THE HUMAN GENOME PROJECT
Mapping the Future

Download a PDF version of the transcript.

Program Summary

Producer: Loretta A. Williams
Aired Beginning: November 1998

The Human Genome Project is a result - at least indirectly - of the atomic bomb, and the project's implications for our global society may be similarly significant. The HGP grew out of the Department of Energy's research of genetic mutations caused by the development and use of nuclear weapons. In the mid 1980s a researcher at the DOE realized that it would be enormously useful to be able to compare the genome of a child with that of its parents - DNA base pair by DNA base pair - to uncover the mutations caused by radiation. Meetings were organized to discuss the technological hurdles and to introduce the idea to scientists from various disciplines.

There was some initial struggle. Many scientists worried that this study would suck money away from other research, and one complained, "Even if I had the sequence, I wouldn't know what to do with it." But the project gathered impetus in 1988 when the National Institutes of Health became involved. The biomedical implications of knowing the human genome were clear to most geneticists and biochemical researchers. By 1990 the U.S. Congress officially sanctioned the Human Genome Project, with research and oversight to be handled jointly by the DOE and NIH. Today most, if not all, scientists agree on the usefulness of this international 15-year effort to map and sequence the 60,000 to 80,000 genes in the human genome.

Sequencing the genome has brought us unprecedented knowledge. We've identified genes that cause debilitating conditions. We can understand genetic mechanisms behind cancer and heart disease. The technologies that allow us to sequence genes also allow us to match DNA samples in criminal cases and paternity suits - and to know if a child will be born with Tay-Sachs or sickle-cell anemia. Anthropologists have a new tool for tracing the ancient migrations of people around the globe, and by comparing our DNA to the DNA of mice, worms, and plants, we've been able to quantify the interrelatedness of all life on the planet.

But there has been controversy. Some say that our technical knowledge has outpaced our ability to handle the social implications. We can test for ills that we can't treat. We'll test a fetus for Down syndrome, but we're unable to determine whether the child will be mildly or severely affected. We think there are genes involved in personality traits, but we don't know the implications of telling a person that he or she is "predisposed" to, say, anxiety. Genetics show that the racial distinctions we make between people are cultural, not biological - so what does it mean to say that more African-Americans have sickle cell, or that more Euro-Americans have cystic fibrosis?

Explore these issues with the experts. Listen in on a roundtable discussion as Human Genome Project director Francis Collins is joined by Georgia Dunston of the Howard University College of Medicine; Thomas Murray, a member of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission; and Vicky Whittemore, from the National Tuberous Sclerosis Association.

Last Updated: July 2004