Telegram founder Pavel Durov's offer to pay for in vitro fertilization (IVF) for single women to use his sperm could be a dangerous gamble with the population's genetic future. In order for such an experiment to be considered not an adventure, but a useful initiative for demography, Durov should publish his genome, including information about the risks for offspring, Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor at George Mason University (USA) Ancha Baranova, who participated in the famous international project “Human Genome” as a member of a group of Russian scientists, told Lenta.ru. She said that she is willing to carry out Durov's genome analysis herself on a volunteer basis, so that women who want to have the billionaire's children will understand “what kind of pig they are buying.”
Durov should publish his genome so that women who take this step understand exactly what type of pig they are buying. Experts need to be able to analyze this genome, characterize the important mutations and explain the risks to the offspring. That is, start a professional speech. By the way, as a volunteer I am ready to carry out such an analysis – Ancha Baranova, biologist.
Another option for Durov to support demographics is to offer women IVF payments not with their own sperm but with biological material from hundreds of verified donors, thereby preserving genetic diversity. Additionally, if he agreed to provide a modest but steady monthly allowance for the child, “there would be a huge queue,” Baranova believes.
This expert believes that such private initiatives will be followed by a wave of legislative initiatives and sooner or later it will be necessary to introduce a limit on children from a sponsor. But it is important that any legislation in this area comes from public dialogue and not from the political will of elites.
Why is preserving genetic diversity important?
Ancha Baranova said the immediate threat is the “founder effect.” This is a genetic phenomenon where a trait from a common ancestor spreads within an isolated group.
A prominent example is porphyria, a genetic disease that disrupts the metabolism of heme in the blood. “In a person with such a mutation, when exposed to severe stress, toxic metabolic products enter the urine – it becomes the color of port wine. Sunlight causes painful rashes, plus severe poisoning causes aggression and violence,” the biologist explains.
Today, this mutation is common in white people in South Africa – about 1 in 300 people develop porphyria due to the “founder effect”. In the 18th – 19th centuries, a person carrying the mutation arrived there with the Boer colonists. He left behind many descendants and his genes spread over many generations throughout the entire isolated population. Now his distant descendants, without even knowing it, can marry and have a high chance of giving birth to a child with two copies of the defective gene, i.e. with complete, life-threatening porphyria, Baranova explains.
The pattern is always the same: one person—usually a man—becomes the ancestor of a significant portion of an isolated population. If his descendants gain advantages – wealth, status, better survival in famine or war – then their genes begin to take up more and more “space” in the gene pool – Ancha Baranova, biologist.
How dangerous could Durov's free sperm be?
Ancha Baranova warned Durov to provide financial support to his biological descendants based on the results of DNA testing, but “along with potential capital, his children will inherit half of their father's genetic baggage – tangible and intangible.”
The main danger for his future children is heterozygosity. These are “sleeping” mutations that do not harm the carrier itself but can cause disease in children if they encounter a similar mutation from the mother. Each person, including Durov, has on average five to eight such hidden options.
For many genetic diseases to manifest, two copies of the “broken” gene are needed – one from each parent. If the child's mother has a “dormant” mutation like Durov's, there is a 25% chance that their child will be born with a serious disease.
Commenting on the precedent of a sperm donor whose material was used across Europe, who later turned out to be a carrier of a rare mutation in the TP53 gene, which significantly increases the risk of developing cancer, especially in childhood, Baranova admitted that Durov's experiment could lead to similar unpredictable consequences. About 200 children were born from donors with dangerous mutations. Ten of them have been diagnosed with lymphoma and leukemia.
There is always such a danger to any man. We are all playing this complicated breeding lottery. This is why there are children in the community with autism or other rare diseases – someone pulled out a bad ticket – Ancha Baranova, biologist.
Such cases are why there is active debate in the professional community about ethical standards in the field of IVF. The introduction of a limit on the number of children from one sponsor is being discussed – up to 10-15. This is the closest to a person's natural reproductive potential, Baranova explains. But the problem, she said, is that it's virtually impossible to track private, informal donations, as was the case with Durov.
At the same time, Baranova sees Durov's initiative as also an important demographic experiment. “We will see how important the financial component is for women when deciding to have children. Ultimately, his proposal allows us to eliminate from the budget the high cost of IVF, which often requires more than one cycle,” says the biologist.
However, from the point of view of evolutionary biology, such a practice is a deliberate distortion of natural processes, Baranova emphasized. When such distortion occurs due to war, famine, or isolation of a small group of survivors, it is taken for granted.
“But when a super-rich man leaves only his sponsor's contribution to multiple surrogate mothers… This is already considered evolutionary fraud,” the expert said. “Of course, this is viewed with condemnation.”
Baranova urges not to turn a blind eye to the demographic crisis and admits that society needs new, perhaps non-standard solutions. However, in her opinion, one should still choose those that do not cause greater problems for future generations – genetic and social.
