"
Team:UI-Indonesia/Human Practice/Expert Talking/yohda/
From 2014.igem.org
Professor Masafumi Yohda
Biotechnology and Life Science
Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japan
YOHDA sensei is a biotechnology and life science professor, and he’s also a lecturer in Engineering in Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology (TUAT). He came to Indonesia as a guest lecture in Society of Biological Engineering Universitas Indonesia Student Chapter (SBE-UISC) featuring UI Synbio Club Seminar entitled “Application of Biotechnology in Industry.” He has come to several Nobel Prize Meetings and very famous, yet he still gave us many advices on our Lab Work. Luckily, he’s here with us to provide some information regarding synthetic biology application projection in Asia, also problems involving application of Synbio in Japan. Check it out!
Synthetic biology really has big prospects in the world. We need ideas––yet we need breakthroughs if we want to achieve more from it. Asia is being forward in many aspects over the past several years. However, Major findings from the Wilson Center on “Tracking the Growth of Synthetic Biology” in 2013 shows that the number of entities conducting research and commercial applications in Synthetic Biology in Europe and US is very high, but Asia has been left behind. Japan––as the most developed country in Asia––is known of its high technology development. Depart from this statement; Professor Yohda from TUAT (Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology) stated that there are restrictions in Japan towards GMO application. This condition biased the usual fact and in real life, a part of Japanese people are intolerant of science implementation, so the government of Japan protect all of the people including the conventionalist by restricting synthetic biology and especially GMO. Safety module might works, but back to reality. Every machine that works can’t be 100% effective, and so is safety module. There’s always a chance of failure of microorganism to escape and contaminate environment, especially because the size of microorganism and bacteria is very small. Although there are chances of failure, Prof. Yohda as a scientist wants a higher degree of Synbio development in Japan. He’s excited about synthetic biology development because it will cope problems many industries. People need to take more risks and accept this novel development.
What do you think about our project and synthetic biology itself?
Your idea is a very fascinating and novel idea, I’m impressed and I think that it would be successful if you were really developing it. From the beginning on the human genome project, I’ve always been impressed. Let’s start with the history of synthetic biology. Do you know Asa Comba? He’s a famous Nobel Prize winner because he invented purified polymers from E.coli. His son also won Nobel Prize, Roger Comba about ten years ago before his father passed away. Roger’s son, Thomas Comba is also very famous because he purifies another polymer from E.coli when he’s an undergraduate student in University of South California San Francisco. As soon as Asa Comba invented polymers, there was a news regarding enzymes that could be used to synthesize bacteria. Afterwards, Kary Mullis invented PCR machine and it helps many people in synthetizing DNA. After that people start putting the DNA in the bacteria. We’ve had a long history of biotechnology, and synthetic biology is a part of it. To make real life, we have to know the detail about our life––our own cells. It’s very difficult to be designed. Genome is a blueprint but to make it works we have to make many tools. In case of Craig Venter synthesizing chromosome, we kinda have a machine to replicate. We need more tools for the application of Synbio. iGEM and other competitions is not synthesizing life, it’s a part you can’t put apart from biotechnology. I know you’ve been doing project with Synbio and tries to make more tools. It’s nice, and it’s really applicable and you should try it. But I think, your idea is difficult and complicated, so if you’re able to attain the result that would be very wonderful. However, idea is always important. Membrane protein is rather difficult to express. Recombinant technology has been developed but still some protein is hard to be expressed. About 2 years ago, a professor in TUAT has succeeded to crystalize the PCR, and developing it towards becoming an important drug target. After all, we need to find a method to make these ideas really works. For example, a newest invention is inserting the dog’s olfactory sensing gene to cells to detect drugs at the airport. It’s very robust and easy to work with. The idea is nice, but we need various breakthroughs to achieve it. We need ideas––yet we need breakthroughs if we want to achieve more.
One of the things that make Synthetic Biology hard to scale up is because of regulation. What do you think?
Well, regulation can changes by the time. Government has to know and notice that Synbio is a part of Science & Technology Development and it can contribute towards better future.
How about in Japan?
There are difficulties, especially in medicals. People are very robust about medical and drugs so they don’t use new ones. You know IPS cell? To use it we need much money; it costs a lot. It’s very nice but we can’t pay that much money––it just costs too much to be applied to many people. It’s a hard battle if we involve money on it.
Is Synbio developed in Japan only involving medicals devices?
We have many projects, such as in food and agriculture, but the government focus only in medicals and some other devices like IPS.
Is the lack of Synbio development only caused by the high cost?
Well, it is also in our mind. We are very nervous on genetically modified tools. Despite the nerve, we still consider the genetically modified foods because the product will be reduced if we ban it. Another thing causes it is also about education. We depend on science and technology but many people in the government and mass communication don’t understand science and the rather conservative. They think science and technology would be dangerous––yet the people are powerful so we couldn’t do anything about it. Even though we depend on science and technology, we have to do something to be applied in our real life. We’re really nervous on safety. We think safety is the most important. I think safety is important, but there are no 100% safety. So, they don’t allow risks. Government always want 100% safety, but they’re wrong. There won’t be anything 100% safe. In the real world there’s always risks.
Is the research being restricted too? Or is it restricted in the application only?
Synbio is very preliminary in Japan, have not been really applied. We couldn’t apply it because the technology is not allowed. Ordinary recombinant technology is allowed, but real application to human isn’t allowed.
Do you think Synbio itself is dangerous?
I don’t personally think it is dangerous––in some cases it is, though. We have to estimate the safety of the technology. There should be appropriate estimation on the risk, but until now there isn’t any critical risks examination until now.
Companies around the world have been using product of DNA recombinant or Synbio, such as Sample6 (check out: sample6.com). What do you think?
This is my first time hearing this, very interesting. Some people may worry about the virus in the veggies, which is a recombinant. Maybe most of Japanese will be okay, but some people won’t accept it. They say loudly against them, so mass communication is nervous about it. Mass communication in Japan is restricted and people can’t have opinion because they follow the people of the small numbers. But I think, majority should make it. People are biased by the mass communication, which depends on only some numbers of people. It’s a big problem. Those people don’t know about science but mass communication follows them. Majority should make the mass communication, yet still involving the minority. They don’t have any desire to develop new things to do.
But if it keeps going like this, Asia will be left a step behind compared to Europe or US countries in this technology. What do you think?
It’s a serious problem for all of us. Asia has been far left behind in Synbio. But it’s hard for us. Without application, science and technology couldn’t be developed. Application in Japan and other Asian countries are mostly the same: high costs.
Should government change regulations?
Yes, but still you couldn’t change what they think that instant. It depends on the ministry.
What do you think? It should be really allowed & developed in real application?
Yes of course, because I’m a scientist! I think we have to do it, because there are so many problems around us and with Science & Technology we can solve it. Maybe we could stay without innovation but it won’t work soon because global problems keep surrounding us.
Major findings from the Wilson Center on “Tracking the Growth of Synthetic Biology” in 2013 shows that the number of entities conducting research in Synthetic Biology in Europe and US is very high, but Asia has been left behind. Do you have any opinion?
I think the biggest factor is because of the budget. US people have lots of money and many people are willing to invest on new technologies. I don’t know about Indonesia, but in Japan it’s very hard to invest. In USA, small companies production would be tax-free. However, in our case, many taxes are given. If the investment is not successful, employees will be fired so many people don’t want to work in it. That’s why computer science is really developed in Japan. In biotechnology we need to build laboratories, instruments, employees, and it costs much. However in computer science, all we need is a computer and even one person could do it, very easy.
How about safety modules?
It might be possible, but do you remember Jurassic Park? Haha. To kill the dinosaur who goes outside, it didn’t work. I think its real! Life can escape a system. There are many evolutions could happen, many mutations.
Do you think the community should be pushed to accept Synbio development?
Even though there are risks, we should go ahead. Without going ahead, we will disappear. Even though S&T causes many problems, but we have to believe in it. Without it, we don’t exist.
What should we do as scientists? Need direct approach?
I think our problem should be divided into 3 main things: Government, mass communication, and education. Teacher should have at least master degree to teach young people. Mass communication: They have to know Science & Technology. I encourage people not to stay on the science, but people need to know and accept it. It’s hard for now but it’s possible. We should get to move ahead.
Aroem Naroeni, DEA, Ph.D.
Biosafety Officer
Institute of Human Virology and Cancer Biology
Universitas Indonesia
Mrs. Aroem Naroeni is IHVCB’s Biosafety Officer located in Salemba, Jakarta. Finishes her Ph.D. in L'Universite d'Aix Marseille II in “Infectious Diseases and Tropical Pathology”, she’s been doing a research on breast cancer stem cells and microenvironment, and HIV antiviral drugs. She’s very concerned with biosafety and risk assessment in medical research and currently she’s developing a guideline for safety and risk assessment to be applied all over Indonesia. The coolest thing is: this will be the first one Indonesia ever have! She knows about our project we’re doing in the lab, so her point of view really matters. Find out her thoughts about our project’s safety assessment and the prospect of synthetic biology development in Indonesia!
Synthetic biology has been developing in Indonesia, but actually there are many issues involved. As a developing country, Indonesia hasn’t had a safety guideline regarding research in Synthetic Biology. But luckily, Indonesian are very “easy-going” and people will try to accept it as long as it can solve problems. A prove of it is shown by a biosimilar products such as erythropoietin, diarrhea drug, and other stuffs that has been commercially published. However, many aspects should be reconsidered including ethics, sustainability, and safety. UI is currently developing a guideline for biosafety and risk assessment for the first time ever in Indonesia. For our project, some things that need to be emphasize is we need to go through more specific study of the safety of virulence gene that would be inserted in the bacteria, and for further research we have to try it in in-vitro, preclinical (animal), and even clinical (human) for the last object. [Read more…]
