Celebrating the Double Helix

---

By Peter McCann

President, Ag-West Biotech Inc.
The double helix really can help feed the world’s needy people. The early work of pioneers, led by Crick and Watson 50 years ago, paved the way to the veritable cornucopia of improvements in plant and animal agriculture available today to help feed the world. The population has grown from 2.7 billion in 1953 to 6.3 billion in 2003 and is expected to climb to 10 billion by the middle of this century.

Opponents of agri-food biotechnology are fond of belittling the potential for human good that the transformation of DNA through plant and animal molecular biology can bring. They advance many un-scientific arguments with consumers and their governments that have the cumulative effect of preventing the benefits of agri-food biotechnology from reaching those that could benefit from it most. The large multi-national corporation is portrayed as the villain by those who, with political axes to grind, oppose the forces of globalization.

Thus in sub-Saharan Africa, we see governments that are unable to feed their own populations, refusing to allow food aid to their starving people. We see 25 to 50 per cent of the crop in some developing world countries being wasted due to the impact of avoidable pre- and post-harvest losses. We see high food prices that could be lowered by adoption of yield-enhancing technologies.

A few examples of beneficial traits ready to be introduced now or in the near future for a broad range of crops are: insect resistance, mould resistance, virus resistance, delayed ripening and enhanced nutritional properties such as healthier oils, enriched vitamins and higher-quality protein. There are plants with built-in vaccines designed to fight common human and animal diseases, and plants capable of extracting their own fertilizers from soil.

With more enlightened government support and by pressuring multi-national corporations to provide high-yielding, stress-resistant seeds, and animals with advanced growth and health characteristics to farmers in the developing world, there could be a rapid increase in the number of people able to support themselves and their families through farming. This, combined with the ability to grow biotech-enhanced crops on some currently unproductive agricultural land, will help produce more food and reduce rural unemployment. At the same time, human health and nutrition will be significantly improved and sustainable economic benefit will accrue.

By accepting the benefits that modern biotechnology has to offer and carefully, responsibly and equitably applying the benefits of biotechnology to the developing world, we will all gain from the technology. Don’t you think that Drs. Crick and Watson would approve?

Bartha Maria Knoppers LLB, DLS, PhD
Centre de recherche en droit public
Université de Montréal

For social science researchers like myself, this revolutionary discovery and all those of the last half century, mean a redoubling of our efforts to both understand the “science” of each discovery and to attempt to decipher and forecast the socio-ethical implications for individuals, their families and society.

Understanding the science itself is an ethical prerequisite to research in ethics. What is DNA? Who does it belong to? How is human DNA different (if at all) from that of the mouse, the worm or even yeast? If we share a lot of our DNA with other species, what makes us unique? Distinguishing genetic diseases often caused by single genes and passed on through heredity from genetic risk factors in common diseases such as cancer where gene-gene or gene-environmental interactions are equally — if not more — important is another challenge. In short, absent an ongoing intellectual curiosity and insight into scientific advances, we cannot enrich our own social science research.

My research into the socio-ethical and legal implications of the discovery of the double helix began by applying the ethical frameworks and tools for research involving humans, most of which have their origin in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. By analogy and extrapolation to laws and guidelines and especially human rights, the adequacy of such frameworks can be challenged.

But like the inapplicability of the monogenic disease model to all of modern DNA discoveries and maps, the social-ethical and legal issues are as complex as the multifactorial common diseases now under study for risk factors. Indeed, the social risks of the new genetics can exacerbate systemic problems such as equitable access, discrimination (insurance/employment) or stigmatization (being perceived as “ill”). They can create new issues: Is there a duty to warn family members? How do we reward innovation but ensure access by researchers and the public to gene databanks? Is personal privacy adequately protected? What about those incapable of consenting for themselves?

In other words, the double helix is truly double — both scientific and social. Fifty years later, can we truly say that the social aspects of understanding have matched the scientific ones? In an era of globalization, a positive answer to that question can only be found through a commitment to international sharing and vision.

Martin Godbout, PhD
President and CEO, Genome Canada

When I was in college learning about the double helix, I found the alphabet of DNA and the mechanics behind cell reproduction really stimulating. It is in part what attracted me to study biochemistry in university. Since then, I haven’t stopped being amazed by the complexity and the beauty of genomics.

Obviously, my whole career has revolved around DNA. From my work as a researcher at the Research Institute of SCRIPPS Clinic, to my return to Canada in 1991 when I began forging stronger links between science and business through the creation of science-related venture capital corporations such as Innovatech Québec and BioCapital. This work led me to the foundation of Genome Canada in 2000. Three years have since passed, and more than $580 million has been invested in 56 large-scale genomics research projects and platforms. I think we can now say that Canada has available the kind of funding capabilities that make it possible to be a player on the big stage. This makes me very proud.

You know, sequencing the genes of the human genome and of other living organisms has given us access, quite literally, to the “Dictionary of Life.” We are now looking at the function of those genes and this, I believe, will have a tremendous impact on the kind of health care we will receive in the future. In fact, I think genomics will give us a whole new set of tools — tools that usher in not simply the next stage in the evolution of health care, but an entirely different type of health care, one that will be predictive, preventive and personalized. Genomics can also play an essential role in meeting Canada’s environmental goals. Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol has opened up incredible new opportunities for Canada to lead in the field of new environmental technology. I believe genomics can help address the problems of global warming.

Whether it is accelerating the progress toward predictive, preventive and personalized health care or contributing to a cleaner environment, genomics, I believe, has a central role to play. The opportunities are too great, the potential too vast and the advantages too numerous to not push forward — and pushing is what I do best!

Peter Morand, PhD
President and CEO, Canadian Science and Technology Growth
Fund Inc.

The momentous discovery of DNA’s double helix was made while I was a university student in the throes of deciding whether to specialize in biology, mathematics, physics or chemistry. I was greatly influenced by this discovery, but even more so by one of my professors whom I greatly admired. He saw the resolution of this complex puzzle as a triumph of organic chemistry and predicted (correctly) that the molecular aspect of life processes would dominate science for the foreseeable future.

From then on I knew what I wanted to do and, during a rather varied career, my interest in the life sciences through organic chemistry has always been at the forefront. The central theme of my university research was the study of biologically active molecules and, in particular, the biosynthesis of estrogens in humans. Along the way I also developed a compelling interest in ethical issues related to the life sciences, particularly during my association with the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Now that I am in the private sector I spend a great deal of time with early stage companies that are developing the use of specific molecules to improve the quality of life. This I do with great enthusiasm because it combines the wonder of discovery about life processes, the ethics and societal impact tied to these discoveries and the potential to create a viable receptor capacity for a new generation of graduates who want to make a career in the health and life sciences sectors of Canada’s emerging knowledge-based economy.

We are just beginning to realize the promise of the DNA milestone. Proteomics, pharmacogenomics, forensic science and stem cell research are generating fascinating results, all of which will have a huge impact on us and on our children. Even more exciting is what remains to be discovered about how our brains work and how we can begin to use our new knowledge to find solutions to environmental pollution, famine, poor health and poverty.

Alan Bernstein, OC, PhD, FRSC
President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research

The discovery of the DNA double helix has shaped the choices, direction and focus of my life in research. From 1964 to 1968, I was an undergraduate student in mathematics and physics. I had taken one biology class in my life, in Grade 10, and it didn’t appeal to me at all. It seemed largely descriptive, all about the parts of a frog or a flower. Then, I started reading, and came across DNA. Crick was representative of a growing number of people from the natural sciences — he was a physicist originally — who were moving into biology. All of a sudden biology seemed more analytical and hypothesis-driven. And genetics was the mathematics of this new science. I sensed that there might be an opportunity for someone like me, someone with my interests, even without a background in biology, in this new, emerging field. I went on to graduate studies in biophysics, and this has shaped the directions of my research career in the thirty-some years since.

Genetics Timeline

1953
Double helix of DNA described (James Watson & Francis Crick)

1955
Human cells defined as containing 46 chromosomes (Joe Hin Tjio)

1959
First human chromosome abnormality identified: extra copy of chromosome 21 causes Down syndrome (Jerome Lejeune & Patricia Jacobs)

1961
Amino acid coding determined: four bases arrange in triplets to determine order of the 20 types of amino acids in proteins (Francis Crick, Marshall Nirenberg & others)

mRNA discovered as molecule that transports information from DNA in nucleus to protein-making machinery (ribosomes) in the cytoplasm (Sydney Brenner, Francois Jacob & Matthew Meselson)

1970
First restriction enzymes described (Hamilton Smith & Kent Wilcox)

1972
First recombinant DNA molecule created using restriction enzymes (Paul Berg & colleagues)

1977
DNA sequencing techniques devised (Walter Gilbert, Allan Maxam & Frederick Sanger)

1983
First disease gene mapped: Huntington’s disease marker, found on chromosome 4 (James Gusella & colleagues)

PCR conceptualized (Kary Mullis)

1985
First automated DNA sequencer conceived (Leroy Hood & colleagues); produced commercially a year later

1989
Defective gene and molecular defect causing cystic fibrosis discovered (Lap-Chee Tsui & colleagues)

1990
Human Genome Project (HGP) launched

BLAST algorithm for aligning DNA sequences released

1993
Michael Smith received 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for work with oligonucleotide-based, site-directed mutagenesis

1994
Detailed human genetic map created, meeting first major goal of HGP

1995
Two genes related to early-onset form of Alzheimer’s disease discovered (Peter St. George-Hyslop & colleagues)

1996
First cloned mammal, Dolly, born July in Scotland (d. Feb. 2003)

Genome of yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae sequenced (int’l team)

1997
Genome of bacterium Escherichia coli sequenced (Frederick Blattner & colleagues)

1998
New stem cell in human blood discovered (John Dick & colleagues)

Gene responsible for progressive myoclonus epilepsy, Lafora type, identified (Stephen Scherer & colleagues)

1999
HGP began full-scale human genome sequencing

First full-length sequence of a human chromosome (number 22) completed (int’l team)

2000
Genome Canada founded

Genome of fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster sequenced (U.C. Berkeley researchers & Celera Genomics Corp.)

First plant genome (Arabidopsis thaliana) sequenced (Arabidopsis Genome Initiative)

Working draft sequence of human genome announced (International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium)

2002
International HapMap Project launched in Washington, D.C.; Thomas Hudson leading Canadian team to analyse 10 per cent of the genome

2003
Gene responsible for Leigh Syndrome, French Canadian type discovered (Canadian, U.S. & Danish research team)