The importance of bioethics
As you dive deeper into manipulating the building blocks of life, you’ll encounter a field that’s as critical to your journey as any lab technique: bioethics. Bioethics is the multidisciplinary study of the ethical issues that arise from advances in biology and medicine. Think of it as the bridge connecting the scientific knowledge you’re gaining with the human values that guide responsible action. Why is this vital for you? Because modern biology is rapidly expanding our ability to interact with, modify, and even design living systems in unprecedented ways. Technique is granting us extraordinary powers that often rise to doubts and ambiguities, in particular we are witnessing a revolution in traditional ethics and the birth of a new kind of ethic that views nature as vulnerable to human actions, therefore an object of our responsibility. As scientists, your work has the potential for significant impact, affecting not just individuals but also the environment and future generations. Engaging with bioethics equips you with the critical thinking tools needed to navigate these complex landscapes.
Ethical implications of synthetic biology
Synthetic biology views living systems not just as subjects of study but as potentially programmable materials, offering exquisite control over biological processes. The core aim is the design and construction of new biological parts, devices, and systems, or the redesign of existing, natural biological systems, for useful purposes. Synthetic biology represents a new direction in the long continuum of research in biology and genetics.However, with such powerful capabilities come considerable ethical considerations. A primary concern revolves around biosafety and biosecurity, particularly the potential for dual-use – where technologies intended for beneficial purposes could be intentionally misused. This includes the risk of bio-terror, such as engineering viruses for harmful purposes. The ability to carry out DNA synthesis is no longer limited to an elite few, and dangerous material can sometimes be obtained relatively easily. Beyond intentional misuse, there are risks of “bio-error”. This encompasses potential unexpected consequences from the accidental release of engineered organisms, unintended outcomes from the intentional release of such organisms into the environment (like horizontal gene transfer), or dangerous random modifications occurring later in the environment. Engineered organisms could also have invasive species effects on native ecosystems. These risks underscore the vulnerability of nature to human intervention and the far-reaching consequences of our actions, issues central to modern ethical challenges in biology.
Ethical dilemmas of the last years
Synthetic biology has become a major topic of conversation in bioethics due to groundbreaking achievements. In 2010, scientists announced the creation of SYNTHIA, a Mycoplasma mycoides cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome, famously described as “the first cell whose father is a computer”. The pioneer of this work, J. Craig Venter, has articulated his efforts as not merely reading life’s digital code, but also writing it, simulating it in computers, and even rewriting it to produce new living cells. While these are significant accomplishments, it’s crucial to understand that they have typically involved inserting synthetic genomes into existing living cells, and have not constituted the creation of life from inorganic chemicals. Ethical discussions on the matter sometimes use sensationalist terms like “creating life” or “playing God,” which can initially grab attention but ultimately impede accurate understanding of both the science and its ethical implications. The likelihood of creating life from inorganic chemicals still remains remote for the foreseeable future.The emergence of CRISPR-Cas9 in 2013 brought these ethical questions to the forefront with unprecedented urgency. Jennifer Doudna has described how the rapid and widespread use of CRISPR-Cas9 by labs around the world amazed her. At the same time, the awareness that someone may test the technique in human eggs, sperm, or embryos with the aim of creating heritable alterations sparked a growing “ethical storm” that began disturbing her sleep as early as the spring of 2014. The fast pace of research and low awareness among governments and regulators convinced her that the scientists involved in the technology’s genesis needed to actively participate in the public debate about its repercussions. This prompted her to co-organize meetings and co-publish an article in the journal Science that urged the global scientific community to refrain from using genome-editing tools to modify human embryos for clinical applications at that time. A striking example of the ethical concerns surrounding heritable genome editing emerged in November 2018, when Chinese researcher He Jiankui claimed to have created the first gene-edited twin girls. Using CRISPR-Cas9, his stated goal was to alter the CCR5 gene in the embryos to make the girls resistant to future HIV infection. The announcement triggered shocked reactions and calls for regulation worldwide. Many scientists and ethicists denounced the experiment as premature and ethically unjustified. They pointed out that simpler and more effective ways existed to protect against HIV and that the potential benefits did not outweigh the risks associated with editing. The case of the twins highlighted the delicate issue of “human enhancement”, raising questions about using these technologies not to cure a disease, but to confer specific traits, a concept often associated with the term “designer babies”. Although He Jiankui attempted to justify the experiment, his actions led to his conviction for “illegal medical practices” in China, underscoring the seriousness of the violation of existing ethical and regulatory norms.
How to approach the problem
Fundamentally, synthetic biology prompts deep philosophical questions about the very definition of life and the distinction between an engineered machine and a living organism, especially when constructing minimal genomes or synthetic systems from scratch. Given the potential benefits and risks, oversight and robust ethical deliberation are essential. Bodies like the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI) and the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) have examined synthetic biology. They have proposed differing, though sometimes overlapping, ethical approaches, with the PCSBI suggesting a pragmatic approach based on principles like public beneficence and responsible stewardship (prudent vigilance), while the EGE emphasizes human dignity and a conceptual analysis of “life” and “nature”. Both underscore the critical importance of responsibility and accountability in research.There is a recognized need for comprehensive ethics education for researchers in synthetic biology, extending beyond traditional medical ethics to include fields like engineering and materials science. Promoting accurate public understanding through clear communication and educational activities for diverse groups is also considered vital for informed public deliberation. As synthetic biology continues to evolve, ongoing evaluation of its risks and effective communication will remain crucial.