tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post3292186393414613359..comments2023-03-24T02:12:55.190-07:00Comments on Barash's Bioethics Blog: Is there a moral line to draw in the world of synthetic biology: ethically acceptable and unethical?Dr. Carol Isaacson Barashhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04813161090432218664noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-38482402825917274432010-12-03T13:43:30.788-08:002010-12-03T13:43:30.788-08:00I believe the debate centered around Craig Venter’...I believe the debate centered around Craig Venter’s synthetic genome and synthetic life has gotten a little too far from reality. The minute the news of the synthetic genome came out there began talk of everything from creating custom mutants, as in science fiction, to terrorists synthesizing dangerous viruses or microbes. We have to be clear, however, that synthesizing a genome for a small bacteria if very different than creating a mutant. We do not have the knowledge yet, and it is unclear if we ever will, be able to construct a complex novel organism simply by putting together a genome. For example, we cannot simply create genes for things we want, say putting a toxic gas sprayer apparatus on to a fly for terrorist purposes. Genes will interact with each other in different ways, so we have to be knowledgeable about all the possible interactions and effects in order to create complex synthetic life. This prospect is a long way off. For now, I think it’s important to focus on the positive prospects of synthetic microbe genomes, especially for creating human hormones for hormone replacement therapies. Obviously, we can imagine the possibility of dangerous viruses being created, possibly accidently, but we should be cautious to implement the proper regulations and monitoring of who is building what genome where. If the regulation and monitoring is proper, I believe the possibilities are endless of how we can utilize synthetic genomes for good reasons and limit the dangerous possibilities.Aaron Yengo-Kahnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17030894450618932958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-3561838934316168302010-11-29T18:27:41.434-08:002010-11-29T18:27:41.434-08:00Although there is some skepticism with all of the ...Although there is some skepticism with all of the new scientific advances being made, there are many benefits to also be considered. First, obviously the protection of such synthetic biology is necessary. Important information in the hands of the wrong people could ultimately do damage. And, although we are far away from creating a synthetic life, it is not out of the question that it may be possible in the future. This brings up ethical questions such as: would it be a clone of an already existent person? How would this man-made-being interact with our world? What are their rights? Are they equal and fair to humans? And countless other dilemmas. There needs to be reassurance that a monster (Frankenstein) isn’t created and nothing is created to harm our lives.<br />On the other hand, there is always fear in things we do not fully understand. In the past, the thought of vaccines, treatments, antibiotics, chemotherapy, etc were probably exceptionally frightening; yet these advances have become part of our everyday lives and are necessity for survival. This kind of movement in science exemplifies how we need to keep working to discover new things, and now that we have the knowledge, synthetic biology could be the next big thing. The opportunities for such innovative science is endless – from curing diseases to helping preserve environment and life – all at the cost of some adventure and perseverance. There is so much more to be discovered, learned, and understood.<br />Despite the skepticism and fear, if we can ultimately work efficiently and safely utilize our scientific advancements, we may be able to develop something great.Alexandra Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15217191447888704773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-778688959759697542010-11-24T09:42:09.680-08:002010-11-24T09:42:09.680-08:00Even with all of the advancements we have made in ...Even with all of the advancements we have made in the past decade or so in the fields of genome sequencing and synthetic biology, I get the feeling that scientists still have barely scratched the surface. I am all for using the knowledge we have gained to attempt to better the human race in terms of eliminating diseases and whatnot, but the methods these researchers are using seem extremely dangerous to me. The human genome, for example, has been sequenced completely, but the functions of each individual gene are still a mystery, for the most part. A scientist might turn off a gene that increases a person's risk for schizophrenia, but who knows what else that particular gene is responsible for? They could have unknowingly created another serious problem in another part of that person's body.<br /><br />My point is that we do not know nearly enough about gene manipulation to do anything but fumble around in the dark, basically. As it mentions in the article, scientists could try to synthesize a microorganism for the purpose of fighting off cancer and accidentally create a new virus that is resistant to all existing vaccines. I do not think that synthetic biology is unethical, at least while it is restricted to lower level organisms like bacteria, but there are definitely high risks that come along with it. I certainly do not think that we should write off an entire scientific field just because of the possible dangers it presents, but I would definitely feel more comfortable if we knew more about the genomes that already exist before we try to go synthesize new organisms from scratch. <br /><br />- Rachel CorradoRachel Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13260974456981154289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-88693890315037153232010-11-17T16:25:53.098-08:002010-11-17T16:25:53.098-08:00Knowledge is power, as the saying goes. With the e...Knowledge is power, as the saying goes. With the ever-expanding knowledge of biology and genetics, we equip ourselves with a greater understanding of what makes us US. This advance in our understanding will no doubt lead to great advances in the world of healthcare. One wonders, however, just how far the line is from healthcare to warfare. If we know for certain what a general human's strengths and weaknesses are, what's to stop a sort of terrorist group with great resources from exploiting that knowledge and harming lots of people?<br /><br />The advancements we make must be regulated, or at least looked after. Lets look at the wonderful advancement of antibiotics. These medicines help many people get over hard-to-fight bugs every year. In lieu of these medications have sprung super-bugs that are resistant to antibiotics. We've just put people in jeopardy, and more and more people get sick every year with drug-resistant strains of nasty bugs. We've got to be careful not to let this same situation happen with new advancements in biology and genetics. Yes, the advancements are great and can/will help many, many people. With these new advancements will come previously unheard of risks, and we've got to be prepared to deal with those as they arise.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05276450634615287568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-67722460736578354452010-11-16T19:14:12.746-08:002010-11-16T19:14:12.746-08:00I am less worried about scientists creating a new ...I am less worried about scientists creating a new life-form that goes awry and attacks humans, and more worried about the ethical implications of such technologies. Of course experimentation can lead to accidents and mishaps, but with careful and methodical research I think that science will advance as it has in the past. And for the most part we can agree that much of new technological and biochemical advances have been positive for society, prolonging life for those who previously might have a very short expectancy, giving people with disabilities lives they never thought possible with advancements such as prosthesis and advanced types of therapy and new approaches to rehabilitation. Of course, knowledge and advancements can be abused when in the wrong hands, as history has shown us time and time again. However my greatest concern is when we have come so far that ethical boundaries are blurred. The idea of engineering a microbe to produce oil sounds enticing, but what about when we get even more advanced? We have already cloned several types of animals. What if we could clone people? There was a scary movie I recall where everyone had a clone and their clones were harvested for organ donation. It isn't that crazy or far fetched! The idea of how we chose to apply our medical advancements and what we deem ethical in the future is what I find most worrisome. <br />-Jess Saferjesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07000468432117278780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-70127958403492993632010-11-15T20:02:53.794-08:002010-11-15T20:02:53.794-08:00Reading the article, a brief comic book-esque labo...Reading the article, a brief comic book-esque laboratory scene flashed through my mind, sharpening my mind with an instant of paranoia. While this is was dramatic, the human error factor is still frighteningly relevant. Yet as Krauss says, “When it comes to technological applications, that which can be done will be done.” If this is so, we should focus on taking measures toward it being done right. If this means having high security facilities, so be it. The margin of the unknown is so great here, making it imperative for us to give a lot of thought toward what we can control, i.e., who has access to these resources and where such experiments are performed. If the public sees numerous regulations in place, the general fear could possibly decrease and the willingness to understand the significance of the procedures could go up.sjhart3https://www.blogger.com/profile/00326624446206802782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-44763010886257642372010-11-13T10:23:30.333-08:002010-11-13T10:23:30.333-08:00I agree that we shouldn't generate unreasonabl...I agree that we shouldn't generate unreasonable fear over the possibilities, but a strong dose of caution as we proceed with powerful new technologies seems reasonable. <br />The ultimately debate of developing such technology is what if. If expertise is garnish in the wrong community and the synthetic biotechnology fell into the wrong hands, for example, the terrorists', disaster would strike. I think the author is looking at the situation through rosy red glass. Sure the benefits may outweigh the discussed possible dangers, but there could be far worst dangers out there that currently we do not know or we choose not to explore further. Humanity is certainly capable of wiping itself out. I am not arguing that we are being intentionally ignorant of the risks, but we are certainly blinded by the possible positive outcomes that could benefit humanity. <br />-Handi WuHandi W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17369409867926479863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-78787942721818309152010-11-13T10:22:35.814-08:002010-11-13T10:22:35.814-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Handi W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17369409867926479863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7224191585523605400.post-78309741875665063082010-11-11T15:46:10.343-08:002010-11-11T15:46:10.343-08:00I believe that synthetic biology could have many p...I believe that synthetic biology could have many potential risks, but along with those risks even more potential benefits. Just with any new area of research, there are unknowns about synthetic biology, but that ought not to discourage scientists from researching it. The thought of scientists assembling an entire life-form is rather scary. If scientists built an organism, who's to say they're not in entire control of it? There are obvious benefits in synthetic biology, but it also has the risk of being a slippery slope in what scientists may create and how those experiments are used. I do, however, think it is important to continue researching new things, but I think it must be done cautiously and with much regulation on how these synthetic creations are used.<br />Alex GustafsonAlex Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10042372685781551009noreply@blogger.com