Challenges of our own making
The successful transplantation of a synthesized genome highlights unresolved ethical and curity issues pod by synthetic biology.
W ho gets to imagine the future where science and technol-ogy are concerned? If we are creating new objects, who is手工编织篮子
responsible for the proliferation of good conquences and the prevention of bad ones? The perennial conundrums were aptly pod last July by the social scientist Sheila Jasanoff of Harvard Uni-versity at a high-level conference on synthetic biology (e go.nature. com/HTQ7JS).周柏豪电影
Events last week illustrated their continuing relevance. Scientists led by Craig Venter published the first successful transplantation of a synthesized genome into a recipient cell (D. G. Gibson et al. Science doi:10.1126/science.1190719; 2010). The feat was a technical tour de force, requiring the accurate synthesis of a slightly modified genome of the bacterium Mycoplasma mycoides — all 1.08 million ba
pairs of it — followed by its successful inrtion into a related species, Mycoplasma capricolum, and then the demonstration of replication of descendant cells exhibiting the characteristics of M. mycoides (e pages 406 and 422).
快门线As many biologists were quick to point out, this was not the synthe-sis of life, nor indeed of a cell. But it was the first time that an organism had been put together with DNA constructed from specifications in a computer databa, albeit derived from an existing organism rather than conceived from scratch. The long-anticipated develop-ment is a landmark in synthetic biology — a field that is burgeoning not only in its science and engineering but also in the discussions that surround it.
Credit is due both to the pioneers of the field for fostering open deliberations about the rearch-community, societal and ethical issues surrounding synthetic biology, and to the Alfred P. Sloan Foun-dation of New Y ork for its long-standing support of the efforts. Unfortunately, such discussions repeatedly point to key concerns without resolving them. The achievements reported last week under-line the need to do better.
A prime example is the lack of international governance for synthetic biology, not least in relation to s
ecurity issues. The Euro-pean Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Devel-opment as well as national governments such as tho of the United States and, to a lesr extent, China are engaged. But none ems willing to take the lead in establishing an international framework of governance and standards.
豫剧赵氏孤儿
Another chronic curity issue is the growth of do-it-yourlf synthetic biology. The construction and transplantation of whole genomes remains beyond the capa c ity
原创歌手
of most labs, although both may be
routine within five years. But the abil-
ity to undertake hazardous biology in
the garage is already with us. With trust
being so important in science, universities and individual investiga-tors are almost certainly not attentive enough to curity risks. Nor are governments: the very possibility of malign synthetic biology, whether by states or eventually by ‘biohackers’, only reinforces the need for a much more extensive worldwide network of centres able to detect emerging infections.
Meanwhile, the anticipated power of synthetic biology leads back to the larger, as-yet-unresolved questions that Jasanoff pod. US President Barack Obama took a belated step in the right direction last week when he asked his bioethics council to consider the wider significance of synthetic biology and to report back in six months. But other organizations — ethical, environmental, medical and com-mercial — also need to join the discussion.
If its visions can be fulfilled, the power of synthetic biology is pro-found. The extensive discussions that have already taken place have revealed no significant new moral or societal constraints on its full realization. Accordingly, where there are concerns, they now need to be developed beyond the knee-jerk soundbite. Tho inclined to worry about synthetic biology should take only small comfort from the fact that the complexity of organisms makes it so difficult to deliver. ■
All at a
US agencies have moved too slowly in gathering key data on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. W hen disaster strikes, the priority for governments and individuals alike is to limit the damage and help the people
affected. But also critical is the rapid, coordinated collec-tion of data to document the disaster. Gettin
g a full picture of exactly what happened can be a huge help in planning recovery efforts, mini-mizing loss in future disasters and, if need be, in holding guilty parties accountable.
In the ca of the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, rearchers have been hampered in their desire to collect more data and have been left feeling ill-informed about what has been done so far.
In theory, the necessary mechanisms for arranging data collection exist. The US Incident Command System, which coordinates fed-eral agencies and first responders during a crisis, has a mandate to collect ‘ephemeral’ or ‘perishable’ data. That is also part of the job of the Office of Respon and Restoration, run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and of the Environmen-tal Protection Agency (EPA).村务监督
In addition, academic scientists can apply for up to US$200,000 in quick funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to study a disaster’s aftermath, through its aptly named RAPID programme.
属羊的年份
“Concerns need to be
老房子装修多少钱developed beyond the
knee-jerk soundbite.”
397
/nature Vol 465 |Issue no. 7297 |27 May 2010
© 20 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights rerved
10
