Human Nature

Even if you are not familiar with science and biology, Human Nature does an excellent job at explaining how gene editing and everything work. From the origins of the method to its application, they try to be as neutral as possible, weighing the pros and cons. Every person interviewed is asked about the potential benefits but also dangers of this new method.

A fascinating insight into the discovery of CRISPR technology. The documentary covers the Human Genome Project, the discovery of resistant bacteria, some inherited human diseases, the scope of CRISPR technology for the evolution and advancement of humans and for treating or eliminating genetic diseases such as sickle cell or cancer (as well as touching on the potential dangers of this technology and ethical considerations ). I have a Bio Sci degree from many years ago but I thought this documentary used really clear explanatory language and excellent animations to convey the scientific concepts. Fascinating and worth a watch! Looking forward to seeing the future applications of this technology and its potential to eradicate terrible diseases.

This is an extremely well done documentary that makes the complex world of genome editing easy to understand for anyone watching it to be able to understand. The documentary presents both fact and opinion, and in the end, allows the viewer to make our own opinion on what we think about the consequences of gene editing and whether or not it should be used. There are several chapters in this movie, all of which contain a specific theme about gene editing. The first chapters focus on the facts of the process, starting with how small mutations can cause major diseases such as sickle cell anemia, which can be very fatal to kids without proper medical attention. CRISPR is then later introduced, talking about the science behind it and what makes it so special, in terms of being able to change small genes and perhaps prevent diseases such as sickle cell anemia before they hurt more children. There is a very positive tone to these first few chapters about CRISPR, as it is reciting the facts about its potential to solve many diseases. The scientists who discovered the CRISPR gene and its corresponding CAS-9 protein are also introduced, a variety of people from around the world hwo present their differing points of view on what CRISPR really does, which is mostly the same for the beginning. The later chapters delve much deeper into the real argument and issues behind the science, not how to use it, but whether we really should. This is where the documentary treads very carefully in terms of introducing bias into the eyes of the viewer. The scientists all have very differing views as to what the potential of CRISPR was. The obvious reasoning was that it would be used to prevent diseases, but where would be stop? Having this technology gives us the potential to be able to change ourselves in many ways, such as our appearance, pain tolerance and other things. There are many who see this as a segway to a future where we order our babies with particular traits that we want, an idea that has been feared much in the past and now. The ethics of the argument is shown now, as gene editing has the potential to change the world for the better or worse. Will it create a generation that is immune to malaria, or provide the tools to create a generation of super soldiers? Although much of this is science fiction, the fiction is slowly and slowly becoming more science. The impossible that was fantasized in movies such as Jurassic Park is currently in development with species such as the wooly mammoth being considered for a revivial with the assistance of gene editing. There is a great crossroads in this part of the film, with evidence for both sides of the debate being presented back to back to the viewer, truly forcing us to have to form an opinion on such a complicated matter in just 94 minutes. The film ends on a bit of a resolution on the topic, as we are shown that the technology is starting to be approved for usage in the US, and scientists being hopeful that we will use it in the right way. The film beautifully describes what seemed like a distant future as the events of the present. It truly shows us that the issue is really not as it all seems, as there are so many converging points that exist that it takes more than just this short amount of time to be able to find a solution that makes sure that such technology is being used to its best positive potential.

We would think that the cure for cancer would take years to find, or even decades. We used to think that super powers can never exist in real life, that humans will always feel pain. Now what if I told you that we can actually change that, that humans can cure cancer and feel no pain. It looks like something taken straight out of a sci-fi movie, but scientists have found a tool that could change humanity. Enter Adam Bolt's "Human Nature," a comprehensible science and nature documentary film about a gene modification tool called CRISPR-Cas9. The documentary shows us the wonders and worries of gene manipulation, gives us an understanding of the inevitable breakthrough, and gives us the preparation to think for ourselves critically. To simplify things, CRISPR stands for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats. It is found in bacteria and is a tool that can be programmed to find a specific group of DNA sequences and change it according to our will. DNA is essentially the building blocks of life, it is what makes us who we are right now. All our positive and negative traits come from our unique DNA sequences that make every living thing different from one another. This also means that genetic diseases like cancer are caused by an undesirable DNA sequence in a person. This is where CRISPR comes to play. A CRISPR that targets the cancer-causing genes will be able to eliminate the gene, making that single person immune to cancer. "Human Nature" brilliantly describes how CRISPR can biologically change the world's problems. Diseases may be eliminated and civilizations can have a more safer and healthier life for everyone. However, CRISPR also opens the opportunity to create genetically modified babies. If we can change our genes to match our wants, we can change the genes of the next generation of humans. Now, is creating a baby who'll grow into a 6 foot person, with a 130 IQ level, and immune to all diseases really what we need? "Human Nature" also points out the bioethics about gene modification and how it can impact the way the world works. Humans have long strived for perfection, but will perfection bring more positive changes, or will it bring negative changes? I would recommend "Human Nature" to those who enjoy a non-fictional, eye-opening, informational, provocative film about human evolution and technology. The documentary invites scientists, bioethicists, and regular people to show us how gene modification can change our future. Explanations are straightforward and easy to understand for the common people to follow. I should also mention one thing that I liked about this documentary. Unlike most documentaries, this film is not made to change or force our perceptions to support the movie creators. Rather, it gives us the opportunity to think for ourselves and choose whether or not we are with this breakthrough, or are we against it. It led me to summarize the ethical questions regarding gene modification. I would ask: "Should people play God?"

This documentary was a very informative documentary. This documentary is great for the people who are new to this topic of gene editing or for those who want to learn more about the science and biology behind gene editing. This movie does a great job of explaining and introducing gene editing and how it works in a simple but effective way. The documentary starts off from the early stages of gene editing and how the idea of it came to be. It does a great job of explaining the steps and processes it took to get to where they are in this fairly new topic called gene editing. I liked how they were pretty neutral in terms of showing both the good and bad sides of gene editing and not just the good. The people who were interviewed were very specific in showing and talking about the pros and cons. They go into great detail on the technology called CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) which helped them figure out details that improved gene editing greatly. The idea of CRISPR and what it stands for were all in the documentary. They did a good job with the visuals that show what the scientists were talking about so it didn't make the viewers uncomfortable with the science jargon. The visuals were especially helpful when the scientists were talking about and explaining the process and how gene editing worked. The analogies were also helpful. The people who were interviewed were very informative, when asked certain questions it left me with a pretty good understanding instead of leaving me with more questions. I liked how the documentary was divided into six different chapters: Needle in a Haystack, CRISPR, The Gene Machine, Brave New World, The Good Gene, and Playing God. This was a very helpful feature put into this documentary. In most other documentaries it can be quite hard to follow when people start talking about various things. But breaking them down into chapters was helpful and it kind of gave a preview of what we could learn next. The story of the young boy was very inspiring to see. You could see that even with a disease like sickle cell he's able to enjoy his life. Knowing that there are researchers trying to help people like him with gene editing was really inspiring. I got to see what gene editing was all about through this documentary. Showing all the steps and mistakes and all the people that came to contribute to making gene editing better and safer. At the end of the documentary it had me thinking for a while about the various things and contents of the film. Things that could happen if this technology and information were to become perfect, what kind of world would it be like. Getting rid of and being able to cure people with the kind of illnesses that would benefit. I think that it would be pretty cool to see a world like that.

I just watched Human Nature that can be found on Netflix for a project that I am doing in my English class. This documentary was informational and showed me how these new sciences can be used in the world. There is this new technology that is introduced called CRISPR. This new piece of technology can be used to cure diseases, reshape our biosphere, and maybe even create our own design babies. In this documentary there are many scientists that want to learn what the limits really are with CRISPR. This is a name for a microscopic phenomenon, which describes repeating DNA sequences found in bacteria that have given scientists a tool to cut and edit the genomes of humans and other life forms. This could be scary for some people because it comes to a point where science could be stepping over it's bounds. Some scientists think that there could be endless possibilities while others want to reserve how much people can try to use this technology. These scientists are so caught up on what they could do that they never stopped to see if they should. There is a whole other debate on if editing sperm and eggs should be able to be done. This would create certain genes to not be passed down anymore from the parent. Some scientists are very set on not messing with these things. They say "Don't edit the germ line." This hasn't stopped other scientists to do so. Human Nature is a scientific documentary, so there is the possibility that it could be very sophisticated for the average person and begin to get boring. That is not the case for Human Nature. They very creatively put educating and entertaining together to make a great documentary. The scientists never talked down like they were talking to uneducated people. The continuous questions on how this could be moral and where the line is and if we have already crossed it keeps the audience engaged. In this documentary there is a young boy who has sickle cell anemia. They have introduced the audience to him and are saying that CRISPR could be used to alter a single DNA molecule and save David Sanchez from this life threatening condition. He knows how beneficial this could be for him if it works, but when he was asked if he would have preferred to have been born with healthy red blood cells he said, " I don't think I'd be me if I didn't have sickle cell." It is crazy to see Vladmir Putin in the documentary talking about how CRISPR can create super soldiers that have no fear or pain. This shows how the new technology can be used for bad. This doesn't mean that CRISPR is an evil thing, it is what the person does with the technology that can make it good or evil according to bioethicist Ata Charo. In the end I think that this documentary was very informative and entertaining. It was easy to keep up with all of the scientific information. It begins to ask people where the line is and what is too far.

"Human Nature" gives audiences a personal stake in the subject before getting into some pretty serious science, all of which has been thoughtfully organized into an easy-to-follow logical flow. The director introduces a young kid with sickle cell anemia who could potentially be saved by the alteration of the single DNA molecule thought to cause the life-threatening condition. David is a remarkable kid who's part of an experimental study at Stanford Children's Hospital, showing a maturity brought on by adjusting to the disorder, he's already lost a friend to leukemia, and he understands that CRISPR could make the difference in his own long-term survival, but he might surprise you when asked if he would prefer to have been born with healthy red blood cells. CRISPR is the name of a microscopic phenomenon, which describes repeating DNA sequences found in bacteria that have given scientists a precision tool to splice and edit the genome of humans and other life forms it plays into many people's anxieties of science overstepping its bounds. The broader ethical considerations come as food for thought while reminding audiences why understanding the basic principles of this emerging field is so important. Whereas some of those digressions confuse more than they illuminate, the real achievement of "Human Nature" is that it takes a complex subject and distills it into such an engaging 95-minute package. That's the successful experiment underlying this particular project, in which viewers happen to serve as the guinea pigs in how such technical information can be presented in a more effective way. The actual question arises throughout "Human Nature" over what we are and what, if anything, we should change about ourselves on a cellular level. Though the film usually takes a hopeful, pro-Crispr outlook, uncertainties still linger, as do fear over the future. As one biologist says, this isn't just the start of a new era for the world , it's the end of our beginning.

This film provides detailed information on the idea of CRISPR and how it will allow us to alter genetic information. CRISPR allows us to target a specific genetic sequence and cause a break at a specific, target site in DNA. With the help of the programming of the bacterial RNA called CAS9, it will replace and provide a complementary sequence of DNA to pair the bases of a new sequence, essentially allowing us to alter changes in DNA. The film draws out the findings of this technology and how it can be used in many different instances in not only humans, but nature as well. For instance, at the beginning of the film, we are introduced to a young boy named David Sanchez. David was born with a genetic disorder called sickle cell anemia, which is when red blood cells are misshapen, causing there to be less oxygen in the bloodstream. This can be a very deadly disorder, but it is caused by the single altercation of only one gene in a sequence of DNA. Later on in the film, we are met with David once again and are able to assess how this genetic altercation technology could essentially eliminate his disorder altogether. Although, once asked, David mentioned he doesn't ever wan't kids, but knows this idea may change. Shockingly, his reasoning had nothing to do with his disorder, rather he claims that he wouldn't be himself without it. He also says that he has learned many important values from his experience, and only but considered the idea of changing his future kids' DNA to prevent this from occurring to them. Another idea mentioned towards the closing of the film is how this genetic altercation can be used in nature as well. For example, this technology can help save coral reefs and save environments from the changing environments due to climate change. As many know, climate change is something extreme that we must begin to conquer head on as soon as possible. But this technology may allow us to find ways around the detrimental affects of climate change. For instance, another example mentioned was found in plans that must survive in extreme heat. Scientists found that by altering the DNA in these plants, they essentially program them to close their stomata when needed, allowing them to conserve their water, whereas in non-altered plants, their stomata never closes, causing its leaves to dry up and eventually die. This is where, as many of the scientists in the film asked, where is the line drawn? I believe this film is one for all future generations to watch in this case. After understanding the use of technology for gene altercation and how it may be used, the line must be drawn somewhere. Take David's experience for example, he believes his disorder has shaped him into who he is today. I believe that this technology should only be used and available for those who want to prevent harmful diseases for their children in an embryonic standpoint. As one of the females mentioned, the experience of having a child should stand more with an emotional connection with your significant other. Meaning, altering only the genes that may be fatally harmful to an individual, rather than changing traits in personality or physical traits. Although changing nature may appear as unethical, there are instances where it will benefit us in an ethical standpoint. Overall, I highly recommend to watch this film, and encourage those around you to do so as well.

I thought (given the way this documentary is described) that I'd be watching an explanation of how CRISPR works. But this is not a documentary about CRISPR, it's a documentary about attitudes towards CRISPR. If you're into that sort of thing, and into the sort of weepy human interest BS that occupies 90% of the Olympics or American Idol, go ahead and enjoy. But if your goal is to learn some actual science at something beyond a third grade level, this is not the documentary you want.

Good points all around this issue of whether we could or should, but in all reality it's coming either way and there is nothing we can do about it. Humankinds hubris is unparalleled as a species on this planet and it has led us to both achieving some our most wildly fantastic dreams and depth defying hellish nightmares. Technology will change us forever. We are seeing that played out right before our eyes in 2020. The question is - what defines perfection when we finally reach the moment of our singularity? Will we even slow down enough to even ponder that question? Nature is a magical formula that over the course of billions of years has gotten us this far. The balance in it is for a reason, and if we tend to disagree with that and opt to change it the unintended consequences may take us in directions that dissolves the true human experience. That being said the true wisdom from this documentary came from the little boy with sickle cell. He made it clear he would not have wanted to be shorted on his true human experience as the roll of natures dice made him who he is. I was blown away by his self awareness and his bravery in light of his condition. After a few hundred years will we look back at this and marvel at what it once meant to live and be apart of the true human experience locked in with the beautiful magical power of billions of years of nature? Maybe. Maybe not. I guess if once you could fly and then you couldn't and so much time had passed that you completely lost the feeling of what it felt like to fly. Would it even matter? Difficult questions.