J. Craig Venter has done the improbable before: racing a much larger team of federally backed scientists to a draw in the push to break the human genetic code before leaving Celera Genomics Group earlier this year.
He recently discussed his latest goal: putting the ability to map your genes within everyone?s financial reach.
When will the new gene-analysis center open?
Well, it?s already functioning — because this is a huge expansion of what we?re already doing at TIGR [The Institute for Genomic Research, founded by Venter in 1992]. TIGR is already one of the largest sequencing facilities in the world, but we?re going to expand it about tenfold.
We expect all the construction work on the new physical center to be completed hopefully by the end of this calendar year.
How much will it cost?
A whole lot of money, tens of millions.
How many will it employ?
We think, because of all the automation, that we should be able to get by with less than 100. You can imagine the change that is versus the basically 10,000 scientists worldwide on the public genome project just to do one genome. We had close to 1,000 employees at Celera, so this is trying to get it down to just a handful of people.
Why do we need this? How will if differ from what the Human Genome Project and Celera do?
The public effort has exhausted the old technology and was created for a 15-to-20-year public works effort.
The goal of genomics for me is not to have something to put on a pedestal and celebrate: It is so genomics can benefit every individual?s life who wants to have that benefit.
In order to do that, we have to go from spending $5 billion over 15 to 20 years to do one genome to where we can do your genome over the course of this conversation. [That would] give you the benefit of understanding your own genetic code to work out what?s important to do with your life to prevent disease.
And you expect to be able to get that cost down to $1,000?
That?s the goal.
How far off is that?
Somebody could make a discovery tomorrow, and it could be a year from now — or it could take 20 years.
If you take the extrapolation of the 15 to 20 years of the public genome project and $5 billion, to Celera doing it for less than $100 million in nine months, to within this year, we?d be able to sequence the essential components of your genome in less than a week for about a half-million dollars.
If you extrapolate from that curve, it?s totally reasonable to expect with new technology development within five years, we should be there. I?ve given it a margin of five to 10 years.
And with my decoded genome in hand, what will I be able to do?
It will be a lifelong period of discovery. It?s a diagnostic test you need only once — because once you have it, every new discovery that ever takes place in biology can be related back to your genetic code. The information will grow exponentially as the century moves on.
To give you one example: colon cancer. Early on in TIGR?s existence, we discovered three new mismatched DNA repair enzymes. [Johns Hopkins oncology professor Bert] Vogelstein?s lab had already shown that one enzyme was related to colon cancer. Shortly after our discovery, he showed that all three of these new enzymes were related to colon cancer.
So by measuring the sequence in just those four human genes, you could understand whether you had an increased risk for colon cancer.
Right now, medical practice states that you should have a colonoscopy at age 50; it?s one of those great things that greet you at that age. But if you know you have an increased risk, it probably makes statistical sense for you to start at age 18. Many people that die from colon cancer die long before they reach the age of 50.
Having that information that you have an increased risk, not a yes-or-no answer but an increased risk, gives you power over your own life.
This isn?t all academic either. You revealed earlier this year that much of the genetic code that Celera completed sequencing in 2000 was your own. Knowledge of your risks led you to start taking some drugs, is that right?
I?m taking one of the statins to lower cholesterol and raise HDL [high-density lipoprotein] levels based on having some abnormal cholesterol metabolism.
I?m fortunate from having sequenced the human genome to be one of the first in history to be able to look at it. With all this fear out there in the public that the genetic code could be used as a weapon against people, I?m trying to set a positive example that I?m not afraid to have other people look at my genetic code. It won?t measure my life outcomes. It won?t measure my personality, where I?m going. But it might help me understand my risk for disease.
Will your new enterprise be working with Celera?
No.
Do you have any comment on their shift to becoming more of a drug company and less of a data and research-based one?
My only comment is that I voted with my feet. I think it?s important that as many groups as possible try to develop new therapeutics; I hope Celera is able to be successful at doing that. Running a pharmaceutical company is not something I wanted to do with my career.
You?re famous for your race with the Human Genome Project to be the first to decode human DNA. Do you see this endeavor as a way to prod publicly funded scientists further?
No. I really don?t care whether publicly funded scientists go any further or not. If they don?t, they should stop being publicly funded. The point is to move science forward, period. It has nothing to do with the individuals associated with the public effort to sequence the human genome. That?s ancient history, and it is only a minor side note of history if it?s not moved forward.
Will you be competing with the Human Genome Project for government contracts?
I don?t know. I don?t know what any of those centers are doing. We will be applying for public funds where it?s relevant. Whether new centers, old centers are also trying to do that, I don?t know.
Do you see this lab being a catalyst for further biotech development in the Rockville area?
I think it certainly has that potential. That?s not the purpose of creating it, but my view is anytime science is successful, and that science is relative to the public health, that science creates opportunities for economic development.
The only way science translates into benefiting you or me as individuals is if it?s done through a biotech or pharmaceutical or other type of health-care enterprise. If we want to see the public development of things, versus these just being esoteric exercises for scientific publications, I hope that would lead to new economic development.
This lab is a nonprofit entity. Would you ever be interested in starting another for-profit company?
It?s very doubtful, but I?ve learned never to say never. I think it?s highly unlikely that I would head such a company. My forte is making scientific breakthroughs. I don?t want to waste my time running a commercial enterprise when there are so many people who can do that.
Issues of human cloning are closely tied to genomics in the public consciousness. Where do you stand on those issues?
I think human reproductive cloning is wrong but not for the reasons most of the people in the public think it?s wrong. I didn?t get my science education from watching Hollywood movies, so I?ve never viewed cloning as some instant duplication process. That?s an absurd view of science that, unfortunately, many people have.
I think cloning is wrong because it?s human experimentation. We don?t understand the human genetic code. We don?t understand the implications of going to nonsexual reproduction. All the indications from animal models are that it?s likely to lead to higher instances of disease or cancer. There?s no justification for doing that whatsoever.
Therapeutic cloning, on the other hand, [including stem cell research] is something that has a chance to really change lives, potentially curing diseases. I think we have a moral obligation to pursue those routes to see if we can do something about them.
One of humankind?s earliest and most enduring quests has been to understand themselves. “Know thyself” is inscribed on the ancient temple of Apollo?s oracle at Delphi in Greece. With your genes sequenced, you probably know more about yourself than anyone else in history. Do you feel like that knowledge has given you wisdom?
I think we?re at the very earliest stages of genetic interpretation. Examining the genetic code overall, not just my own, has hopefully given me some degree of wisdom.
It?s very clear to me that most of our life outcomes are not written in the genetic code. This notion that?s come up [from] some scientists that deal with life as born-again Christians or others, that this is the blueprint of humanity or this is the Word of God written into the genetic code, is not a very realistic view. It attributes far more to the genetic code in terms of life outcomes than is reality.
