"
Team:Warwick/Human
From 2014.igem.org
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
</div> <br> | </div> <br> | ||
| - | < | + | <h4> Synthetic Biology: Reality v Hype </h4> |
<p> Scientific skepticism has many different definitions, as a team we define it as a method to examine the claims about the world. The skeptical way of thinking is embodied in the scientific method, starting the generation of a hypothesis - the acceptance or rejection of which is dependent on evidence, which must be robust, reliable and verifiable. Syntethic biology as a relative new discipline could then be seen to be a hype to generate interest, rather than a reality, as with all areas of science - results, if produced are rarely reproducible and verified. | <p> Scientific skepticism has many different definitions, as a team we define it as a method to examine the claims about the world. The skeptical way of thinking is embodied in the scientific method, starting the generation of a hypothesis - the acceptance or rejection of which is dependent on evidence, which must be robust, reliable and verifiable. Syntethic biology as a relative new discipline could then be seen to be a hype to generate interest, rather than a reality, as with all areas of science - results, if produced are rarely reproducible and verified. | ||
Revision as of 15:42, 30 August 2014
HUMAN PRACTICES: THE INSPIRATION STATION
BIOWEAPONS
- What are our project's key vulnerabilities? That is, in what ways is our replicon system susceptible to weaponisation and ill-purpose?
- Are there cases of synthetic biology being hijacked by malevolent forces in the first, that we might better insulate our project against such activities?
- We could include a history of bioweaponry and their use, from before their outlawing at the 1975 Asilomar conference, to modern day use, illegal by international standards, in Syria.
- To the end of better understanding the threat our work could possess, we have attempted to contact a friend of Will's at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory , who transform discoveries in the fields of science and technology into functional defence and security material. We are awaiting a reply.
FUTUREPROOFING SYNBIO
Synthetic biology is a new frontier in science. It is regulated by governments, but having been around for less time, may well have been subject to less meticulous scrutiny by all interested parties. An interesting exercise would be creating a slider of sorts, which dictates how stringently an imagined government controls the investigation of synthetic biology. Too little, and you run into issues of bioterrorism and accidental environmental contamination; too much, and you run the risk of stifling all research in a web of beauracratic frustration. Futureprooding would be about examining different existing models of regulation, deciding where they fit on the scale, and examining these case studies to determine the most effective solution, so as to support and not suffocate a burgeoning and potentially revolutionary field of scientific investigation.
Synthetic Biology: Reality v Hype
Scientific skepticism has many different definitions, as a team we define it as a method to examine the claims about the world. The skeptical way of thinking is embodied in the scientific method, starting the generation of a hypothesis - the acceptance or rejection of which is dependent on evidence, which must be robust, reliable and verifiable. Syntethic biology as a relative new discipline could then be seen to be a hype to generate interest, rather than a reality, as with all areas of science - results, if produced are rarely reproducible and verified. How then as a team, do we realize the use of synthetic biology in the world today and in the future, do we believe that it is a reality that will become more prevalent or does synthetic biology make bold claims, without evidence to justify such claims? Chelsey – Synthetic biology is trying to make solutions to problems that already have well characterized solutions available. For example - industrial processes which utilize chemical based methods. Translating and modifying organisms to scale up the same processes is a complex undertaking. However, it is important to realize that synthetic biology is a relatively new scientific discipline and as such, hype is used to generate interest – as with all areas of science today. I see synthetic biology growing in popularity for the future and can be a new way of solving problems, but only if the complexity of biological systems is further unravelled. Leo – Synthetic biology doesn’t have any particular advantage over traditional methods currently; with this being dependent on the scope of the project being conducted. For traditional biotechnological projects, it can become a valuable asset. However, for the majority of projects which are biologically complex – it is not currently feasible. Whether large scale companies will utilize synthetic biology in the future is an interesting question – of course, in the world today, scientific ventures that are the most interesting have to also have an impact commercially to be relevant. Waqar – Having been the one conducting the team interviews and gaging responses of the team on synthetic biology. I come to an opinion where I think that synthetic biology is hyped to an extent but will also become an ever increasing reality in the future. Synthetic biology may offer better methods/approaches/outlook to problems that exist currently. In particular, crop production being a major problem - with a growing population that is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050 it becomes imperative to improve yield and quality of crops with the limited agricultural land available. The diseases of today will still be the diseases of tomorrow, cancer, heart disease, MS, diabetes, TB, malaria, dengue and many others. Whilst research in such areas has been promising, it remains an open question whether synthetic biology can contribute or even be the magical cure. Will – Has great potential in the future, but hype is just an inevitable part of science today. Trying to take experiments and redefine them in a different way is great, but it’s a safe way of doing science and merits little in return. Take the analogy of a fruit tree, picking the lowest branch yields the smallest fruit but putting in the work to get to the highest branch gives the largest fruit. In synthetic biology there is a lot of talk about standardization and hierarchical abstraction, but few examples rarely exist.
