|
Aim:
To examine the ethical, biological and social concerns related to the release of genetically modified bacteria in the wild
Achievements:
- We talked to expert which enabled us to have a broad overview of the situation. [1]
- We screened previous iGEM team’s wikis to trace the evolution of biosafety concerns in the iGEM competition when it comes to releasing genetically modified bacteria in the wild. We especially examined the containment systems that have been proposed. [2]
- We wrote a report where we addressed the concerns raised by synthetic biology per se, that is, as a technique. Then, we analyzed the specific concerns that arise from synthetic biology’s potential applications in nature. [3]. We realized:
- The need to raise awareness of synthetic biology in the population so people can decide in the most enlightened way possible if they want of this new technology and of its applications (A),
- The need of a discussion between society’s different protagonists to set goals, define what they would consider as benefits and acceptable risks (B),
- The need for more biosafety in iGEM (C),
- The need for an INDEPENDANT comity of scientists to test any application of synthetic biology that requires releasing in the environment (D), (You can find the the full list here)
- We tried to address some of the above needs by:
- Organizing a workshop on synthetic biology and a tour of our lab for 60 high school students, (addresses issue A and B) [4]
- Organizing a debate with 10 non expert students from various background, and then opening the debate to the floor (the public), which was made up of both experts and non experts, (addresses issue A and B) [5]
- Creating a safety page on the biobrick registry (addresses issue C)[http://partsregistry.org/Biosafety]
- Making a list of proposals [6]
|
"
Overview
Delay system
Semantic containment
Restriction enzyme system
MAGE
Suicide system
Encapsulation
Synthetic import domain
Safety Questions
Safety Assessment
