I don't think the first message in the thread approached the conversation at an angle appropriate for productive conversation about the topic, either- a single sentence, sent as it was, does not lend itself to dialogue within this community that I do feel is necessary to acknowledge
somewhere. Regardless of the way it was brought up, Bryan's interactions with this particular group of people does carry an impact on the reputation of DIYbio/biohacking as a whole-- like it or not, unsubstantiated or not, unfair or not, etc. Searching "designer babies" "epstein" "bryan bishop" on a search engine bears many results, using the terms "biohacker" and "DIYBio" in the same sentence. It does not feel in the interest of anyone doing work in this vast domain to have it viewed differently because of a single influential actor within it. I don't think that's unreasonable, and, although it must be approached with a great deal of restraint/composure, some channel of communication should be made to address it. I'm providing some information to those who wish to hear it (and I understand some may not, which will be addressed later)
I am going to lay out only what I can prove, attempting from now on to be as objective as possible:
Please note that these are not necessarily completely chronological as the lookup tool is not particularly suited for this need. I have tried to fix this somewhat. I do not imply chronology with the sequence in which the emails are summarized in this message, so dates are provided.
--
Bryan's interactions dealt with both cryptocurrency and biohacking, particularly focusing on "Designer Babies" (seen in many of the subject lines throughout the ~50 emails I can find). I am only including several emails I feel are most relevant to this conversation, though the search tool is of course publicly accessible.
The earliest email I can find that mentions Bryan is a sort of many-times-forwarded thread, wherein Bryan is part of a chain of emails regarding LedgerX, from 2016. ^
1In July of 2018 Bryan and Epstein seem to be setting up a meeting- Bryan supplies a PDF from diyhpluswiki that is no longer public, writes about "how serious [Epstein is] about wanting this, and what the ground rules for even exploring this with [him] and getting to next steps....Most of these questions are around your requirements for secrecy and privacy, specifically regarding reputational risk and also any financial involvement. I think there would also need to be some understanding about goals and feasibility of different results.
I think that one way this could be done is under the banner of my designer babies project, since the other deliverable is similar and shares so many of the same procedures and lab requirements. This might offer a sufficient level of deniability."
Epstein replies, and "[has] no issue with investing the problem is only if i [sic] am seen to lead".
^
2Several emails during this time involve Jeffrey asking others if they know Bryan, and what they think of him. Available upon asking nicely, again accessible through the DOJ's portal.
In August of 2018 Bryan delivered a spreadsheet dealing with funding for the project, along with a message which I will attach in full:
"Attached is the doc you requested, it's the "use of funds" spreadsheet for the designer baby and human cloning company.
This gets us out of our self-funded "garage biology" phase to the first live birth of a human designer baby, and possibly a human clone, within 5 years. Once we reach the first birth, everything changes and the world will never be the same again, much less the future of the human species. Attached doc shows —$1.7rn/year for up to 5 years + $1m for lab setup. (--$9.5m to fund 5 years, $6m for 3 years).
Next steps: I am happy to hop on another call, or I could take a trip to meet you in person? And if you have any thoughts about what I might be missing, or whether this is a reasonable estimate to get to the first live birth, then I would really appreciate any feedback you have.
I am traveling in Lithuania for Aug 7-14 and I'll probably be unreachable during that time.
Google Docs version here (same file): REDACTED
Thank you.
Bryan"^
3A redacted account sends Epstein an "August 2018 Itinerary", which includes: "4-5:00pm Designer Babies-Bryan Bishop-appear.in (
https://appear.inItaxmastergenetics )
Bryan Cell for backup: REDACTED". ^
4In October of 2018, Bryan sends Epstein in October of 2018 referencing the new legality of human embryo gene editing-
"Eventually this will mean we can make practically unlimited modifications to the cells before generating an embryo. This isn't a requirement for our initial work but it's a very important direction that will unlock more commercial opportunities."...
to which Epstein replies "we need to get a read on legal. first. cant [sic] do anything where US rules apply to us citizens regardless of where.? its [sic] such a great subject. what type of investors. " ^
5The earliest formally documented meeting I can find is a Google Calendar invite named "Financial markets & cryptocoins with Jeffrey, Bryan" set for July 20th, 2018. ^
6Another calendar alert for an event titled "Designer babies (Bryan Bishop)" set for August 2nd. "Agenda- Designer babies, structuring, finance, privacy, project goals, feasible outcomes, timelines" ^
7Many emails from this point in time regard crypto and embryo editing interspersed, not within the same threads but by nature of Epstein's networking within both. To comment on every one of these would not be germane or cater to the pursuit of reasonable brevity, but I can provide links to them if requested. Many of them are very short replies from Epstein, of relatively little gravity, to aforementioned emails.
Dan, I understand the source of your distaste for speaking about this issue through this channel, truly. This conversation should be opt-in, and I am offering my email (
alexa...@gmail.com) for anyone wishing to talk about this further elsewhere- I'll just make an email thread for those who do. It is not in good interest to clog the main artery of this part of the community with something many people either want to talk about further or
really don't want to talk about at all. We can redirect the drivel somewhere else such that it is no longer drivel to those who are a party to it.
This message is likely riddled with formatting and typographical mistakes. I apologize.
Reach out if desired. Sources below.
Alex