The genome genie
Synthetic biology needs intelligent regulation
Reactions to the J Craig Venter Institute’s (JCVI’s) latest achievement in programming synthetic life make it clear that there are many prevailing misconceptions about what exactly JCVI has done. First and foremost, Venter did not program life in the sense of animating non-living organisms. The demonstration is a major advance on gene-splicing techniques. It does unravel some of the mysteries involved in the creation of life but it doesn’t create life itself. It is closer to the truth to call it re-engineering. JCVI took genes from bacteria. These were decoded and re-combined to create a new genome in a computer-determined sequence. The synthetic sequence was plugged into living bacterial cells, which had the original DNA removed. New cells reproduced according to the synthetic DNA, thus creating a new strain of bacteria, which does not exist in nature. This demonstrates JCVI’s technique works at bacterial level. The proof of concept scales up from Eckard Wimmer’s and JCVI’s own earlier synthesis of viruses.
As always with scientific advance, the so-called synthetic biology is value-neutral. It could be a force for good and it could have its dark side. These techniques could be used, for example, to synthesise insulin-producing cells, new drugs and vaccines, natural contraceptive hormones, even to reverse ageing and replace cancer tumours by growing new cells. Other possibilities include pollution-control and anti-global warming tools in the form of organisms that “eat” plastic, carbon dioxide, asbestos, etc. It may eventually be possible to design bacteria to process food and fuel directly from the air and sunlight. Somebody will also eventually design larger and more complex forms of life, including plants and animals with specific utilities.
The dark side is that such synthetic organisms could also be instruments of bio-warfare, spreading diseases that bypass immune systems since they are unknown in nature. There is also a chance of synthetic bacteria with unknown properties being released into the wild in error. It’ll be a while before proof of concept translates into new organisms designed to order. However, as more genomes are decoded, such possibilities will loom larger. More genetic sequences are being identified daily and the techniques required to combine them will gradually become more stable.
Like the proverbial genie, the genome cannot be put back into the bottle. As computing power increases and genome databases get larger, the tools of synthetic biology will also become exponentially cheaper and, therefore, far more widely available. Where exactly this could lead is an open question and ethical debates are inevitable. One suspects that proscription is impossible. Raw materials are available everywhere. JCVI synthetic bacteria use yeast cells as hosts. Soon enough, it will be possible to tinker with synthetic organisms using off-the-shelf laptops. Ham-handed regulation would be counter-productive. It would shut down law-abiding ethical experimentation while being ignored by rogues. A lot of thought will have to go into figuring out policies that deliver effective, desirable outcomes. Sadly, the confused reaction to the initial announcement indicates that legislators and the public at large understand neither the science nor its implications.