This past May, J. Craig Venter, one of the leading figures in genomic research, succeeded in transplanting a wholly man-made genome into a living cell. This was a stepping-stone for the field of synthetic biology that also drew it much public attention regarding the ethicality of creating life. However, the purpose of synthetic biology is more than just to create life. Because the artificial organisms can be genetically designed to carry out virtually any function, Venter’s work is potentially the solution to the energy crisis, the end of global warming, and the cure for cancer, among other things. So if these are only a few of the advancements we can make by further developing this field, well, why don’t we?
According to MSNBC’s Jeremy Hsu, one third of Americans are for a ban on synthetic biology. Venter and the scientists behind the new completely artificial organism are currently working with the National Institutes of Health to make synthetic versions of every flu vaccine ever sequenced. Six out of ten people support such an application because it would allow for a more efficient distribution of vaccines. However, the remaining four generally did not support such use because, as David Rejeski, director of the science and technology innovation program at the Woodrow Wilson Center, said, "The vaccine issue is one that was publicly mentioned and obviously would have significant implications if you rolled it out, because it would touch millions of people.” Because it is usually a case of “get vaccinated or get infected,” and there is no valid alternative to vaccination, an issue would be getting actual consent. Plus, if consent is likely, there is very little incentive to fully inform the public of the full implication of receiving artificially based vaccines. Other fears of those who oppose synthetic biological research are: possible use of synthetic biology to create biological weapons, moral issues with creating artificial life, and negative health effects for humans.
On the other hand, with the advancement that is synthetic biology, scientists can effectively simplify complex living cells so that they can work with just the essentials to create overall cleaner experiments and understand complex diseases like cancer. This alone may be worth the risks involved with such research for some people. Alternatively, synthetic biology may also allow us to breathe life into already extinct organisms. We currently possess DNA from organisms that have been dead for centuries that we are now able to transplant into currently living cells. This is a benefit that is more than just fascinating for the scientifically inclined. It opens up a seemingly infinite amount of new doors, for there is much to be learned from the organisms that are no longer found in this world.
The research is still in its early stages, and many of the ethical issues surrounding the field, such as the development of biological weapons, would not manifest for years to come. Therefore, to stifle the research prematurely would be unwise when there is so much to gain. However, periodic reevaluation of the practices involved with synthetic biological research would serve well to prevent the rise of ethical dilemmas.
Sources:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39101258/ns/technology_and_science-science/
http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/maynard20100913
1 comment:
I think that synthetic biology only poses an ethical issue for people who believe that it is equivalent to “playing god”. For everyone else it’s probably more of a matter of risk-benefit analysis.
Another major risk associated with synthetic biology I’d like to mention is that the created life-forms may accidentally escape into the wild and pose a threat to public health, or reproduce unchecked and cause irreversible ecological disruption. Because they aren’t understood as well as natural life-forms are, they might also mutate and produce unintended effects. This is an especially great source for concern for synthetic life-forms that are meant for applications in the open (such as soil microbes and oil-eating bacteria), since it is not possible to “recall” them once they have gone out of control. Application of these life-forms would require careful risk management and contingency planning.
Post a Comment