Latest News

McGill, News

TEDx McGill holds annual conference on theme of ‘pushing the envelope’

by Kate Addison & Magdalena Nitchi & Jackie Lee & Tasmin Chu on

More in McGill:

TEDxMcGill’s annual conference was held on Nov. 16 and featured nine presentations from students, innovators, and business leaders notable for their actions that tested the limits of possibility. 

Emma Lim 

Emma Lim is a climate change activist and U0 Science student at McGill. As an organizer of Climate Strike Canada, Lim has been striking from school for climate justice since November 2018. Since then, she has become well known for her #NoFutureNoChildren Pledge, whereby she states that she will not have children until the government takes greater action to combat climate change. Lim talked about how Canada is currently not on track to meet acceptable greenhouse-gas emissions levels. 

“Canada isn’t […] on track to meet our Paris Climate Agreement goals, which would be just a 30 per cent reduction [in] emissions below early–2000s levels. Instead, we declared a national climate emergency and, less than 24 hours later, announced the purchase of a $4.4 billion pipeline expansion project.” 

Lim called on activists to go beyond making environmentally friendly changes in their own lives and pressure corporations that contribute to climate change. 

“The most impactful and powerful thing you can do as a young person, or even an older person, living in our society is to point your finger. Point your finger at the people who are responsible for this crisis,” Lim said. 

Tristan Surman

Tristan Surman is a U2 Arts student and filmmaker who has been planning events with the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) since the age of 15. After working as a multimedia editor for The McGill Tribune Surman moved on to a position in Johannesburg creating documentaries about local education.

Surman talked about how his organization, My Media Creative, works with artists to develop multimedia campaigns and provide learning experiences.

“There are so many tools that are way more accessible than ever, and if we actually want to empower young people to change discourses, to create innovations, […] we need to empower them with the tools that will actually get [their ideas] into people’s heads,” Surman said. “We need to expand the toolkit so [that] we can help people become more motivated students. [But] when we are empowering people with these communicative and creative skills, we need to adopt a different method of learning.”

Surman urged schools to break from the current mainstream method of teaching, incorporate more diverse ways of learning into their curricula, and provide more purpose-driven opportunities to students.

“How do we provide the conditions so [that] people can learn and do?” Surman said. “If we make sure people are empowered [with a tool set, provide] them a little bit of structure so [that] they can execute something, and link their learning to [a] purpose, [then we can make sure] that people can keep on doing great things and learn while doing them.”

Viveca Lee

Viveca Lee is a U2 Science student at McGill who is passionate about normalizing conversations about mental illness. Having recovered from anorexia nervosa as a teenager, Lee hopes to destigmatize the societal perception of eating disorders. In addition to her community outreach work, Lee holds a position as a research assistant at the Biopsychosocial Examination of Eating Patterns (BEEP) Lab.

Lee explained that despite eating disorders’ high mortality rates, these conditions remain insufficiently understood in our society.

“People with eating disorders are blamed for their condition,” Lee said. “They often get told things like, ‘Stop doing this to yourself.’ […] But eating disorders are not a choice. They are serious mental illnesses that affect at least one million people in Canada alone. […] When I had anorexia, it felt like my body was possessed by a demon that was constantly controlling my thoughts and actions.”

According to Lee, the behaviours that patients display are attributed to their disorder, and not their personality.

“I was in denial [that I had an eating disorder],” Lee said. “And denial is a common, characteristic symptom of anorexia nervosa. […] Although there isn’t a clear understanding of what exactly causes this lack of awareness, [research] suggests [that] starvation induces this defective information processing. […] These research findings […] validated my feelings of worthlessness and confusion for not being able to control my thoughts and actions.”

Aren Bezdjian 

Aren Bezdjian is a PhD candidate in Experimental Surgery at McGill’s Faculty of Medicine. He is internationally recognized as one of the few to have published 30 peer-reviewed scientific articles before the age of 30. 

The first section of his talk discussed the issue of incorrect interpretations of data from scientific studies. News outlets and social media platforms often take information out of context and draw false conclusions to receive public attention.

“Just because you find a correlation doesn’t mean [that] you can make a [false statement],” Bezdjian said. “A cursory reading of the abstract and title [of a scientific study] is not sufficient to make conclusions.” 

In the second half of his talk, Bezdjian explained how sound travels through the human body via bone conduction and emerging applications of this knowledge, discussing his work developing innovative hearing implants for deaf children. 

“Through these implants, [we have] allowed children to connect with the sound of their mother’s voice,” Bezdjian said. “This has [had] huge benefits in their development and quality of life.” 

Bezdjian concluded by advising the audience to remain critical of the information they consume and to take advantage of the brain’s neuroplasticity to continuously learn and improve. 

“Seek, and you will find answers to the ‘how’ and the ‘why’ [of the world],” Bezdjian said. “Passion is not innate. It is developed through life experiences [that] wire and rewire the brain.” 

Album Reviews, Arts & Entertainment

Highly Suspect misses the mark in experimenting with new sounds

by Tatianna Sitounis on

More in Album Reviews:

In a world where most rock heroes are either aging or have already passed away, it is hard not to get excited when a promising young rock band like Highly Suspect appears. After the success of their first album, Mister Asylum, which landed the band two Grammy Nominations (Best Rock Album and Best Rock Song), it seemed like they had the music industry in the palm of their hand.

The promise of the band’s earlier work is one reason why it pained fans so deeply when Highly Suspect’s third studio album, MCID, turned out to be a disappointment. Of course bands evolve, as does the ambition that goes into creating a unique album. In this case, the band’s vision of a completely new sound was poorly executed, especially considering the sound and success Highly Suspect has already achieved. 

The album is inconsistent in its overall sound, with each song pulling the listener into completely different genres: From hip hop on “Tokyo Ghoul,” which features Young Thug, to “16,” which reflects the band’s former rock/groove sound. Throughout the album, there are intermittent, lo-fi tracks such as “Tetsuo’s Bike” and “Juzo,” which bring the listener, once again, into a different soundscape.

Frankly, the album is difficult to sit through. It lacks coherence and the lyrics are often rudimentary, even cringey. Take, for example, the opening track, “Fly,” wherein the last quarter of the song, the lead singer, Johnny Stevens, gives random shoutouts: “Shout out to Pam the cat / Shout out to Jolene the dog,” not adding anything to the music or the sound. 

Sadly, MCID is a confusing, poorly executed attempt at bridging gaps between genres. Although this album sorely missed the mark, listeners shouldn’t give up on Highly Suspect just yet. Their past work proves that the group is capable of bringing more to the table in the future.

1.5 out of 5 stars

McGill, News

Award-winning Harvard University professor Maya Jasanoff presents at McGill

by Deisha Paliwal on

More in McGill:

Harvard history professor Maya Jasanoff drew a crowd of over 100 attendees to the McGill Faculty Club on Nov. 13, where she delivered the annual Cundill Lecture. Jasanoff, who serves as the Coolidge Professor of History at Harvard, received the 2018 Cundill History Prize for her book The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World. Established in 2008 by McGill alumnus F. Peter Cundill, the prize is awarded to one book annually on the basis of its profound literary, social, and academic influence in the field of history. In her lecture, Jasanoff detailed the journey of her novel and its subject, Polish-British writer Joseph Conrad. 

Christopher Chanco, a PhD student in the Department of History & Classical Studies, introduced the audience to the broad scope of Jasanoff’s writing.

“In her writing, Dr. Jasanoff has been exploring the global through the granular, finding the historical in the literary, and answering the big questions about global and social change through the lives of nomads and artists,” Chanco said. 

Jasanoff’s lecture was guided by the question, ‘How do you tell a history?’ She began by presenting a set of headlines that one might find in present-day newspapers, such as “Bomb goes off in London: Maybe terrorism.” She was quick to disprove the audience’s hunches. 

“If this looks like a history of our times, let me [correct] you,” Jasanoff said. “Each of these statements is really a description of something that also happened a century ago in a work of fiction; a novel, written by Joseph Conrad.” 

Jasanoff then criticized the common linear approach that historians adopt when trying to understand Conrad’s influences. At first, she also took on this approach, studying the archives of the University of Oxford’s Rhodes House in detail. 

“There, I realized I was looking at literature as a repository of period detail,” Jasanoff said. “I was trying to string together histories without a real purpose to the fiction.”

Jasanoff proceeded to link Conrad to his historical context, placing him in a world with growing colonialism, imperialism, and globalization.

“As I got to know him, I discovered that Conrad did not merely witness the step change of the scale and range of globalization,” Jasanoff said. “He, in certain ways, embodied it in his own global and transcontinental life.” 

In her exploration of Conrad, she found discrepancies between his narrative writings and his historical accounts, as well as a general lack of information. Jasanoff went on to explain that only four per cent of his collected work concerns his life before 1895.

“Conrad left very little documentary trace of the part of his life which would then go on to inform that fiction he spent the rest of his life writing about,” Jansanoff said. 

This posed a problem for Jasanoff, which she navigated by reading around the gaps that he left. 

“Though I cannot reliably get inside anyone’s head, using the tools of a historian, I can begin to figure out the conditions under which a person is operating,” Jasanoff said. 

Jasanoff’s strategy involved comparing her knowledge of Conrad’s environment to how he depicted it in his writing. This method gave her insight into the factors that informed his fiction. Seeking to further understand how Conrad concocted his stories, Jasanoff followed in his path and sailed across the Indian Ocean, where she came to a realization. 

“It was on board this ship that I realized that I was not writing a history of the British Empire,” Jasanoff said. “I was writing a history about globalization, because these ships still take the routes that Conrad took.” 

Yael Halevi-Wise, Associate Professor of English and Jewish Studies at McGill, delivered the closing remarks.

“Maya Jasanoff has shown more broadly that Conrad lived and wrote at the dawn of an era that we [now] recognize as a time of rushed, globalized movements and identities,” Halevi-Wise said. “[She] has compelled us to listen differently, court opportunities for unconventional dialogue, and above all, to [resist] homogeneity.”

Commentary, Opinion

Bill 40’s differential treatment of Anglophones demonstrates CAQ’s troubled agenda

by James Li on

More in Commentary:

Public hearings for Bill 40, which would remove all school boards in favour of service centres, began at the National Assembly on Nov. 4. While the bill fulfills one of the CAQ’s election promises, its provision to maintain elections for the board of directors of Anglophone, but not Francophone, service centres has proved to be its most controversial aspect. Education Minister Jean-François Roberge explained that the changes will streamline an inefficient system and save $45 million over the next four years. However, the bill is actually a hasty attempt to centralize power. In addition, the bill’s misstep in angering the Francophone community should not distract McGill from the CAQ’s continued mistreatment of English institutions.

Haphazardly changing the organization of the school system does not improve student education. Groups representing Francophone and Anglophone school boards alike brought up this point during Nov. 4’s public hearings. Instead, the bill is taking power away from voters, parents, and education professionals, granting the Minister of Education more executive power. Civic engagement and academic performance will be diminished, as observed in PEI and Nova Scotia, where Liberal governments recently removed school boards. 

At the very least, one would expect the government to follow the democratic process in deciding that it is best to remove elections, which means an adequate period for hearings and debate. Unfortunately, this has not happened. The timeline for hearings is unproportionally short considering the magnitude of the proposed changes, and would have been even shorter were it not for opposition pressure. The CAQ is working on a tight timeline as they hope to pass Bill 40 before Christmas, causing speculation that Premier Legault will use the process of closure to end debate on the bill as he did with the controversial Bills 9 and 21.

The CAQ has continuously exerted its power to the detriment of Quebec’s English institutions. While hearings for Bill 40 were running, Legault put the English Montreal School Board (EMSB) under trusteeship, accusing it of corruption. The timing of this news is a planned political move, one that effectively silences the EMSB, which previously filed legal action over the CAQ forcefully transferring schools to the French system, as well as to protect its staff from Bill 21. McGill should be especially wary of Roberge’s attempts to stretch beyond his power and impose austerity. As an English institution, McGill has historically already been treated disadvantageously; students should be particularly conscientious now, given the CAQ’s penchant to handicap Anglophones. 

In their rush to pass the bill, the CAQ has attempted to quell Anglophone dissent by changing the bill to allow English service centres to keep elections. Roberge explains this inequality by saying “in Canada there is a protection of minorities.” While it is not without justification, nor without precedent, to give special privileges to minorities (PEI and Nova Scotia kept their French school boards), it is frankly difficult to believe this supposed care for the Anglophone minority coming from this government. The CAQ is trying to placate the Anglophone community; it is afraid of legal challenges under the minority language education rights enshrined in Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As a result, Francophones are claiming discrimination, while unsatisfied Anglophones maintain that Bill 40 may still infringe on Section 23 rights because of increased executive power.

The CAQ’s propensity to speedily instigate extensive change has backfired at a surprising moment. Education is not nearly as divisive or attention-grabbing as those issues concerning the CAQ’s headlining moves, such as Laws 9 and 21, which ostensibly target minorities. However, by upsetting the Francophone majority, the CAQ will potentially face a much fiercer opposition than before. McGill students should also stand in opposition to this violation of democratic principles. In particular, students must make their concerns known to the SSMU and administration, to rein in the Minister of Education and Higher Education whose sweeping reforms may soon concern universities.

 

Commentary, Opinion

Students’ reliance on technology is increasingly distressing

by Kennedy McKee-Braide, Staff Writer on

More in Commentary:

Upon entering the typical McGill classroom, a sea of screens makes it clear that the use of laptops and tablets for note-taking has become commonplace. In response to this phenomenon, professors tend to clarify their technology policy during their first lecture of the semester: Even if they permit the use of laptops and tablets for note-taking, many will point to research that proves the damaging effects of technology use in the classroom, though these remarks are often ignored. In most cases, students should be trying to make the switch to handwritten notes, using technology to enhance their academic experience as opposed to letting it infiltrate every part of it. 

Almost universally, students get their course material on MyCourses, McGill’s ‘online classroom.’ Considering this, it seems logical and convenient to bring online tools into the physical classroom, too. Typing is generally faster than writing by hand, and software like Microsoft OneNote allows students to enhance study materials while providing the freedom to edit notes after lectures. Additionally, having access to search engines can help students avoid falling behind if a term or concept discussed is unclear, especially if the class is too large to ask questions. These factors alone might lead one to the conclusion that typing notes makes the most sense for the average student. 

However, in the long run, this convenience comes at a cost and can lead to poorer grades. Research from the University of California, Los Angeles has shown that those who write by hand tend to be more selective with what they take down in their notes instead of rushing to copy down everything verbatim when typing. While those who type notes can recall dates and facts at the same level as those who write by hand, more nuanced arguments tend to be absorbed better when students use a paper and pen.

Students have also become increasingly compulsive users of social media, with the average person checking their phone every 12 minutes. This is no accident; social media platforms are engineered to keep users addicted. This may explain why checking social media on a laptop is so appealing during lectures. Some students avoid this through self-discipline or applications that block specific websites, but most can be switched off relatively easily.

As time goes on, these distractions make it harder to concentrate for extended periods of time. A study conducted earlier this year compiled years of research on the subject, coming to a near-definite conclusion that certain brain functions, including levels of concentration and capacity for the retention of information, are negatively impacted by constant technology use. These effects can take a toll on students’ ability to be productive and actually absorb what is taught in lectures, which makes doing well more difficult. 

It is important to recognize that technology in the context of the classroom can be beneficial. Typing can make learning much easier for people with learning disabilities, as can text-to-speech software. There is also no doubt that greater access to information and the ability to use online databases and library material makes research easier. Further, online in-class quizzes can encourage students in large classes to attend lectures and catch up on readings, and recorded lectures can be crucial for those who need to miss class. However, the existence of these benefits does not mean that every aspect of students’ academic experiences should be digitized.

Technology in and of itself is not all bad; its positive impact on things like research, medicine, and communication should not be understated. The problems begin when these benefits lead to a belief that everything we do needs to be improved or made more convenient through digitization. Note-taking by hand is more than sufficient for the average person and can lead to better grades and long-term cognitive benefits. Those unhappy with their academic performance should consider eliminating unnecessary technology use. Though this may not make a difference for everyone, science says it’s worth a try. 

Features

Seeing the trees through the forest

by Kaja Surborg on

More in Features:

Prologue: 

I’m perched high in the branches of the red cedar across the street from my childhood home. I have a book, Warrior Cats, and a water bottle, and I feel like I could stay here forever. In my head, I’ve already devised a rope harness system so I don’t fall out as I sleep. I can hear the other kids playing down on the street. They’re welcome to join me, but none of them would dare climb this high. But then I hear my father yell my name.

“Get down right now, but very carefully,” he says.

I knew this warning was coming as soon as he realized where I was. 

“I’m not saying you have to get out of the tree,” he reasons. “I’m just telling you to come down a little lower.” 

There is a particular feeling I get while resting up in a tall tree: It’s this sense of stability, a sense of slowing down in all of the hectic goings-on. When I come down, it isn’t quite the same.

 

Creative

Climate on Campus: Divest McGill

by Sarah Ford and Aidan Martin on

More in Creative:

On November 12, Divest McGill, C-JAM, and Greenpeace McGill held a manifestation to pressure McGill to divest.

Our Multimedia Editors interviewed members of Divest McGill and other climate activists in Montreal to discuss their demands, achievements in the climate justice movement, and what’s in store for climate groups on campus.

Video by Sarah Ford and Aidan Martin
Illustration by Zoe Lubetkin

Hockey, Sports

Martlet hockey triumphs over top-ranked Carabins

by Katia Innes on

More in Hockey:

The McGill Martlets (4–5) faced cross-town rival and RSEQ top-ranked Université de Montréal (UdeM) Carabins (5–2) at McConnell Arena on Nov. 16. From the sound of the opening buzzer, the Martlets dominated, maintaining the lead with the help of third-year forward Lea Dumais’ decisive hat-trick and ultimately securing a 4–1 victory. This victory was especially meaningful for the Martlets considering their last encounter with the Carabins ended in a 1–3 defeat.

“[The Carabins] are definitely […] very physical,” Dumais said. “We’ve played them a lot in the playoffs, so it’s definitely sometimes a bit emotional, but [they’re] always a fun [team] to play against, and it’s very competitive.”

Within minutes of the opening faceoff, the Martlets kept the Carabins in their defensive zone, setting the tone for the rest of the game. Another precedent set early on was in penalties: Two minutes into the game, third-year forward Stephanie Desjardins was called for interference. Though the Martlets were the first in the penalty box, they did not let this deter them. A structured offence and tight passing gave the Martlets ample opportunity for shots on goal, and on a power play for the Martlets, Dumais scored her first point of the game, assisted by third-year forward Kellyane Lecours and fourth-year defencewoman Kate Devries. 

“[We played] with lots of confidence,” Head Coach Peter Smith said. “We had a great week of practice. The previous weekend, we played well against Concordia, [but then] we didn’t play well against Carleton, and I think that that was a lesson learned. In this league, you have to come out of every game and play hard, and I think that’s what we did today.”

The second period saw the Carabins returning the pressure as both teams found the back of the net, with Dumais scoring her second goal. McGill then surged in the third period, gunning to secure victory. A pair of penalties against Dumais and fifth-year center Nicole Howlett for slashing and hooking, respectively, resulted in a five-on-three Carabins power play. Fourth-year goalie Tricia Deguire defended shot after shot from a hungry Montréal offence, remaining steady on the penalty kill. The Martlets used this newfound resolve to score two goals within the last five minutes of the game: One by Dumais to round-out her hat-trick, and an empty net goal from Desjardins. 

With this victory under their belt, the Martlets feel confident that they can use this momentum to power through the final three games of the semester. 

“Today we played amazing,” Deguire said. “It was really a team effort [….] Right now what we need to do is continue on that track, and if we can play the same as today, we will be really good to go [for the next game].”

The Martlets will face off against the University of Ottawa Gee-Gees (7–5) on Nov. 22. 

 

Moment of the game

With third-year forward Lea Dumais and fifth-year centre Nicole Howlett in the penalty box, the Martlets had just three skaters on the ice. Thankfully, the Martlets soldiered through the penalty kill, with fourth-year goalie Tricia Deguire keeping the Carabins’ out of her net. 

Quotable

“Every game that we’ve played has been a […] lesson, and […] today is no different. I think our players realize what they’re capable of [….] Every game I think we’ve gotten better and better at understanding that. I have a lot of confidence that we’ll come out and play exactly like that in our remaining three games of our semester.” — Head Coach Peter Smith on the team’s growth

Stat Corner

The Martlets and Carabins kept the penalty box full this game, with seven penalties against the Martlets and five against the Carabins.

Baseball, Sports

Fantasy sports are ruining real sports

by Gabe Nisker on

More in Baseball:

The Athletic’s Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal reported on Nov. 12 that the Houston Astros had used technology to steal signs in 2017. They had installed a camera in centre field to watch the opposing catcher’s signs to the pitcher; someone in the dugout would then bang a garbage can loudly to alert their own hitters as to what pitch was coming. Stealing signs is acceptable if teams can pick up the patterns on their own but using cameras is a step too far. The Astros wanted to win baseball games, but they ignored competitive spirit to do so. The “win-at-all-costs” mentality has a long history in sports, and, more recently, it has been a big factor in ruining them.

About 30 years ago, Sports Illustrated writer Daniel Okrent invented Walks and Hits per Inning Pitched (WHIP), a statistic to assess pitcher performance. Okrent could calculate the statistic by hand, given the easy mathematics. He checked box scores every morning for his rotisserie fantasy baseball league—the first ever—in which friends drafted teams in order to see who would be the best baseball general manager. This story, in and of itself, was okay: They were simply friends having fun.

However, fantasy baseball, and fantasy sports more broadly, have transformed from fun into a cruel money-making machine. Startups DraftKings and FanDuel turned it into a daily game to win money. In daily fantasy sports, players are assigned monetary values and managers must put together the best lineup while staying under the salary cap. The Astros first hired their now-former Assistant General Manager Brandon Taubman because of his Ivy League credentials and a financially successful fantasy sports endeavour. He, like many savvy mathematicians, created algorithms to exploit matchups. 

“Sometimes there were mispricings,” Taubman said to The Athletic in 2018. “One of the big advantages was paying attention to which players were mispriced and taking advantage of that.”

The rhetoric in baseball media has since matched the way we talked about fantasy sports to the point where fans no longer discuss the ins-and-outs of good play on the field. Instead, we debate whether that team should have made a trade or whether a player is a “valuable asset.” Most fans are not on the players’ side. In a sense, they are general managers in their own minds. As a result, real baseball has become such a fantasy to some that they forget that real people are involved, both on and off the field. 

This change in how we watch sports was highlighted during an outburst from Taubman after the Astros advanced to this year’s World Series. 

“Thank god we got [Roberto] Osuna!” Taubman yelled to three female reporters. “I’m so f***ing glad we got Osuna!”

Osuna, the team’s closer, had just blown the save, but it is clear why Taubman yelled at who he did. Sports Illustrated’s Stephanie Apstein reported that Taubman directed his outburst at one reporter in particular who was wearing a domestic violence awareness bracelet. Osuna had been suspended for 75 games the year prior under the Domestic Violence Policy; the Astros acquired him in a trade from Toronto for a lessened cost due to his suspension. Taubman saw his new closer as a mispriced asset, rather than as a domestic abuser, and that is abhorrent.

The Astros’ leadership defended Taubman at first and issued a statement effectively calling Apstein’s report a false accusation. Yet, strong reporting won out, and the league began an investigation into the events. When others confirmed Apstein’s account, the Astros finally fired Taubman in what felt like a case of too little, too late.

The Houston organization is the prime example of a broken system. Teams are preoccupied with how to maximize their value—winning each and every game however they can—which neglects serious problems like players with histories of domestic violence. The Nov. 12 report exposing how the Astros stole signs in the year they won the World Series came out to much fanfare but no real surprise. Baseball’s human element has already gone missing.

From the BrainSTEM, Science & Technology

From the Brainstem: The ethics of gene editing

by Owen Dunkley on

More in From the BrainSTEM:

Since the discovery of the structure of DNA in 1953, society has debated whether our understanding of human biology might one day be our downfall. These debates progressed through the transgenic mice and in vitro fertilization of the ‘70s, DNA copying of the ‘80s, viral gene delivery and cloned sheep of the ‘90s, and completion of the human genome in 2003. The controversy has not dissipated, following an explosion in genome editing techniques that were spurred on by the repurposing of Cas9—the effector enzyme of CRISPR-Cas9—in 2012. 

As genetic technologies progress at breakneck speed, humanity’s capacity to safely fix debilitating or fatal genetic disorders has grown to the point that we will be rolling out gene-editing treatments to a greater audience in a matter of years. As the clinical adoption of this field of therapies appears imminent, ethical discussions surrounding the topic of human gene editing have returned to the forefront. Fuelling these debates are two major causes for concern: Designer babies and equitable access to healthcare. 

In late 2018, the genomes—the library of genes within each of our cells—of a set of twins born in China were modified by Cas9 for the purpose of enhancement. The announcement of the births spurred a whirlwind of controversy and renewed calls for a memorandum on the use of CRISPR and similar techniques in human embryos. To the wider public, this controversy may suggest that we have already begun to move toward consumer eugenics, wherein people tailor their children’s features to reflect their ideals. 

However, eminent scientists have underlined that the conservative nature of mainstream science will prevent genome editing research that is not thoroughly vetted by ethics boards. In light of greater ethical oversight, scientists in the coming years will likely focus their research on disease prevention in embryos, rather than on enhancement.

Although concerns about the use of CRISPR-Cas9 in embryos are legitimate, last November’s announcement should not negate the positive impact that gene editing will have in the future. Once genome editing technologies are proven safe for humans, their ability to allow people to live their lives without costly and painful medical conditions should be weighed against other ethical concerns such as potential adverse health effects and societal inequalities. Thousands of heritable single-gene mutations are already known to cause disease, and a majority of them may soon be curable with advanced CRISPR-based techniques. These techniques are likely to be more effective in early embryos than in developed humans. As soon as embryonic gene editing is deemed safe, those who oppose gene editing will need to explain how it is ethical to block people who have no reasonable alternative treatment from accessing a veritable cure.

Equitable access to healthcare remains one of the major hurdles that policymakers face each time new treatments become available. For example, in the early 2000s, patients diagnosed with HIV in Canada had access to more expensive, yet newer and more effective drug combinations than patients in sub-Saharan Africa. This divide in access to treatments allowed HIV to persist within African populations: In 2018, 68 per cent of worldwide HIV infections were in Africa. Meanwhile, only six per cent of worldwide cases were spread across Western and Central Europe and North America, combined. If genome editing technologies are not designed to fundamentally maintain the concepts of equality, disease burdens will again concentrate in lower-income countries, and global social structures will further polarize populations by income. 

No responsible government can stop the advancement of technologies in medicine that have encouraging potential. Rather than fighting off advancements, more effort must be placed on reshaping ethical and legal frameworks to ensure that as new technologies become available, free-market economics do not dictate their use and all people are granted equal access. Conversations on the use of these technologies are needed between policymakers, scientists, and the public, such that everyone understands the implications of their use before they become available.

1 … 444 445 446 447 448 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue