Print
Email
Print Edition Stories
Photo courtesy of Harvard Medical School
Terrafugia Transition First Flight
MHT's Marc Songini: Mass. bio firms prep for lifting of stem cell ban
NECN: Jim Connolly discusses the home of the future
What are the ethical implications of creating the building blocks of a synthetic cell? Leave your comment below.
The man who mapped the human genome is now doing a major follow up by creating the components of synthetic life, offering potential biotechnology breakthroughs but also creating worries over the related ethical, safety and religious consequences.
Harvard University molecular geneticist George Church, the founder of the Human Genome Project, has led a research team to create a self-replicating ribosome. While ribosomes were reconstituted 40 years ago, this appears to be the first time it has been done succesfully and synthetically. Exactly where the research will go isn’t certain, however.
“It’s hard to predict these things,” said Church. “It’s pretty pioneering and a little bit out of the box.”
Church, a renowned researcher who led the mapping of the human genome, explained that the ribosome is a building block: It’s found in all cells and works as a protein creator and synthesizer.
“Almost everything depends on protein synthesis,” said Church. That includes antibodies, drugs, small-molecule compounds, structured materials and biofuels. “It is the main component in all living organisms and one of the most complex. Taking it apart and putting it together is a significant milestone,” he said.
“It’s really opening up new vistas,” said Anthony Forster, assistant professor of pharmacology at Nashville-based Vanderbilt University Medical Center and one of Church’s collaborators. This addresses core cellular replication processes and has applications around both DNA and RNA technology, he noted.
However, with this step forward comes a new set of ethical considerations, say experts. “We need to be critically aware of the profound implications of creating synthetic life,” said Karl Giberson, director of the Forum on Faith and Science at Gordon College in Wenham. “I don’t think this is something to be scared of. I don’t think Mother Nature is being violated in some egregious way. But this is an area of science with important ethical considerations, and religious sensibilities and higher priorities need to be on the table, under discussion.”
But having such a concern isn’t a matter of religious zealotry. “We are intruding into areas of nature that transcend us, and we need the ability to make informed and appropriate decisions,” he said.
Church said ethical and safety considerations are already being addressed. The original plan was just to improve protein synthesis. “It’s not our intention to make an artificial bacterium, much less an artificial human. Being able to make a synthetic cell is a by-product.”
Additionally, these self-replicating systems depend on multiple small molecules and very specific lab conditions to be on life support, noted Forster. “It’s not something that’s going to escape or cause danger.”
Many experts believe that synthetic biology, which has been around in some form for a decade or longer, poses unique ethical questions that other forms of biotechnology don’t, noted Gregory Kaebnick, a research scholar at the Hastings Center, a Harrison, N.Y.-based bioethics think tank. “The idea of creating life and playing God is particularly sharp.” His view, however, is that this is only an extension of existing technologies — not a separate category. Moreover, this is an “enormously exciting” area.
Church intends to continue to work on building out a platform around synthetic life. One of the specific objectives for the next eight months is creating a so-called “mirror-image protein” — that is, one identical to that found naturally. Such a protein won’t be as susceptible to enzyme breakdown and can last longer, he said.
Some initial commercial applications include potentially creating basic molecular biology tool kits, said Forster. Researchers could buy systems to synthesize proteins for molecular biology research or for therapeutic proteins. The proteins themselves could be engineered to undergo “Darwinian evolution to evolve even better therapeutic proteins,” said Forster.
Church has been active in a number of companies and other enterprises. Besides the genome project, he’s been involved with companies such as Beverly-based Enzymatics Inc., Marlborough-based Qteros Inc., and Cambridge-based Codon Devices Inc., among others.
What are the ethical implications of creating the building blocks of a synthetic cell? Leave your comment below.
RSS Feeds
Comments (2)
Please Login/Register to post comments.