led to formal recommendations for the conduct of potentially dangerous experiments. Berg's leadership in this regard is exemplary. In another time and place, for example, it is doubtful whether Oppenheimer or Groves would have agreed to postpone the testing of the first atomic bomb. Prior to the test the consequences for mankind remained unresolved, but it was wartime and such issues were subordinate to defeating the enemy.
Because of the extraordinary possibilities and risks from genetic research, it is the scientists responsibility to prove themselves deserving of society's confidence. By focusing the spotlight on the "roll of personality in science,"(14) Duncan tells us how geneticists interact to moderate risks while simultaneously advancing cutting edge science. Through personal interviews, Duncan describes their projects, what motivates them, and assesses how moral, ethical, or regulatory boundaries govern the manner and scope of their research. We see that scientists are human but ambitious and sometimes arrogant people who, like Douglas Melton ("Prometheus"), test the limits of what society accepts as ethically "normal."
Duncan's main point is that a dialogue between science and society is the key to balancing safety and risk so, as Cynthia Kenyon cautions, there are no surprises. The fundamental question for society is not whether DNA research should be done at all, but whether any science can be done morally and ethically "right." Duncan leaves the impression that, at least with his nine scientists, society's trust is deserved. This is a significantly endorsement but, since it is limited only to nine geneticists in one field of research, the question remains whether civilization can or will do the right thing. Only time will tell, and it will be up to historians to write the tale.