How to Build a Human (2011) s01e02 Episode Script
Predictor
Imagine a world where we could look in to our future by looking at our genes.
A world where a machine could study the genetic information locked away in just one drop of blood.
And predict details of a life from birth until death.
Could this fantasy ever come true? To what extent does DNA shape our destiny? In the 21st Century, we are about to find out.
This remarkable journey to a world of prediction starts here, in the human cell.
And at the heart of the cell is the greatest prize of all, the 46 chromosomes which between them contain all the genes needed to build a human being.
The genes are a book of information that describe how each human being will develop, and we can now read that book, and for the very first time we're going to be able to see inside of every human being.
As we decipher the information contained within these genes, we are not only learning how to build a human, but also how to predict what characteristics that human might have.
We have new genetic techniques that allows us to look at personality, the same way that we would look at eye colour.
We can actually look at the molecules that are involved in.
That's really exciting.
Could a gene really predict whether you would do this.
As you step off, if you don't do anything, you have 14 seconds to live.
Cr predict who will be prone to murderous impulses.
There is such a thing as a natural born killer.
Cr even predict your ultimate end? People with those strength versions of the gene seem to be dying a little bit younger.
Everyday, we are learning more about what can and cannot be predicted from the mysterious substance that is our DNA.
It's amazing to think that this translucent slime that we have here is DNA.
Nobel Prize winner, Paul Nurse, has spent much of his career studying DNA.
Everything about us is determined by the structure of this DNA, whether we have blue eyes or brown hair, a big nose, whether we'll suffer from certain diseases, like cystic fibrosis.
Maybe even one day in the future, perhaps it can be used to predict our behaviour, all by knowing the structure of this molecule.
But how can these tiny drops of DNA be used to make predictions? Here, at the Army Training Headquarters at Bassingbourn, an experiment is about to begin.
These new recruits are taking part in one of the first scientific studies of gene prediction, an attempt to see if a single gene, called the ACE gene, can predict how these recruits will perform.
The man behind this ground-breaking study is Hugh Montgomery.
He believes that by studying these recruits he can unlock one of the key genes that determines long life.
We've chosen to use the army for these sorts of studies for very good reasons.
If we take these recruits here, we're looking at people we can choose to be the same age, the same sex, they're eating the same food, they're drinking the same water, being shouted at by the same people, wearing the same sorts of clothing, and undergoing absolutely identical training.
Montgomery is testing the DNA of each of the 80 recruits taking part in the study.
By examining their genes he thinks he can predict which of the recruits has the endurance to deal with the gruelling demands of army training.
And finding out which of the recruits can run further may also allow him to predict which will live longer.
In later life, it is quite likely that these sorts of genes we're looking at will affect their long term survival.
One of the soldiers being studied is Ian McDermott.
Ian is 17 years old, and endurance is not his strong point.
He's worried he might not keep up when he has to do long distant runs.
The only thing I had doubts about was the runs, because I'm not a big long distance runner, like four, five, six miles, I can't really do it, I sort of think I thought it was going to be impossible, and that it was going to be like running 15, 16, 17 miles everyday, but it's not.
But it's not - it's not easy.
When it comes to long distance running, Ian's genes may be letting him down.
Look back at his family and it's clear he comes from a long line of bad runners.
I once ran a mile because I had to, that was it.
There after I never ran more than 200 metres in my life.
Ian's very much of the same short, sharp stuff that I was.
Which is why I really worried that he'll drop out.
I don't want him to drop out.
Even though I don't want him to be in the army, I don't want him to drop out.
At the end of 10 weeks, the squad's athletic performance will be compared with their genes.
Although this is just one study, the implications of this sort of research for every one of us are huge.
The idea that our destiny could lie in our genes is about to change the way we live forever.
We are not in a position to really predict a life, but we can certainly say more about a person like Ian than ever before.
More and more, we are finding that the unique characteristics that make us all individuals can in some way be traced back; traced back to the moment when a unique mix of genes was created: Back to the moment of conception.
In each one of our lives, the moment of conception marked the beginning of an extraordinary journey.
A journey that saw the 23 chromosomes carried in our father's sperm combine with the 23 chromosomes inside our mother's egg, to form the distinct set of instructions that we call our genome.
Cur DNA is inherited from our parents, and yet we are different from them.
Each one of us can look at our parents and see them reflected in ourselves.
But how is this information passed on? In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, scientists began to realise that there were patterns of inheritance which could make sense of the confusing hereditary that they'd recognised up to that point.
And then they could start applying these principles to human beings, particularly the freak shows at the beginning of the 20th Century.
In the early 1900s, scientists realised the best way to discover how ordinary characteristics are passed on was by first studying the extraordinary.
Families with unfortunate inherited diseases would provide key insights in to how our genes are transmitted.
And here, in Coney Island, the scientists found exactly what they were looking for, endless examples of families with physical deformities.
The shows still exist on Coney Island, and Tony works here as an entertainer.
Tony has a condition called achondroplasia, a form of growth retardation.
For Tony and his family, the condition appears random.
It seems to hide, skip generations, and then reappear.
It could pass 12 generations before another one pops up in my family again.
It's just - it's just odd.
Tony's mother is like him, but his son is not, and Tony is unsure what the risks are of the deformity reappearing in future generations.
I have a three year old son, his name's Antonio.
He's about - if I stand up, he's about up to my shoulders already.
According to my specialist, my son will be between six two to six eight.
But that don't say that because he's tall, one of my grandchildren may come out to be like me.
We don't know.
We don't know until the time comes.
Tony is happy not knowing, but if he really wanted to, he could find out the odds of having another child with his condition.
The scientists who worked at Coney Island a 100 years ago, showed that genetic diseases, like Tony's, follow a very predictable pattern.
Examining freak shows and the sorts of abnormalities that were being inherited in families, revealed patterns which allowed scientists to predict the probability of a child inheriting a particular defect or deformity.
So out of this chaos, real order began to emerge, and that order was really the beginning of human genetics.
But while 20th Century geneticists could predict the odds of a disease being passed on, they could not give the precise yes or no that most parents wanted.
But the science of prediction has improved.
Four years ago, Catherine Linnett set out looking for precise answers.
She was hoping to track down a gene and solve her family mystery.
I remember my grandmother telling me when I was small that it was a curse.
We used to sit there and she would tell us this story, and we used to imagine what this awful thing was that this person must have done.
According to family legend, the curse began 500 years ago, when one of Catherine's ancestors, a clergyman, had his prize apples stolen.
Mad with rage, he cursed the unknown thief, calling on God to remove the thief's fingers.
Later, to his horror, the clergyman discovered that the thief was his own pregnant wife.
Legend has it that the curse fell upon their baby, who was born without fingers.
Catherine was born with deformed hands.
Where her fingers should be are ten shortened nailless digits that stop at the first joint.
It is never the same in two different people.
We have various length fingers.
My brother's fingers are longer than mine, my mother's fingers are longer than mine, but my grandmother's were shorter, so it varies from person to person.
The condition is known as brachydactylly, and although very little is understood about it, it is clear that something in the womb goes wrong.
The palms develop properly, but the fingers do not.
Deformed or webbed fingers appear and disappear through the generations.
Catherine's two daughters do not have the condition, but her son, David, does.
He had to have surgery when he was very young to have the webbed fingers separated, and he inherited my thumbs, which have an extra bone in each thumb.
So he had to have quite a lot of reconstructive surgery on his hands when he was 18 months old.
Catherine wants to know exactly what causes the family deformity, which particular gene is responsible.
Find it, and the family curse can be put to rest.
And today, this is a possibility.
For the first time in human history, we can peer in to our children's genetic future; thanks to a discovery made in 1953 in Cambridge by two young men, James Watson and Francis Crick.
We're clearly specified to a high degree of detail, and yet half that information is carried in the head of the sperm, and that head is very small, about the size of a pinpoint.
How can so much information be contained in such an exceedingly tiny space? Crick, with his colleague James Watson, battled to understand how tiny, almost invisible cells, can store all the information needed to build a human.
Their answer, when it came, was simple and beautiful.
What Watson and Crick did was to work out the structure of DNA, that is how the molecules of DNA are put together, and when they looked at that, they realised that the structure consisted of a series of chemical letters, and that the code of life was written in those four chemical letters.
The language of DNA is written in a four letter alphabet that corresponds to four chemical basis.
A for adenine, C for cytosine, G for guanine, and T for Thiamine.
And it's these groups of letters that spell out chunks of information that we now call our genes.
The structure of DNA determined by Crick and Watson in the early 1950s was the greatest discovery in biology of the 20th Century.
It's revolutionised our understanding of genetics, it's revolutionised how we carry out biology and medicine, and we're still living with the fruits of that revolution today.
The Linnett family are about to harvest some of the benefits of this revolution.
For the first time, relatives Catherine didn't even know existed have travelled from all over the country to be together.
And, for the first time, they have an explanation for the family condition.
The fact that my grandmother said that it was a curse, it never rang true.
It is just a gene that went wrong generations ago that has just been passed on through the generations.
In every member of the family with a deformity, there is a spelling mistake in the genetic code.
On chromosome 9, the letter C has been turned in to the letter A.
It's a tiny error, but the impact is huge.
Just this one letter change out of billions is enough to disrupt the building of a human hand.
After years of searching, Catherine now knows what causes her deformity.
It's been suggested we call ourselves the Stumpy Club, and And through the search for the gene she has also found a wider family she had never previously met.
I felt, probably for the first time ever, that I can really be me, and I can use my hands and not think that people are looking and starring, and it's just been - it's been great.
It's an extraordinary conclusion to a 500 year old mystery for the Linnett family, allowing them to finally put to rest the idea that the family is cursed.
And, by showing how finger development can go wrong, it's provided another small piece in the complicated puzzle of how to build a human.
But if we can read the instructions that build us, does that mean that one day we will be able to use this information to actually predict a life.
Here, at the beginning of the 21st Century, we can see what's going to happen.
We can see where this technology is taking us, and it's taking us towards a point where we will have this individual information on people.
We'd be able to predict from day one how tall they would become, what colour their hair would be, what colour their eyes would be, whether they would need to wear glasses or not.
All of these physical characteristics can be predicted from the genes.
We're going to be able to see the future before it happens.
But how can a string of DNA, a string of letters, control our body's development in so many different ways? Take Ian, for example.
When he was born, he was 20 inches long.
17 years later, and he has grown to over six feet.
It's a remarkable transformation, and we are finally beginning to understand how our genes control this everyday miracle.
Each gene is too valuable to risk leaving the nucleus of the cell, so it makes a copy of itself, and sends this in to the minefield outside.
This copy makes the long journey to a distant part of the cell, called a ribosome, the production line of the cell.
And here, with mind boggling precision, the genetic instructions are read, and a specific molecule is constructed.
From the cells of your heart, to the blood rushing through every artery of the body, to the hair on your head, this is the way that humans are built.
And now we understand the magical process of growth, we are able to manipulate it.
Inside these bottles is the human hormone, made by living organisms that are not creations of nature, but of science.
And this is who it's for.
Edward Hewlett is four years old, and unusually small.
We noticed Edward was short for his age at about three years old, and then we kept a close eye on it and the doctors had him in to the growth clinic.
And he was always a fairly small baby, so we knew that, you know, he wasn't -things weren't a 100% right.
Edward's body is not producing enough of a particular hormone, growth hormone, so Edward now has to rely on something artificially produced.
We give Edward the growth hormone injection in the evening, before bed.
So he'll have his bath and his bedtime story, and then we give him his injection.
This is because the growth hormone actually works at night.
It's one injection in the evenings, and he's just a very brave little boy with it.
What we do, is we wipe your legs so it's all clean, don't we, and then we put it in, and we count, one One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.
That's very good, isn't it.
The synthetic growth hormone has exactly the same effect on Edward's body as if it was made by his own cells.
But the hormone that is inside him is anything but ordinary.
While Edward sleeps, 200 miles away in a laboratory, something is happening.
Contained within this dish are bacteria that will be working throughout the night for Edward.
Incredibly, these bacteria are part human.
Their genes are no longer entirely their own.
Instead, a human gene, the growth hormone gene, has been patched in to their genetic make-up, and so, throughout the night, they will be producing growth hormone for Edward.
Scientists figured out how to be able to take bacteria which are so tiny that you could put twenty on the head of a pin.
They figured out how to put in the gene for a growth hormone, and thereby change these bacteria in to factories.
And these microscopic factories do this job incredibly well.
Since he's been on growth hormone injections he's grown, in the last three months, three and a half centimetres, and two shoe sizes, and they do say that there's going to be a big catch up in the first six months, and then growth will be normal.
Bacteria engineered to contain human genes are just the beginning.
In the past few years, scientists have begun mixing genes from different species to enhance disease resistance or add extra abilities.
These animals are part mice, part jellyfish.
The gene that makes jellyfish glow has been inserted in to their DNA, and they now glow in the dark.
Genes that confer similar unusual abilities have been put in to monkeys, and could be put in to us.
Once we understand that DNA is the genetic material in all living things, there really is no limit to what genes you can put in to any living thing.
There is no reason why we couldn't put genes in to human beings that didn't exist there previously.
Adding genes to us from all over the animal kingdom is fraught with dangers and practical difficulties, but it could happen.
People are very much afraid of this, and yet, I'm as convinced as ever that within a 100 years it's going to happen.
But how many of us will be around in a 100 years time? The answer may lie in our genes.
Here, at the Bassingbourn base, the recruits taking part in the genetic experiment are in to the fifth week of training.
But while some of the recruits are pulling ahead, Ian is struggling to keep up.
Could the thing that is holding him back be his genes? I knew I was going to hit the wall sometime, and it happened about two miles, two and a half miles round, and then it just got really hard.
I was in a lot of pain, yeah, because my chest was hurting and I just I found it hard to breathe.
Gene hunter, Hugh Montgomery, continues to monitor the recruits.
He believes the thing that may be holding Ian back lies deep inside his DNA: On chromosome 17.
This is the so-called ACE gene.
It comes in two forms, and our athletic ability seems to depend on which form we inherit.
One version seems to be particularly associated with endurance capability and fatigue resistance of muscle, and the other version seems to be particularly associated with strength capacity.
But how does the ACE gene make some recruits good at distance running, while others excel in strength? Cur best guess at the moment is that one version is making the muscle cells grow bigger and thicker, and hence a great deal stronger.
The other version, however, is making the cells burn lean, it's allowing these cells to use less oxygen to get more work out.
And that's what seems to be predisposing them to be good at endurance.
Although it is good to be strong, in the long run, it is better to have high levels of endurance.
What Hugh Montgomery is finding is that people with the endurance form of the gene, tend to live longer.
And there is a reason for this.
Cells that can endure a lack of oxygen when running can also cope with lack of oxygen in more life threatening situations; like when the blood supply is temporarily cut off during a heart attack.
By using these recruits in this way, we can explore how cells regulate their efficiency, and then perhaps start treating these sorts of diseases.
But it's not just our physical destiny that may be shaped by our genes.
Genetic research is now being taken in to far more controversial territory.
Could DNA ever be used to predict what goes on in the mind? Some scientists believe it could.
After all, they argue our personality is formed in our brains, and our brains are made by our genes.
The search for so-called personality genes remains one of the most contentious areas of science.
And leading that search is Professor Dean Hammer.
Everybody's interested in human personality.
I mean, that's what makes each person unique is their personality.
But until recently, this was the realm of the soft sciences, of psychology, hard core molecular biologists, real scientists like myself, couldn't study much about personality, it's all changing.
Professor Hammer is convinced that DNA can make a difference between a life on the sidelines or a life on the edge.
We had new genetic techniques, new brain science techniques that allows us to look at personality, the same way that we would look at eye colour.
Putting his reputation on the line, Hammer is now claiming to have found a gene that may drive the desire for thrills.
And this is possibly the most extreme thrill seeker on the planet.
Adrian has spent his whole life going where most of us would fear to follow.
As you step off, if you don't do anything, you have 14 seconds to live.
I can't remember not wanting to go faster.
I can't remember not wanting to fly, I can't remember not wanting to rush off and have adventures.
But how could a gene predispose anyone to do this? Back in Washington, Dean Hammer's laboratory began the search.
The way that we discover genes, like the so-called thrill seeking gene, is simply by taking a bunch of people, a 1,000 or so, and then taking a bit of their DNA.
The team then compare the genes of the thrill seekers, like Adrian, with the genes of less adventurous types.
The main difference between the two groups was a gene hidden away on chromosome 17, called D4DR.
This was a really incredible finding, because it was the first time that it was possible to directly link the molecular nature of the gene with the person's fundamental personality.
The so-called thrill seeking gene comes in two forms, long and short.
Those with the long version tend to be more adventurous.
The key effect of this particular gene is on a brain chemical called dopamine.
Dopamine is the brain's pleasure chemical.
It's what makes your brain feel good.
Dopamine is the most pleasurable thing that your brain will ever experience.
It's literally like a moment set out of time, because even if you can experience that sense of elation for one moment in your life, you'll never ever forget.
Most people's brains are very sensitive to dopamine.
Just walking to the edge of a cliff would be enough to get a buzz.
But people with the long form of the thrill seeking gene tend to have brains which are more resistant to dopamine.
They need to take that extra step to get their buzz.
It would be very reassuring to think that it's not my fault, I'm not as daft as a brush because of me, but there's something in my genetics, there's something in my family tree that's made me how I am.
Although genes may shape some aspects of personality, education and training can over-ride natural inclinations.
Ian and his fellow army recruits are being trained to do something society normally forbids: They are learning to kill.
Nothing can ever prepare you for shooting someone.
Apparently, you just see their eyes.
Everything goes blank, and you just like immediately get head wrecked, because you just think, oh, I¡¯ve just seen someone die in front of me by my own hand.
The army teaches people to kill.
It does not encourage acts of random violence.
Nonetheless, in Ian's unit, there are clearly some individuals who are more aggressive and more impulsive than others.
Although upbringing plays a big part, there is increasing evidence that impulsive behaviour may also be genetically determined.
A very controversial issue is how much of our behaviour is determined by our genetic make-up, and I think people have difficulty thinking about this because it's a question of freewill.
If we're determined in everything we do by what our genes are, then what control do we have over what we are, and how we behave.
And this is a very important question and, frankly, we don't really have the proper answers to it.
But while scientists struggle for answers, the questions raised by new genetic discoveries are already beginning to have an impact.
This is Death Row.
Each one of these cells contains a convicted murderer.
But for one prisoner, an extraordinary claim is being made, a claim which, if accepted, would alter the way we look at crime.
That prisoner is Tony Mobley.
He admits to murder, but his Defence Attorney claims that Mobley couldn't stop himself, that his impulsive violent crime was the result of his innate biochemistry.
There are individuals who are destined to become criminals, violent criminals, predators, the serial criminals, the Ted Bundys, the Daimlers.
In 1991, Defence Attorney, Dan Summer, began work on the Tony Mobley murder case.
A case that would eventually make American legal history.
Tony was on his way to his father's house and saw the pizza parlour and decided, sort of spur of the moment, to rob the place.
Tony went in to the pizza parlour and encountered John Collins, pulled a gun out, pointed it at John and demanded the proceeds from the cash register.
At that point, Tony ordered John to turn around and face the wall.
He raised the gun up, and squeezed the trigger.
The bullet struck John in the back of the head and killed him instantly.
Mobley was soon caught and confessed to the crime.
Facing an almost certain death penalty, Dan Summer began digging in Mobley's past, to try and uncover reasons for an apparently spontaneous murder.
If you look at Tony's life it's clear that from a very early age he was stealing, lying, cheating, getting kicked out of school, stealing cars, things of that nature, and that manifested itself at such an early age and was so persistent that there was some forces in his life that were compelling him, if you will, to engage in that type of behaviour.
Tony Mobley came from a family of risk-taking, wealthy entrepreneurs.
But as Summer began digging in to the family tree, he unearthed ancestors who seemed to have channelled their energies in to darker areas, from rape to robbery and murder.
And as the case went to court, evidence was mounting from laboratories around the world linking particular genes with impulsive aggressive behaviour.
So when the trial began, Summer and his team of defence lawyers decided to attempt a legal first, they asked the court to allow Mobley's genes to be part of his defence.
This country and our law is founded on the notion that people choose between good and evil.
We were raising the possibility that a lot of what people do in life isn't result of freewill or free choice, but actually something that's pre-determined at the moment of conception.
And that raised a lot of eyebrows.
The judge refused to let Mobley be tested and threw out the genetic defence.
Mobley is now awaiting execution.
We will never know whether Mobley's genes influenced his actions, but the issues raised by these sorts of cases will not go away.
We may well be able to predict whether somebody will become aggressive or not later in life.
That sort of knowledge is going to take some handling.
We're going to have to think about its effects on how we deal with such a child and, indeed, how we cope with such a child if he misbehaves or even ends up in the courts.
So where will this research lead? Will it lead to a world where we lock up children solely on the basis that they are impulsive and might commit a crime? Cr because some tests suggest that they are genetically loaded towards violence? The idea that we will ever be able to make accurate enough predictions to justify locking up children is pure science fiction.
But recognising that some children are more at risk than others might encourage society to help them before it is too late.
It could be that we'll be able to predict that a child is more likely to be aggressive, let's say, and, if so, perhaps we should take particular care with aspects of their upbringing to try and prevent that aggression getting out of control.
It just could be that being forewarned of a problem will allow parents and society to deal with that problem, perhaps reduce it from becoming a major issue in the future.
But while the ethical debate continues, the science of prediction moves on.
And after ten weeks, the genetic study of these recruits is now complete.
The study we've done has been a great success, perhaps more than we'd anticipated it to be, and it's shown really that the ACE gene certainly does have an effect on human performance, that one version of the gene seems to be strongly associated with some measures of endurance performance, and the other one seems to be affecting strength.
Not only is this gene having an effect on sporting performance, but also on health.
People with those strength versions of the gene seem to be dying a little bit younger.
None of the recruits will be told their result.
Hugh Montgomery believes the knowledge is too dangerous.
He knows from personal experience how heavy a burden that knowledge can be.
I personally do know the type of ACE gene that I carry, because we used to use our own DNA in the early days for our experiments.
And I regret knowing what my ACE genotype is.
The genes are suggesting that I might die a little bit younger than I'd otherwise wish to, that I might suffer increasing severity of diseases that I'd rather not suffer in a severe form, and I can't do anything about those findings.
In fact, it makes you feel quite angry when you know, because you can't overcome that obstacle.
Ian's results, and those of his squad, will remain undisclosed and locked away in a computer.
Some tests say more about us than we would ever want to know.
When I saw him march past, and he's got his hat on, his face looked like when he was a young boy.
It was his boy face, and yet he's there, you know, and he's a grown man now.
And it really brought it home to me, you know, that it's just gone, just like that.
Imagine a world where you could look in to your child's eyes and know their genetic destiny.
Imagine a world where every facet of your child's medical history, its strengths, its vulnerabilities could be uncovered by tapping in to a computer.
We will not be the same again, because there's so much information which was hidden away, which is now open for everybody to see.
Today, we know more about how to build a human than ever before.
And one thing is certain, in the years to come, we will be able to predict even more about our lives; because this world of prediction has already begun.
A world where a machine could study the genetic information locked away in just one drop of blood.
And predict details of a life from birth until death.
Could this fantasy ever come true? To what extent does DNA shape our destiny? In the 21st Century, we are about to find out.
This remarkable journey to a world of prediction starts here, in the human cell.
And at the heart of the cell is the greatest prize of all, the 46 chromosomes which between them contain all the genes needed to build a human being.
The genes are a book of information that describe how each human being will develop, and we can now read that book, and for the very first time we're going to be able to see inside of every human being.
As we decipher the information contained within these genes, we are not only learning how to build a human, but also how to predict what characteristics that human might have.
We have new genetic techniques that allows us to look at personality, the same way that we would look at eye colour.
We can actually look at the molecules that are involved in.
That's really exciting.
Could a gene really predict whether you would do this.
As you step off, if you don't do anything, you have 14 seconds to live.
Cr predict who will be prone to murderous impulses.
There is such a thing as a natural born killer.
Cr even predict your ultimate end? People with those strength versions of the gene seem to be dying a little bit younger.
Everyday, we are learning more about what can and cannot be predicted from the mysterious substance that is our DNA.
It's amazing to think that this translucent slime that we have here is DNA.
Nobel Prize winner, Paul Nurse, has spent much of his career studying DNA.
Everything about us is determined by the structure of this DNA, whether we have blue eyes or brown hair, a big nose, whether we'll suffer from certain diseases, like cystic fibrosis.
Maybe even one day in the future, perhaps it can be used to predict our behaviour, all by knowing the structure of this molecule.
But how can these tiny drops of DNA be used to make predictions? Here, at the Army Training Headquarters at Bassingbourn, an experiment is about to begin.
These new recruits are taking part in one of the first scientific studies of gene prediction, an attempt to see if a single gene, called the ACE gene, can predict how these recruits will perform.
The man behind this ground-breaking study is Hugh Montgomery.
He believes that by studying these recruits he can unlock one of the key genes that determines long life.
We've chosen to use the army for these sorts of studies for very good reasons.
If we take these recruits here, we're looking at people we can choose to be the same age, the same sex, they're eating the same food, they're drinking the same water, being shouted at by the same people, wearing the same sorts of clothing, and undergoing absolutely identical training.
Montgomery is testing the DNA of each of the 80 recruits taking part in the study.
By examining their genes he thinks he can predict which of the recruits has the endurance to deal with the gruelling demands of army training.
And finding out which of the recruits can run further may also allow him to predict which will live longer.
In later life, it is quite likely that these sorts of genes we're looking at will affect their long term survival.
One of the soldiers being studied is Ian McDermott.
Ian is 17 years old, and endurance is not his strong point.
He's worried he might not keep up when he has to do long distant runs.
The only thing I had doubts about was the runs, because I'm not a big long distance runner, like four, five, six miles, I can't really do it, I sort of think I thought it was going to be impossible, and that it was going to be like running 15, 16, 17 miles everyday, but it's not.
But it's not - it's not easy.
When it comes to long distance running, Ian's genes may be letting him down.
Look back at his family and it's clear he comes from a long line of bad runners.
I once ran a mile because I had to, that was it.
There after I never ran more than 200 metres in my life.
Ian's very much of the same short, sharp stuff that I was.
Which is why I really worried that he'll drop out.
I don't want him to drop out.
Even though I don't want him to be in the army, I don't want him to drop out.
At the end of 10 weeks, the squad's athletic performance will be compared with their genes.
Although this is just one study, the implications of this sort of research for every one of us are huge.
The idea that our destiny could lie in our genes is about to change the way we live forever.
We are not in a position to really predict a life, but we can certainly say more about a person like Ian than ever before.
More and more, we are finding that the unique characteristics that make us all individuals can in some way be traced back; traced back to the moment when a unique mix of genes was created: Back to the moment of conception.
In each one of our lives, the moment of conception marked the beginning of an extraordinary journey.
A journey that saw the 23 chromosomes carried in our father's sperm combine with the 23 chromosomes inside our mother's egg, to form the distinct set of instructions that we call our genome.
Cur DNA is inherited from our parents, and yet we are different from them.
Each one of us can look at our parents and see them reflected in ourselves.
But how is this information passed on? In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, scientists began to realise that there were patterns of inheritance which could make sense of the confusing hereditary that they'd recognised up to that point.
And then they could start applying these principles to human beings, particularly the freak shows at the beginning of the 20th Century.
In the early 1900s, scientists realised the best way to discover how ordinary characteristics are passed on was by first studying the extraordinary.
Families with unfortunate inherited diseases would provide key insights in to how our genes are transmitted.
And here, in Coney Island, the scientists found exactly what they were looking for, endless examples of families with physical deformities.
The shows still exist on Coney Island, and Tony works here as an entertainer.
Tony has a condition called achondroplasia, a form of growth retardation.
For Tony and his family, the condition appears random.
It seems to hide, skip generations, and then reappear.
It could pass 12 generations before another one pops up in my family again.
It's just - it's just odd.
Tony's mother is like him, but his son is not, and Tony is unsure what the risks are of the deformity reappearing in future generations.
I have a three year old son, his name's Antonio.
He's about - if I stand up, he's about up to my shoulders already.
According to my specialist, my son will be between six two to six eight.
But that don't say that because he's tall, one of my grandchildren may come out to be like me.
We don't know.
We don't know until the time comes.
Tony is happy not knowing, but if he really wanted to, he could find out the odds of having another child with his condition.
The scientists who worked at Coney Island a 100 years ago, showed that genetic diseases, like Tony's, follow a very predictable pattern.
Examining freak shows and the sorts of abnormalities that were being inherited in families, revealed patterns which allowed scientists to predict the probability of a child inheriting a particular defect or deformity.
So out of this chaos, real order began to emerge, and that order was really the beginning of human genetics.
But while 20th Century geneticists could predict the odds of a disease being passed on, they could not give the precise yes or no that most parents wanted.
But the science of prediction has improved.
Four years ago, Catherine Linnett set out looking for precise answers.
She was hoping to track down a gene and solve her family mystery.
I remember my grandmother telling me when I was small that it was a curse.
We used to sit there and she would tell us this story, and we used to imagine what this awful thing was that this person must have done.
According to family legend, the curse began 500 years ago, when one of Catherine's ancestors, a clergyman, had his prize apples stolen.
Mad with rage, he cursed the unknown thief, calling on God to remove the thief's fingers.
Later, to his horror, the clergyman discovered that the thief was his own pregnant wife.
Legend has it that the curse fell upon their baby, who was born without fingers.
Catherine was born with deformed hands.
Where her fingers should be are ten shortened nailless digits that stop at the first joint.
It is never the same in two different people.
We have various length fingers.
My brother's fingers are longer than mine, my mother's fingers are longer than mine, but my grandmother's were shorter, so it varies from person to person.
The condition is known as brachydactylly, and although very little is understood about it, it is clear that something in the womb goes wrong.
The palms develop properly, but the fingers do not.
Deformed or webbed fingers appear and disappear through the generations.
Catherine's two daughters do not have the condition, but her son, David, does.
He had to have surgery when he was very young to have the webbed fingers separated, and he inherited my thumbs, which have an extra bone in each thumb.
So he had to have quite a lot of reconstructive surgery on his hands when he was 18 months old.
Catherine wants to know exactly what causes the family deformity, which particular gene is responsible.
Find it, and the family curse can be put to rest.
And today, this is a possibility.
For the first time in human history, we can peer in to our children's genetic future; thanks to a discovery made in 1953 in Cambridge by two young men, James Watson and Francis Crick.
We're clearly specified to a high degree of detail, and yet half that information is carried in the head of the sperm, and that head is very small, about the size of a pinpoint.
How can so much information be contained in such an exceedingly tiny space? Crick, with his colleague James Watson, battled to understand how tiny, almost invisible cells, can store all the information needed to build a human.
Their answer, when it came, was simple and beautiful.
What Watson and Crick did was to work out the structure of DNA, that is how the molecules of DNA are put together, and when they looked at that, they realised that the structure consisted of a series of chemical letters, and that the code of life was written in those four chemical letters.
The language of DNA is written in a four letter alphabet that corresponds to four chemical basis.
A for adenine, C for cytosine, G for guanine, and T for Thiamine.
And it's these groups of letters that spell out chunks of information that we now call our genes.
The structure of DNA determined by Crick and Watson in the early 1950s was the greatest discovery in biology of the 20th Century.
It's revolutionised our understanding of genetics, it's revolutionised how we carry out biology and medicine, and we're still living with the fruits of that revolution today.
The Linnett family are about to harvest some of the benefits of this revolution.
For the first time, relatives Catherine didn't even know existed have travelled from all over the country to be together.
And, for the first time, they have an explanation for the family condition.
The fact that my grandmother said that it was a curse, it never rang true.
It is just a gene that went wrong generations ago that has just been passed on through the generations.
In every member of the family with a deformity, there is a spelling mistake in the genetic code.
On chromosome 9, the letter C has been turned in to the letter A.
It's a tiny error, but the impact is huge.
Just this one letter change out of billions is enough to disrupt the building of a human hand.
After years of searching, Catherine now knows what causes her deformity.
It's been suggested we call ourselves the Stumpy Club, and And through the search for the gene she has also found a wider family she had never previously met.
I felt, probably for the first time ever, that I can really be me, and I can use my hands and not think that people are looking and starring, and it's just been - it's been great.
It's an extraordinary conclusion to a 500 year old mystery for the Linnett family, allowing them to finally put to rest the idea that the family is cursed.
And, by showing how finger development can go wrong, it's provided another small piece in the complicated puzzle of how to build a human.
But if we can read the instructions that build us, does that mean that one day we will be able to use this information to actually predict a life.
Here, at the beginning of the 21st Century, we can see what's going to happen.
We can see where this technology is taking us, and it's taking us towards a point where we will have this individual information on people.
We'd be able to predict from day one how tall they would become, what colour their hair would be, what colour their eyes would be, whether they would need to wear glasses or not.
All of these physical characteristics can be predicted from the genes.
We're going to be able to see the future before it happens.
But how can a string of DNA, a string of letters, control our body's development in so many different ways? Take Ian, for example.
When he was born, he was 20 inches long.
17 years later, and he has grown to over six feet.
It's a remarkable transformation, and we are finally beginning to understand how our genes control this everyday miracle.
Each gene is too valuable to risk leaving the nucleus of the cell, so it makes a copy of itself, and sends this in to the minefield outside.
This copy makes the long journey to a distant part of the cell, called a ribosome, the production line of the cell.
And here, with mind boggling precision, the genetic instructions are read, and a specific molecule is constructed.
From the cells of your heart, to the blood rushing through every artery of the body, to the hair on your head, this is the way that humans are built.
And now we understand the magical process of growth, we are able to manipulate it.
Inside these bottles is the human hormone, made by living organisms that are not creations of nature, but of science.
And this is who it's for.
Edward Hewlett is four years old, and unusually small.
We noticed Edward was short for his age at about three years old, and then we kept a close eye on it and the doctors had him in to the growth clinic.
And he was always a fairly small baby, so we knew that, you know, he wasn't -things weren't a 100% right.
Edward's body is not producing enough of a particular hormone, growth hormone, so Edward now has to rely on something artificially produced.
We give Edward the growth hormone injection in the evening, before bed.
So he'll have his bath and his bedtime story, and then we give him his injection.
This is because the growth hormone actually works at night.
It's one injection in the evenings, and he's just a very brave little boy with it.
What we do, is we wipe your legs so it's all clean, don't we, and then we put it in, and we count, one One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.
That's very good, isn't it.
The synthetic growth hormone has exactly the same effect on Edward's body as if it was made by his own cells.
But the hormone that is inside him is anything but ordinary.
While Edward sleeps, 200 miles away in a laboratory, something is happening.
Contained within this dish are bacteria that will be working throughout the night for Edward.
Incredibly, these bacteria are part human.
Their genes are no longer entirely their own.
Instead, a human gene, the growth hormone gene, has been patched in to their genetic make-up, and so, throughout the night, they will be producing growth hormone for Edward.
Scientists figured out how to be able to take bacteria which are so tiny that you could put twenty on the head of a pin.
They figured out how to put in the gene for a growth hormone, and thereby change these bacteria in to factories.
And these microscopic factories do this job incredibly well.
Since he's been on growth hormone injections he's grown, in the last three months, three and a half centimetres, and two shoe sizes, and they do say that there's going to be a big catch up in the first six months, and then growth will be normal.
Bacteria engineered to contain human genes are just the beginning.
In the past few years, scientists have begun mixing genes from different species to enhance disease resistance or add extra abilities.
These animals are part mice, part jellyfish.
The gene that makes jellyfish glow has been inserted in to their DNA, and they now glow in the dark.
Genes that confer similar unusual abilities have been put in to monkeys, and could be put in to us.
Once we understand that DNA is the genetic material in all living things, there really is no limit to what genes you can put in to any living thing.
There is no reason why we couldn't put genes in to human beings that didn't exist there previously.
Adding genes to us from all over the animal kingdom is fraught with dangers and practical difficulties, but it could happen.
People are very much afraid of this, and yet, I'm as convinced as ever that within a 100 years it's going to happen.
But how many of us will be around in a 100 years time? The answer may lie in our genes.
Here, at the Bassingbourn base, the recruits taking part in the genetic experiment are in to the fifth week of training.
But while some of the recruits are pulling ahead, Ian is struggling to keep up.
Could the thing that is holding him back be his genes? I knew I was going to hit the wall sometime, and it happened about two miles, two and a half miles round, and then it just got really hard.
I was in a lot of pain, yeah, because my chest was hurting and I just I found it hard to breathe.
Gene hunter, Hugh Montgomery, continues to monitor the recruits.
He believes the thing that may be holding Ian back lies deep inside his DNA: On chromosome 17.
This is the so-called ACE gene.
It comes in two forms, and our athletic ability seems to depend on which form we inherit.
One version seems to be particularly associated with endurance capability and fatigue resistance of muscle, and the other version seems to be particularly associated with strength capacity.
But how does the ACE gene make some recruits good at distance running, while others excel in strength? Cur best guess at the moment is that one version is making the muscle cells grow bigger and thicker, and hence a great deal stronger.
The other version, however, is making the cells burn lean, it's allowing these cells to use less oxygen to get more work out.
And that's what seems to be predisposing them to be good at endurance.
Although it is good to be strong, in the long run, it is better to have high levels of endurance.
What Hugh Montgomery is finding is that people with the endurance form of the gene, tend to live longer.
And there is a reason for this.
Cells that can endure a lack of oxygen when running can also cope with lack of oxygen in more life threatening situations; like when the blood supply is temporarily cut off during a heart attack.
By using these recruits in this way, we can explore how cells regulate their efficiency, and then perhaps start treating these sorts of diseases.
But it's not just our physical destiny that may be shaped by our genes.
Genetic research is now being taken in to far more controversial territory.
Could DNA ever be used to predict what goes on in the mind? Some scientists believe it could.
After all, they argue our personality is formed in our brains, and our brains are made by our genes.
The search for so-called personality genes remains one of the most contentious areas of science.
And leading that search is Professor Dean Hammer.
Everybody's interested in human personality.
I mean, that's what makes each person unique is their personality.
But until recently, this was the realm of the soft sciences, of psychology, hard core molecular biologists, real scientists like myself, couldn't study much about personality, it's all changing.
Professor Hammer is convinced that DNA can make a difference between a life on the sidelines or a life on the edge.
We had new genetic techniques, new brain science techniques that allows us to look at personality, the same way that we would look at eye colour.
Putting his reputation on the line, Hammer is now claiming to have found a gene that may drive the desire for thrills.
And this is possibly the most extreme thrill seeker on the planet.
Adrian has spent his whole life going where most of us would fear to follow.
As you step off, if you don't do anything, you have 14 seconds to live.
I can't remember not wanting to go faster.
I can't remember not wanting to fly, I can't remember not wanting to rush off and have adventures.
But how could a gene predispose anyone to do this? Back in Washington, Dean Hammer's laboratory began the search.
The way that we discover genes, like the so-called thrill seeking gene, is simply by taking a bunch of people, a 1,000 or so, and then taking a bit of their DNA.
The team then compare the genes of the thrill seekers, like Adrian, with the genes of less adventurous types.
The main difference between the two groups was a gene hidden away on chromosome 17, called D4DR.
This was a really incredible finding, because it was the first time that it was possible to directly link the molecular nature of the gene with the person's fundamental personality.
The so-called thrill seeking gene comes in two forms, long and short.
Those with the long version tend to be more adventurous.
The key effect of this particular gene is on a brain chemical called dopamine.
Dopamine is the brain's pleasure chemical.
It's what makes your brain feel good.
Dopamine is the most pleasurable thing that your brain will ever experience.
It's literally like a moment set out of time, because even if you can experience that sense of elation for one moment in your life, you'll never ever forget.
Most people's brains are very sensitive to dopamine.
Just walking to the edge of a cliff would be enough to get a buzz.
But people with the long form of the thrill seeking gene tend to have brains which are more resistant to dopamine.
They need to take that extra step to get their buzz.
It would be very reassuring to think that it's not my fault, I'm not as daft as a brush because of me, but there's something in my genetics, there's something in my family tree that's made me how I am.
Although genes may shape some aspects of personality, education and training can over-ride natural inclinations.
Ian and his fellow army recruits are being trained to do something society normally forbids: They are learning to kill.
Nothing can ever prepare you for shooting someone.
Apparently, you just see their eyes.
Everything goes blank, and you just like immediately get head wrecked, because you just think, oh, I¡¯ve just seen someone die in front of me by my own hand.
The army teaches people to kill.
It does not encourage acts of random violence.
Nonetheless, in Ian's unit, there are clearly some individuals who are more aggressive and more impulsive than others.
Although upbringing plays a big part, there is increasing evidence that impulsive behaviour may also be genetically determined.
A very controversial issue is how much of our behaviour is determined by our genetic make-up, and I think people have difficulty thinking about this because it's a question of freewill.
If we're determined in everything we do by what our genes are, then what control do we have over what we are, and how we behave.
And this is a very important question and, frankly, we don't really have the proper answers to it.
But while scientists struggle for answers, the questions raised by new genetic discoveries are already beginning to have an impact.
This is Death Row.
Each one of these cells contains a convicted murderer.
But for one prisoner, an extraordinary claim is being made, a claim which, if accepted, would alter the way we look at crime.
That prisoner is Tony Mobley.
He admits to murder, but his Defence Attorney claims that Mobley couldn't stop himself, that his impulsive violent crime was the result of his innate biochemistry.
There are individuals who are destined to become criminals, violent criminals, predators, the serial criminals, the Ted Bundys, the Daimlers.
In 1991, Defence Attorney, Dan Summer, began work on the Tony Mobley murder case.
A case that would eventually make American legal history.
Tony was on his way to his father's house and saw the pizza parlour and decided, sort of spur of the moment, to rob the place.
Tony went in to the pizza parlour and encountered John Collins, pulled a gun out, pointed it at John and demanded the proceeds from the cash register.
At that point, Tony ordered John to turn around and face the wall.
He raised the gun up, and squeezed the trigger.
The bullet struck John in the back of the head and killed him instantly.
Mobley was soon caught and confessed to the crime.
Facing an almost certain death penalty, Dan Summer began digging in Mobley's past, to try and uncover reasons for an apparently spontaneous murder.
If you look at Tony's life it's clear that from a very early age he was stealing, lying, cheating, getting kicked out of school, stealing cars, things of that nature, and that manifested itself at such an early age and was so persistent that there was some forces in his life that were compelling him, if you will, to engage in that type of behaviour.
Tony Mobley came from a family of risk-taking, wealthy entrepreneurs.
But as Summer began digging in to the family tree, he unearthed ancestors who seemed to have channelled their energies in to darker areas, from rape to robbery and murder.
And as the case went to court, evidence was mounting from laboratories around the world linking particular genes with impulsive aggressive behaviour.
So when the trial began, Summer and his team of defence lawyers decided to attempt a legal first, they asked the court to allow Mobley's genes to be part of his defence.
This country and our law is founded on the notion that people choose between good and evil.
We were raising the possibility that a lot of what people do in life isn't result of freewill or free choice, but actually something that's pre-determined at the moment of conception.
And that raised a lot of eyebrows.
The judge refused to let Mobley be tested and threw out the genetic defence.
Mobley is now awaiting execution.
We will never know whether Mobley's genes influenced his actions, but the issues raised by these sorts of cases will not go away.
We may well be able to predict whether somebody will become aggressive or not later in life.
That sort of knowledge is going to take some handling.
We're going to have to think about its effects on how we deal with such a child and, indeed, how we cope with such a child if he misbehaves or even ends up in the courts.
So where will this research lead? Will it lead to a world where we lock up children solely on the basis that they are impulsive and might commit a crime? Cr because some tests suggest that they are genetically loaded towards violence? The idea that we will ever be able to make accurate enough predictions to justify locking up children is pure science fiction.
But recognising that some children are more at risk than others might encourage society to help them before it is too late.
It could be that we'll be able to predict that a child is more likely to be aggressive, let's say, and, if so, perhaps we should take particular care with aspects of their upbringing to try and prevent that aggression getting out of control.
It just could be that being forewarned of a problem will allow parents and society to deal with that problem, perhaps reduce it from becoming a major issue in the future.
But while the ethical debate continues, the science of prediction moves on.
And after ten weeks, the genetic study of these recruits is now complete.
The study we've done has been a great success, perhaps more than we'd anticipated it to be, and it's shown really that the ACE gene certainly does have an effect on human performance, that one version of the gene seems to be strongly associated with some measures of endurance performance, and the other one seems to be affecting strength.
Not only is this gene having an effect on sporting performance, but also on health.
People with those strength versions of the gene seem to be dying a little bit younger.
None of the recruits will be told their result.
Hugh Montgomery believes the knowledge is too dangerous.
He knows from personal experience how heavy a burden that knowledge can be.
I personally do know the type of ACE gene that I carry, because we used to use our own DNA in the early days for our experiments.
And I regret knowing what my ACE genotype is.
The genes are suggesting that I might die a little bit younger than I'd otherwise wish to, that I might suffer increasing severity of diseases that I'd rather not suffer in a severe form, and I can't do anything about those findings.
In fact, it makes you feel quite angry when you know, because you can't overcome that obstacle.
Ian's results, and those of his squad, will remain undisclosed and locked away in a computer.
Some tests say more about us than we would ever want to know.
When I saw him march past, and he's got his hat on, his face looked like when he was a young boy.
It was his boy face, and yet he's there, you know, and he's a grown man now.
And it really brought it home to me, you know, that it's just gone, just like that.
Imagine a world where you could look in to your child's eyes and know their genetic destiny.
Imagine a world where every facet of your child's medical history, its strengths, its vulnerabilities could be uncovered by tapping in to a computer.
We will not be the same again, because there's so much information which was hidden away, which is now open for everybody to see.
Today, we know more about how to build a human than ever before.
And one thing is certain, in the years to come, we will be able to predict even more about our lives; because this world of prediction has already begun.