Synthetic Hype
By Jonathan Kahn,
Biopolitical Times guest contributor
| 12. 27. 2010
I've been thinking lately about the current excitement over the promise and potential of synthetic biology. The basic idea of synthetic biology is to make biology more like engineering, creating standardized biological "parts" that can be combined to redesign existing biological systems or create entirely new ones that do not already exist in the natural world. It is aptly represented by the concept of "biobricks," a
trademarked term describing "standard biological parts [that] a synthetic biologist or biological engineer can [use to] program living organisms in the same way a computer scientist can program a computer."
I am concerned because this seems to be the latest in a long line of grand promises that have accompanied demands for resources (both monetary and intellectual) for successive major biotechnological undertakings over the past twenty years. Each of these undertakings has been worthy in its own right but none has, as yet, come anywhere near to realizing the extravagant claims made by its initial promoters. Modern developments in biotechnology have been driven, in part, by an ever receding horizon of promise. Many scholars...
Related Articles
By Julia Black and Margaux MacColl, The Information [cites CGS' Katie Hasson] | 07.19.2024
When venture capitalist Jack Abraham first began dating his wife, Gabriella Massamillo, he insisted on one condition: that when they were ready to have children, she’d be willing to conceive using in vitro fertilization. Abraham had lost both his mother...
Image courtesy National Human Genome Research Institute
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is supposed to encourage effective medical advances while also ensuring that patients and research subjects are protected. This dual mandate demands tricky judgment calls that are made more difficult by outside pressures of several kinds, political, judicial, and especially commercial. This April story at Bloomberg examines one deeply troubling pattern of regulatory capture:
Americans Are Paying Billions to Take Drugs That Don’t Work
Companies are increasingly...
By Peter Aldhous, Scientific American | 07.02.2024
In June a notice posted on the website of the journal Nature set a new scientific record. It withdrew what is now the most highly cited research paper ever to be retracted.
The study, published in 2002 by Catherine Verfaillie...
By Emma McDonald Kennedy
| 07.11.2024
Louise Perry’s recent article in The Spectator cautions against “The quiet return of eugenics,” a threat she locates in preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic disorders. The technology is billed as a way for parents undergoing IVF to select which embryo to implant based on information about each embryo’s genetic risk factors and traits. These reports, she says, give parents “a very full picture of the adult that embryo could become”––from their child’s risk of developing different diseases to their “likely...