. >> dan pearlman. i'm a scientist, following the crispr story. imagine to have you that we live in an age of 2017 is no ice cream, and you invent ice cream, and your come over and you say, well, how do you like it? they say we love it. then you say, well, it causes elevation, it may be siderous, causes hazardous effects. maybe we shouldn't do anything about it. publish it ond the internet. crispr is like that, because the hat.s out of the capitalism is here to stay. i don't understand in what alluded to, the free-for-all, how we'll have any it if patent offices are going to be etc.?vant, what do you think about future, say, 5-10 years? >> on one hand it's wonderful, but also very challenging about the technology, is that it's widely available. whether patent offices, notwithstanding, anybody doing academic or even commercial research right now can easily ahold of the crispr molecules and tools for doing gene editing, and they can do it. that's, of course, happening. there's absolutely no way to put back in the bag. i was at an ethics meeting a ph