Th e Ethics of Synthetic Biology and Emerging Technologies

[Patrik]

FYI, the US presidential bioethics commission just released its report
on synthetic biology:

http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biology-Report-12-16-10.pdf

http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biology-Report-Press-Release-12.16.10.pdf

http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biology-FAQ.pdf

A few quotes from the press release:

"While the ‘Do-It-Yourself’ community has an important role to play in
advancing synthetic biology, we recognize that technical challenges
and costs are too high right now for a completely novel organism to be
developed in a non-institutional setting,” said Dr. James W. Wagner,
Commission Vice Chair and President of Emory University. “We strongly
support an open dialogue between DIY groups and the government as we
go forward so that scientists and government can discuss the research
constraints necessary to protect public safety as the field continues
to evolve.”

The Commission recommended the following steps in order to minimize
risks and to foster innovation:

[...]

• The Executive Office of the President should remain actively
engaged with “do it yourself” groups to communicate and discuss
applicable safety and security issues.

[...]

• 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.

• Forums should be established to improve the general public’s
understanding of this field, including the creation of a biology
equivalent to FactCheck.org, in which a private group would track
statements about the science and offer an independent view of the
truth of such claims.

[Patrik]

Actually, just scanning the report for "DIY" makes for some
interesting reading. Although the charge letter from the President
didn't refer to the DIY community at all, it's clear the commission
put some serious thought into this issue.

On Dec 16, 12:12 am, Patrik <patr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI, the US presidential bioethics commission just released its report
> on synthetic biology:
>

> http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biol...
>
> http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biol...
>
> http://bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biology/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biol...

[Jason Bobe]

Having looked through the report already, you'll find that DIYbio was not portrayed as an existential threat to planet.  They also didn't single out amateurs or non-institutional actors for special treatment compared to other groups.  It a long report, so I'm working on a summary of the pertinent points for the DIYbio community.  I'll try to get that up early next week.  

Thanks,

Jason

[Bryan Bishop]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Jason Bobe wrote:

Having looked through the report already, you'll find that DIYbio was not portrayed as an existential threat to planet.

Did you see the DHS recommendation? Oh crap.

"""
to be appropriately managed. As the field progresses, however, the government should continue to assess specific security and safety risks of synthetic biology research activities in both institutional and non-institutional settings including, but not limited to, the “do-it-yourself ” community. As part of the coordinated approach urged in Recommendation 4, the Executive Office of the President, working with the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and others, should undertake and periodically update this assessment. An initial review should be completed within 18 months and the results made public to the extent permitted by law.
"""

Other than this, I haven't noticed anything startlingly negative-- there were many positive, proactive recommendations, but they may or may not be followed in that 18 month report.

- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507

[Jason Bobe]

On Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:14:15 AM UTC-5, Bryan Bishop wrote:

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Jason Bobe wrote:

Having looked through the report already, you'll find that DIYbio was not portrayed as an existential threat to planet.

Did you see the DHS recommendation? Oh crap.

"""
to be appropriately managed. As the field progresses, however, the government should continue to assess specific security and safety risks of synthetic biology research activities in both institutional and non-institutional settings including, but not limited to, the “do-it-yourself ” community. As part of the coordinated approach urged in Recommendation 4, the Executive Office of the President, working with the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and others, should undertake and periodically update this assessment. An initial review should be completed within 18 months and the results made public to the extent permitted by law.
"""

Other than this, I haven't noticed anything startlingly negative

I think this ongoing assessment is a positive feature and not a negative.  The concept of "prudent vigilance" requires ongoing assessment to reevaluate risks as new information is obtained and as technologies/practices change (including within DIY communities).  What was it about the quoted paragraph that makes you say "oh crap"?

Thanks,

Jason    

[Patrik]

Have to agree with Jason here. DHS and FBI were already keeping an eye
on the DIYbio community as a matter of course. (Hi, DHS and FBI
visitors! <waves>) There was no way that they would recommend anything
less than "we should continue keeping an eye on things".

I think the fact that the DIY community was not singled out as any
more worthy of concern as academic or private commercial labs is a big
win, considering the potential for public paranoia around "amateurs
playing God"...

[Bryan Bishop]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Jason Bobe wrote:

 It a long report, so I'm working on a summary of the pertinent points for the DIYbio community.  I'll try to get that up early next week.  

Can you post that soon?

[Bryan Bishop]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Jason Bobe wrote:

What was it about the quoted paragraph that makes you say "oh crap"?

"Prudent vigilance" looks OK to me. My concern is with the DHS. @Patrik, just to clarify, the FBI and DHS are two different entities. The report says "we should keep an eye on things", yes, but it also says (essentially) "the DHS will compile a report and make its own suggestions" which could include a total and complete nuclear attack. *shrug*

OTOH, I haven't met anyone with DHS on this list yet, so if we can hear what they are thinking that'd be great. Ed has been instrumental with FBI communication, so hopefully someone's doing the same via DHS.