Team:TU-Delft/test10

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "{{:Team:TUDelft/Scripts}}{{:Team:TUDelft/CSS}}{{:Team:TUDelft/menu}} <html> <head><title>Human Outreach</title></head> <body> <div style="height:70px; width:100%;"></div> <img s...")
Line 23: Line 23:
<br/>
<br/>
-
 
+
</p>
</div>
</div>
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/3/37/Footer_2.jpg" align="middle" width="690">
<img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/igem.org/3/37/Footer_2.jpg" align="middle" width="690">
<a href='https://2012.igem.org/Main_Page' target="_blank"><div id='logo_igem2'></div><a/></body></html>
<a href='https://2012.igem.org/Main_Page' target="_blank"><div id='logo_igem2'></div><a/></body></html>

Revision as of 20:27, 26 September 2012

Menu

Human Outreach

There is no agreed definition of synthetic biology, but it is best understood as the deliberate design of biological systems and living organisms using engineering principles.
One of the most potent promises of synthetic biology is the creation of ‘artificial life’. This has provoked fears about scientists ‘playing God’ and raises philosophical and religious concerns about the nature of life and the process of creation. Religion involves a belief in a spiritual world (often accompanied with a deity), influencing the world view of a person and determining moral principles through a belief (mostly written in a book) and/or cultural system. What religion often tries to pass is an explanatory world view, trying to grasp the world.
Often religion considers living species as beings having a cause (for instance, in the Catholic church the task of people is to make the world as if it were heaven) and directing the introduction or deletion of functions in these beings influence this cause tremendously. With introduction of smelling genes in yeast the whole sexual reproduction system of yeast is disturbed. The cause of reproduction therefore has changed. Introducing designed genes in an organism, even considering the gradual discovery of essential functions, therefore can be called ‘acting as God’ in the respect that there is a significant and directed influence in the target organism and its siblings.
It has been suggested that a stable definition of ‘life’ is impossible and that synthetic biologists are confused over what life is, where it begins and particularly, how complex it must be. In response a number of scientists have proposed a modified version of Turing’s test for life imitation. However, it is unclear whether these moves to undermine lay concepts of life will ameliorate deeper fears about the blurring of the boundary between the artificial and the natural world.
The regulator of these licenses also has an ethical decision to be made: ‘Where would it be permitted to implement this invention?’ Also he has to ask himself the possibility of dual use, being aware of consequences which can occur when the invention comes to the open and much more considerations. The producer of the invention then has the ethical decision of distribution the invention. Given the ethical viewpoint of the inventor and regulator he should be aware of the possible damages an invention can cause. He is then to be blamed when he sells the product to malevolent or incapable people anyway.
With knowledge about evolutionary processes there is known that many organisms modified in laboratories wouldn’t survive in nature. Just because the ‘extra genes’ only cost extra energy and there is no gain in maintaining those genes. A yeast cell that has sacrificed its sexual reproduction mechanism to get the function of smelling just wouldn’t survive. Changing species by knocking out functions or introducing extra survival skills however, can lead to more viable species. With these species the risk is greater and therefore the possible consequences should be considered before making the species. What will happen when it breaks out?
Natural virtue ethics is a part of virtue ethics theorem which is discussed because it also considers the animalistic behavior of people. Being realistic, decision making of people doesn’t go according to a theory often, but mostly it occurs more pragmatic. When a decision is made it can contain someone’s moral view point, but not often it is completely according to a theory. This theory provides the proper characteristics of the righteous actor on which everyone should base their actions. Gene Modification seems a hard topic for a virtuous person or group. The topic provides a list of pros and cons, uncertainties and proven concepts, but when the act of gene transfer is virtuous cannot be said by these facts alone.
The main concerns in this area are centred on the development of synthetic organisms that are either intentionally or accidentally released into the environment.When is considered what sort of methods and genes are patented at this moment and judging the legal verdict about genetic patent cases, the extent genetic patenting will play a role in research seems limited. Since scientists most of the time try to comprehend and research natural phenomenon, patent infringement should never occur because natural genes and products can’t be patented. When engineers are researching a modified gene they have to be able to see to what extent genetic licensing is done in that area. Until now this does not exist, so there is a chance patent infringement comes as an unwelcome surprise. Licensing for engineering purposes only seems fair since the use of inventions have to be valued.
When applications come to the market, which are more and more exposed to the society, the party against Genetic Modifications has great chance to get bigger. When such applications have to be valued by a board where all parties with interests are present, a general acknowledgement of a certain application can be made.