Source

By Kerry Sheridan (AFP) – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON — A White House panel said on Thursday the controversial field of synthetic biology, or manipulating the DNA of organisms to forge new life forms, poses limited risks and should be allowed to proceed.

An expert commission convened by President Barack Obama advised vigilance and self-regulation as scientists seek ways to create new organisms that could spark useful innovations in clean energy, pollution control and medicine.

Critics, including environmental advocates, accused the panel of not taking their concerns seriously and said that allowing science to police itself was tantamount to offering no oversight at all.

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues "concluded that synthetic biology is capable of significant but limited achievements posing limited risks," it said in its first report.

"Future developments may raise further objections, but the commission found no reason to endorse additional federal regulations or a moratorium on work in this field at this time."

The 13-member panel of scientists, ethicists and public policy experts was created by Obama last year.

Its first order of business was to consider the issue of synthetic biology after the J. Craig Venter Institute announced in May it had developed the first self-replicating bacteria cell controlled by a synthetic genome.

Those opposed to Venter's techniques said the discovery was tantamount to "playing God," and creating novel organisms that could be dumped into the environment without adequate understanding of the ramifications.

Announcing the creation of the "first synthetic cell," lead researcher Craig Venter said at the time it "certainly changed my views of the definitions of life and how life works."

But the commission said Venter's team had not actually created life, since the work mainly involved altering an already existing life form.

"Thoughtful deliberation about the meaning of this achievement was impossible in the hours that elapsed between the breaking news and the initial round of commentaries that ensued," it said in its report.

"Of note, many scientists observe that this achievement is not tantamount to 'creating life' in a scientific sense because the research required a functioning, naturally occurring host cell to accept the synthesized genome."

Commission chair Amy Gutmann said the panel considered a range of approaches to regulating the new scientific field, from allowing unbridled freedom to imposing strict government regulation on experiments.

"We chose a middle course to maximize public benefits while also safeguarding against risks," she said.

"Prudent vigilance suggests that federal oversight is needed and can be exercised in a way that is consistent with scientific progress."

As to the risk of releasing modified organisms into nature, a scenario some have warned could spark biological threats or damage to the ecosystem, "scientists and ethicists advised careful monitoring and review of the research," the panel said.

The panel also urged greater cooperation among federal agencies that oversee product licensing and funding of synthetic biology, and collaboration with world governments and global groups like the World Health Organization.

"Educational classes on the ethical dilemmas raised by synthetic biology should be a mandatory part of training for young researchers, engineers, and others who work in this emerging field," it added.

A spokesman in the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy said the Obama administration was "grateful" for the report and highlighted the panel's conclusion that no new regulatory bodies were needed.

"We appreciate the commission's main conclusion that synthetic biology does not currently pose novel safety or ethical issues that require the creation of new oversight bodies," the spokesman said.

A coalition of 58 groups from 22 countries sent a letter of protest to the panel, saying "this process has not resulted in recommendations that recognize the serious threats synthetic biology pose to the environment, workers' health, public health, and social justice."

"We are disappointed that 'business as usual' has won out over precaution in the commission's report," said Eric Hoffman, biotechnology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth and of the signatories.

"Self-regulation equates to no regulation."

Wow, I didn't expect this... and this makes me seriously happy :)

I can see where the scientific community would be happy. But what about this artificial life how can we ensure it will be treated humainly. What about all the failed experiments? Playing God is never a good thing because people get arrogant and drunk with power.

I remember hearing awhile back about a Canadian company that thought in the future we will grow clone bodies of ourselves artificially to provide organ transplants. He said in the future we will grow the organs. The question is the humanity. If you are creating human bodies to harvest organs isn't that just as bad as harvesting organs from prisoners or innocent civilians?

Of course I know scientists would do this eventually and it may lead to alot of good break throughs. But at which point do we sell out our humanity and morals? Which point does it become not okay?

Eventually we'll have clones, we'll have dinsaurs back we'll all have an unlimited supply of organs. A brain that never grows old. These things all sound great but at what cost?

If anything I'd think PETA would freak, as all these living organisms are exactly that, living organisms.

Dude, when pepole talk about artificial life they think about things on the cellular level, nothing close to real animals.

Thats not what I gather from any of the interviews I've watched on TV or read about. Sure it starts at a cellular level but the end goal is to create artificial life. Many of the break throughs people talk about is cloning or an artificial womb. Right now its at a cellular level but it will eventually turn into animals and humans. That is a goal of many of these companies.

This is just the start. As I said I saw an interview on CBC a year or so ago about a guy who was saying that in the near future we will grow artificial clones which we will get organs from. These would be artificial humans!

About time. I agree with JoelCool that there are some issues when it goes to far, but if its only non-intelligent lifeform that we are talking about, then we could see amazing gains on soooo many grounds

Synthetic life really is no big deal. Look at what humans have been doing with the domestication and cross-hybridization of animals and plants. We've been tampering around with this kind of thing for thousands of years, only now our technology enables us to take it to the next level.

If you create a artifical body without a head/brain then its not really a human, as anything that a human is goverened by is because of its brain (pain, pleasure, emotion). So if they were to find a way to create human organs, i dont see this as a problem. They have been trying out making ears on animals (which seems pretty weird and cruel), so to me this seems more humane.

My only concern is that at some point we release something dangerous into the wild like a disease created by humans.

Dinosaurs for the win though :)

Evn if we do manage to create full-bodied artificial life in order to prolong our lives, they would be developed eccentially brainless (Enough brain-power to power the heart and vital orgns, nothing more) and therefor by both reeligious and scientific definition... the new lifeforms would not have a sole, or governing personality.

Meaning they would have no Humanity or Animality and would basically be giant versions of the mold that grows in your milk...and you dont treat that with much joy or respect...Theres no real difference.

If they'd only provide me with a research grant to hire a few "lab assistants," I'm confident I could produce some man-made life in less than a year.