George Church

So I think that's the more appropriate use of gene therapy.

But I think for practical reasons, getting FDA approval and so forth, you might go for the rare diseases, and that's perfectly fine.

But I think the cost-effectiveness of the sweet spot for gene therapy is for age-related diseases, and the sweet spot for...

of rare diseases is genetic counseling.

Oh, phew.

I have to preface this by saying when scientists answer a question and explore possibilities, it doesn't mean they're advocating it.

In the past, people have asked me off-the-wall questions about Neanderthals, for example, and then it was described as if I was enthusiastic about it.

So I'm not enthusiastic about NIH and NSF budgets being cut.

You could say, well, it forces us to think more seriously about philanthropy and industrial sponsored research.

That could be a positive thing.

It could be that that makes us

listen more carefully to what society actually needs rather than doing basic research.

I'm a big proponent of basic research, but also maybe I'm more than average connecting the basic research to societal needs from the get-go.

I don't think it actually interferes with basic research to think and act on societal needs at the same time.

So that could be a positive.

It could be that it creates a...

another nation state that now is the dominant force, you know, like China could now become the next empire after.

Yeah, it could be for China.

I mean, you didn't specify who it's a positive story for.

You know, the U.S.