
Genetic modification could protect soldiers from chemical weapons - bookofjoe
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/genetic-modification-could-protect-soldiers-chemical-weapons
======
roywiggins
Chemical weapons are already mostly useful against civilians, because soldiers
carry gas masks and antidotes, which mitigate the effectiveness and makes it
harder to kill them.

It's not that chemical weapons have no military use at all, but if you make
soldiers immune then the only people killed in gas attacks will be civilians,
and that's not so far off from the world as it is.

~~~
jammygit
The biggest example of chemical weapon usage so far was wwi, and it was almost
entirely used against soldiers. wwii saw them used them in concentration camps
against captives, but not in a military capacity (apparently Italy used them
against Ethiopia shortly before the war). Not even at Stalingrad.

It honestly amazes me that the “people” in charge of some of those countries
had such restraint

~~~
trhway
>Not even at Stalingrad.

Germans had already had that experience
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_of_the_Dead_Men](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_of_the_Dead_Men)

"The gas, "caused the grass to turn black and leaves to turn yellow, and the
dead birds, frogs and other animals and insects were lying everywhere. Terrain
looked like Hell."[1] The Russians either had no gas masks, or had poorly made
ones, and most soldiers used their undershirts as masks, with many soaking
them in water or urine.[2] Sub-Lieutenant Vladimir Kotlinsky, the highest
ranking Russian soldier to survive the initial attack, rallied the other
surviving soldiers, and they elected to charge the advancing German lines.[2]

Over twelve battalions of the 11th Landwehr Division, making up more than 7000
men, advanced after the bombardment expecting little resistance. They were met
at the first defense line by a counter-charge made up of the surviving
soldiers of the 13th Company of the 226th Infantry Regiment. The Germans
became panicked by the appearance of the Russians, who were coughing up blood
and bits of their own lungs, as the hydrochloric acid formed by the mix of the
chlorine gas and the moisture in their lungs had begun to dissolve their
flesh. The Germans retreated, running so fast they ran into their own
traps.[2]"

>had such restraint

it isn't restraint. On a real battlefield, especially a modern one with all
the tanks, APCs, etc. having NBC protection, chemical weapons have very low
resulting efficiency coming at very high price. It is a very unreliable
opportunity weapon with a complex logistics. It is much more useful as a
threat than as an actual weapon.

Instead of soldiers, i think the work in the original article will in the
coming future be used to "fortify" people working in harsh/toxic/dangerous
conditions.

~~~
tropo
The threat is effective. You force the enemy to carry extra gear for
protection and decontamination.

With a serious immediate threat, you can force the enemy to wear the full NBC
gear. That impedes everything. They can't effectively eat or wash, their
vision is restricted, and they might get heatstroke.

~~~
roywiggins
But now so do your troops if they're anywhere close!

------
Thiez
I wonder whether we'll end up in a world where the military will advertise
with permanent enhancements for recruitment. Peter Watts presents this concept
in a pretty interesting way [1] and it looks like this could become a reality
in the next few decades.

[1]:
[https://www.rifters.com/echopraxia/recruiter.htm](https://www.rifters.com/echopraxia/recruiter.htm)

~~~
ErikAugust
One would have to believe that will come with frightening complications, side
effects, and potential for all sorts of debilitation. Most people though,
especially younger, do naively believe they are going to be the one egg in the
dozen that doesn't break.

At the same time all these mods are likely going to be commercialized but out
of reach for most classes, so the whole thing will become similar to the pitch
that "money for college" was back in the day. I suppose the government would
also restrict the sale of certain classes of mods making it potentially more
lucrative to enlist.

~~~
nexuist
> One would have to believe that will come with frightening complications,
> side effects, and potential for all sorts of debilitation.

But enough about the military :)

------
rahuldottech
How about you just stop with the pointless wars and chemical weapon
development instead? Wouldn't that be a whole lot cheaper and safer, and give
rise to way fewer ethical dilemmas?

Essentially all wars in recent history have led to widespread devastation, no
benefit to any people, insane numbers of deaths, and a LOT of profit for
corporations for whom war is a business.

See: _War is a Racket_ (1933):
[https://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket](https://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket)
HN discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22012255](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22012255)

~~~
refurb
Ending war means changing human nature.

Good luck with that!

~~~
jacobwilliamroy
Ending war means exploiting human nature, not changing it. We are inherently
averse to violence, danger and suffering.

------
willis936
I’ve seen this episode of Star Trek.

~~~
arexxbifs
I'm getting Universal Soldier vibes.

------
trhway
>Turn the liver into a factory for making a bioscavenger enzyme. Led by
biochemist Nageswararao Chilukuri, they used a harmless virus called an adeno-
associated virus to ferry DNA instructions into the liver cells of mice. The
result was the mice’s liver cells cranking out a potent version of PON1.

>Mice injected with the DNA-ferrying virus soon had high blood levels of the
synthetic PON1 enzyme, which remained stable for the 5-month study. The
rodents survived nine normally lethal injections of nerve agents over 6 weeks

now imagine that that virus and/or enzyme finds its way into cockroaches and
the likes - the acquired resistance against the organophosphates (the nerve
gases were a result of research into insecticides) would make them into super-
cockroaches able to resist the humans' weapons of mass cockroach destruction,
ie. insecticides.

~~~
m0llusk
Interesting point, but it is perhaps worth mentioning that cockroaches through
their resilience and fast reproduction are already strongly resistant to
control using insecticides. This is why the only reliable means for
controlling roaches are bait that gets shared before it kills.

------
CalRobert
Genetic modification is already useful for protecting crops against
glyphosate, allowing you to lay waste to the land without fear. Applying the
same methodology to humans seems fraught with peril.

------
SuperPaintMan
Pass me the Ketracel White, thanks.

~~~
all2
Ref: [https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ketracel-white](https://memory-
alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ketracel-white)

------
Nasrudith
Really even assuming an utter breakdown in norms for not using chemical
weaponry they would lose that arms race as the adversary would only need one
non-immune chemical weapons.

Of course the implications of the gene mods go far beyond that niche military
application. Being able to reliably mod organs is obviously therapeutically
helpful - say being able to reverse sickle cell anemia. Being able to
"vaccinate" against toxins is likewise obviously helpful. Drugs that
technically work on the pathogen but would be lethal to the patient could be
used harmlessly if the patient was made resistant first.

------
idclip
A Brave New Word.

~~~
kanzure
... Have you read it? You might find that it's not quite the cautionary tale
against genetic enhancement that you might think....

"The use and misuse of Brave New World in the CRISPR debate"
[https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/crispr.2019.0046](https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/crispr.2019.0046)

"One of the strangest aspects of Brave New World's use in bioethics is that
many authors use the novel as shorthand for ethical issues that never appear
in the novel at all, and even some issues that contradict those portrayed in
the novel."

"... In contrast, some of the most prominent ethical issues with GGE are
rarely discussed. For instance, it is hard to draw a connection between
Huxley's scenario and the idea of therapeutic genome editing. The use of
“biologically superior” gametes for Alphas is mentioned in Huxley's later
essays rather than in the novel itself, and even then, it is left unclear what
that entails. Nor does the novel address the possibility of these processes
causing unanticipated side effects."

"... thus, there does not seem to be any genetic testing in Brave New World,
and most of the methods described involve hormones and chemicals rather than
heritable interventions. Although Huxley wrote that “eugenics and dysgenics
were practiced systematically,”67 this seems to refer only to selective
breeding and not to any kind of direct manipulation on the genetic level. (The
Bokanovsky process does represent a form of cloning, but this is not ethically
equivalent to GGE, and references to Brave New World may lead some readers to
confuse the two technologies.)"

"Second, many authors assume that Brave New World is a parable about genetic
enhancement.35,43,47 In their report Beyond Therapy, the President's Council
on Bioethics suggested that the novel was about “producing improved … perfect
or post-human” people.41 While it's true that the upper castes in Brave New
World are smarter than the others, this is more because of the deliberate
impairment of the lower castes than because the upper castes are “perfect.”
Rather than reducing the number of individuals born with genetic disorders or
handicaps, Huxley's dystopia involves dramatically increasing their number.
Concerns about large-scale disenhancement appear only occasionally in the
gene-editing literature,7,13,28,40 making Brave New World a poor match for
these concerns. Furthermore, unfair competition for education or career
opportunities is not an issue in Huxley's world because there is no real
competition: everyone is created to fill a particular niche in society."

"In some of these cases, it is possible that authors are misremembering the
society described in Brave New World, or that they have not read the book in
the first place. Others may be using the phrase “brave new world” less in
reference to Huxley's novel and more to evoke the general idea of a futuristic
dystopia. In many cases, this seems to involve reading contemporary bioethical
concerns into Brave New World even when they are not supported by the text
itself."

"Huxley was particularly enthusiastic about Nobel laureate H.J. Muller's well-
known plan to improve the human gene pool by banking high-quality sperm.75 He
envisioned a society organized along those lines in his 1962 utopian novel
Island, in which the sperm of men with high IQs are provided from a central
bank to grateful married couples, and children play board games such as
“Evolutionary Snakes and Ladders” or “Mendelian Happy Families.” In many ways,
Island serves as an inverted version of Brave New World, demonstrating how a
non-totalitarian society might use eugenics to great benefit. Island even
suggests that people who were overly susceptible to persuasion could be
trained to avoid hypnotism by would-be dictators.76"

"Huxley's lifelong interest in modifying humans at a biological level makes
him a poor (and inaccurate) icon for common-sense controls on GGE. Although
many ethicists may be unfamiliar with his other writings, these strongly
suggest that Brave New World was never meant to be a warning about
technologies such as CRISPR. Authors looking to use science fiction in their
work might want to cite authors who provide a better foundation for their
ethical arguments."

Brave New World is about tyranny and totalitarianism, not a warning against
genetic enhancement technologies. The misuse of this book has set us back by
decades.

~~~
idclip
I did but a long time ago, i honestly dont remember it well, i actually used
that sentence ironically because while i dont mind mild boosting, just very
wary of large scale change.

I actually didnt know the book was being used like that, interesting!

------
dx87
People in the military already get smallpox and anthrax vaccines before they
deploy, so this seems like the next logical step, as long as there aren't any
negative long-term effects.

------
AJMaxwell
Gettin some real Rogue Trooper vibes

