ࡱ> NPM 1bjbj .DH)Kbb8,$6ALhhh,......$"RhhhhhRg(((hP,(h,((R}0,#X##$hh(hhhhhRR(hhhhhhh#hhhhhhhhhb k: Human Practices project: Synthetic biology and bioethics 1. Why do human practices in iGEM? Synthetic biology is clearly an exciting and inspiring area for those participating in iGEM. For the most part, our enthusiasm arises because we have got the chance to learn how to use the tools and techniques of synthetic biology in order to work towards applications that benefit humanity with teams working towards more effective ways to deliver medicines, make biofuels, or even make bacteria smell nicer, the iGEM competition opens up a space for students to imagine how to make the world better, one BioBrick at a time. Yet, we believe that iGEM participants ought to go beyond learning about what synthetic biology can do and how to accomplish positive goals in this field. It has become apparent in recent years that a number of social, political, legal and ethical issues circulate around synthetic biology (i.e. see Lentzos 2009). For example, there are concerns about how a sceptical public may perceive this technology as well as worries about biosafety, biosecurity and the fair distribution of knowledge and applications that disseminate from this field with mixed open source and IP regimes and saying that merely scratches the surface! As young iGEMers, a good number of us are likely to comprise the next generation of practicing synthetic biologists it is therefore crucial that we enlarge our view to include an appreciation of this fields potential societal impacts. That is why we believe that iGEM students should think carefully about how we can help to develop this area of biotechnology in a safe and productive way, acknowledging and participating in discussions that address wider socio-political and ethical concerns. Such dialogue is already taking place at multiple levels a number of scientists and engineers practicing synthetic biology are participating in debate and discussion with public spheres, policy makers and social scientists in order to support development that aims at maximizing benefits and minimizing potential negative impacts of the field. 2. About our human practices project Keeping in mind that a number of synthetic biologists are participating in the kind of dialogue discussed above, we thought it would be a good idea for us to get some practice at talking through the human practices side of this field. That is why, with the help of Caitlin Cockerton (a PhD student from the BIOS Centre at London School of Economics), we developed a human practices project. We decided to focus on three themes: (1) describing our work in easily understandable terms; (2) reflecting on the biological (some might even think life like) nature of the materials used in synthetic biology; and (3) addressing risks in our project and in synthetic biology in general. Caitlin conducted interviews with each of us in the iGEM team and these were recorded on video. This was where we had the chance to talk through our personal views on the three themes. We also participated in a group workshop with Caitlin, where we discussed and debated our views collectively. We have included a short video (see below/above or provide a link) of some of our favourite clips from the interviews. 3. What we learned & suggestions for future iGEM human practices projects From this enriching experience, we learned that such discussions are essential to the safe advancement of the field. Many of us expressed their desire to have a transparent scientific community where the scientists and society discuss freely about the expectations and risks that the field touches on. It was an interesting exercise to be pushed to articulate our views on topics that are indeed closely tied to our work in iGEM, but that sometimes we forget about when we are just doing the science and engineering. We need to be able to explain our work in understandable terms this ties into the matter that synthetic biology will have to discuss and debate about this biotechnology in public spheres as the field progresses and begins to impact society. We also ought to think about how others may perceive the manipulation and engineering of the components of life although we may think biology can be black-boxed and thought of in analogous ways to computer systems, others may disagree. It is for example important to keep in mind that the materials that are manipulated in synthetic biology do not have the same moral implications as existing, non-living technology such as the computer. It is important for us to appreciate that there will be many different views on what synthetic biology is about and we will need to create a framework within which all these different points of view can come together, discuss and shape the future of the field. Finally and this was something we knew right from the beginning of our project it was essential that we all knew about how our project may be perceived as somewhat risky, in that the application would imply human beings could ingest capsules that are filled with proteins that have been made by a genetically engineered E. coli. We have built in strong safety measures into our project right from the beginning and we need to be able to articulate what this is about to others. We strongly believe that the wider sociological issues and concerns need to be addressed in the design of synthetic biological systems. This will show the commitment of the synthetic biologist towards the aim of creating a field that will contribute to the betterment of society as a whole. In conclusion, we would recommend that future iGEM teams take on a human practices project of some sort. Even the simple exercise of reading and talking through some of the wider socio-political and ethical issues amongst fellow iGEM peers does a lot to benefit the field. If we begin now to work on developing ourselves as scientists and engineers who can relate our work to a bigger picture, it will only serve to benefit our research community and our society at later stages of synthetic biologys development. Of course, there are many avenues to go down to take human practices projects further do some pubic outreach by visiting schools or community centres to talk about synthetic biology; make questionnaires for members of the synthetic biology community or wider circles in our universities, cities or countries; think carefully about how to build in safeguards into our projects and then make sure we are able to talk about it clearly to lay audiences as well as to peers in the field. This is another reason why we are excited about coming all together at the jamboree, as it is an ideal opportunity for discussion and debate around the aforementioned issues. We believe that as the next generation of synthetic biologists and hopefully as the generation who will really be transferring the products of synthetic biology into society it is essential for us to consider human practices of synthetic biology as an inherent part of our work! Recommended reading For those interested in exploring literature more in the social sciences realm of synthetic biology (or biotechnology in general), the following reading list has been provided as a starting point Happy reading! (i.) Some books and journals in the social sciences realm BioSocieties Debate (2008) Beyond the genome: The challenge of synthetic biology, BioSocieties Vol.3(1): 3-20 Fox-Keller, E. (2009) What Does Synthetic Biology Have to Do with Biology? BioSocieties Vol.4: 291-302 Hope, J. (2008) Biobazaar: the Open Source Revolution and Biotechnology, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Jasanoff, S. (2005) Designs on nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Lentzos, F. (2009) Synthetic Biology in the Social Context: The UK Debate to Date, BioSocieties Vol.4: 303-315 Lentzos, F., Gaymon Bennett, Jeff Boeke, Drew Endy and Paul Rabinow (2008) Visions and Challenges in Redesigning Life, BioSocieties Vol.3(3):311-23 Rai, A. & Boyle, J. (2007) Synthetic Biology: Caught between Property Rights, the Public Domain, and the Commons, PLoS Biology Vol.5:389-393 Rose, N. (2007) The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Sunder Rajan, K. (2006) Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life, Durham: Duke University Press Wilmut, I., Campbell, K. & Tudge, C. (2000) The Second Creation: Dolly and the Age of Biological Control, Cambridge, MS: Harvard University Press (ii) Some links to interesting recent articles in popular intellectual media  HYPERLINK "http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/28/090928fa_fact_specter" \o "http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/28/090928fa_fact_specter" \t "_blank" http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/28/090928fa_fact_specter  HYPERLINK "http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14299634" \o "http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14299634" \t "_blank" http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14299634  HYPERLINK "http://www.wired.co.uk/wired-magazine/archive/2009/09/features/at-home-with-the-dna-hackers.aspx" \o "http://www.wired.co.uk/wired-magazine/archive/2009/09/features/at-home-with-the-dna-hackers.aspx" \t "_blank" http://www.wired.co.uk/wired-magazine/archive/2009/09/features/at-home-with-the-dna-hackers.aspx  HYPERLINK "http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20370" \o "http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20370" \t "_blank" http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20370 (iii) Articles in science journals address some of the wider social concerns surrounding synthetic biology too! See these for a start Bhattacharjee, Y. (2007) Gene-synthesis companies join forces to self-regulate, Science Vol.316(22June): 1682 Bgl, H. et al. (2007) DNA synthesis and biological security, Nature Biotechnology Vol.25(6): 627-9 Check, E. (2005) Synthetic biologists face up to security issues, Nature Vol.436(18 Aug): 894-5 Check, E. (2006) Synthetic biologists try to calm fears, Nature Vol.441(25 May): 388-9 Nature Editorial (2006) Policing Ourselves, Nature Vol.441(25 May): 383 Nature Editorial (2008) Pathways to Security, Nature Vol.445(25 Sept): 432 Parens, E. et al. (2008) Do We Need Synthetic Bioethics? Science, Vol.321(12 Sept): 1449 Service, R.F. (2006) Synthetic biologists debate policing themselves, Science Vol.312(26 May): 1116     Imperial College London iGEM 2009-10-21 The E.ncapsulator 89:]=JZab !! !!H!K!h!l!####u$v$$$$%%"%p%|%%Ҿv#h 8h6CJ^J_H mH sH  h 8hCJ^J_H mH sH h 8h6CJh 8h5CJmH sH h 8hCJmH sH h 8hCJ hn]hhn]hlh5h>@h5h h5 hn]5hCJaJhn]CJaJ*9:]^ <=bc###u$ $ & Fa$gd$a$gd$a$gdn]u$v$$$"%#%%%%%&&&&'' (!(((#)%))))* $1$7$8$H$a$gd$a$gd$dh1$7$8$H$a$gd%%%&[&\&]&&&&&&&&&&&&&&'''''='s''''''''(((ɼ}u}k]]]hCJ^J_H mH sH h 8h6CJhCJPJh 8hCJPJ hCJh 8hCJh 8h6CJ^JaJhCJ^JaJh 8hCJ^JaJh 8hCJmH sH  h 8hCJ^J_H mH sH #h 8hCJ]^J_H mH sH &h 8h6CJ]^J_H mH sH $((((((( (!(1((((()#)$)Q)))))** ******̾쭆yooy^y^O^h 8h0JCJ^JaJ!jh 8hCJU^JaJh 8h5CJh 8hCJ^JaJh 8hCJh 8hCJmH sH  h5CJ\^J_H mH sH  h 8hCJ^J_H mH sH hCJ^J_H mH sH hCJ]^J_H mH sH  h6CJ]^J_H mH sH &h 8h6CJ]^J_H mH sH ***++7-8----T.U...,/-/////40500000G1H1$a$gd $1$7$8$H$a$gd***++++++,,5-6-7-8-9-----T...//q/w/////0050;0e0k000)101F1G1H1೨ę||||||||||oh 8hCJmH sH h 8h6CJh 8hCJh 8h5CJjh 8hCJUaJh 8hCJaJ h 8hCJ^J_H mH sH h 8h0JCJ^JaJh 8hCJ^JaJ!jh 8hCJU^JaJh 8h5CJmH sH +H1I1K1L1N1O1Q1R1T1111h 8hCJmH sH hn]hjhU H1J1K1M1N1P1Q1S1T1n11111$a$gd  B# gdn]gdn] ,1h. A!"#$% ^ 666666666vvvvvvvvv666666>6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666866666662 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p(8HX`~_HmH nHsH tH@`@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA`D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k (No List 4U@4 8i Hyperlink >*ph66 Zo0 Footnote TextPP Zo0Footnote Text CharCJaJmH sH tH @&!@ Zo0Footnote ReferenceH*4@24 n]0Header  B#:/A: n]0 Header Char CJaJtH 4 R4 n]0Footer  B#:/a: n]0 Footer Char CJaJtH PK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] )D JJJJJM%(*H11 u$*H11!""""###$5%8%%%)XXXX8@0(  B S  ?W[_g'02={ M Q wxp| !6=s %!+!@!E!U&b&&&((H)H)J)J)K)K)M)N)P)Q)S)T)n)r)))))@ES\1 4 Q!T!&&'"'x''''('(l(t(((((1)9)H)H)J)J)K)K)M)N)P)Q)S)T)n)r)))3333333333333333H)H)J)J)K)K)M)N)P)Q)S)T)))R_ z^`5o(() ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.R_К>        n]H)J)@)@UnknownG* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial;. * Helveticak MHelvetica-ObliqueTimes New Roman;|i0BatangY MHelvetica-BoldHelveticaA BCambria Math"1hzچfR)#J)#J4d3)3)2qHX-?>@2**Human Practices Project** hallasCharles Fracchia Oh+'0 , L X dpx **Human Practices Project** hallasNormalCharles Fracchia5Microsoft Office Word@lt @^c{M@ΔR)#՜.+,D՜.+,x4 hp  4London School of Economics and Political ScienceJ3) **Human Practices Project** TitleH 8@ _PID_HLINKSAF &http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20370  Jahttp://www.wired.co.uk/wired-magazine/archive/2009/09/features/at-home-with-the-dna-hackers.aspx }MIhttp://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14299634 XHDhttp://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/28/090928fa_fact_specter   !"$%&'()*,-./0123456789:;<>?@ABCDFGHIJKLORoot Entry FڴRQData #1Table+##WordDocument.DSummaryInformation(=DocumentSummaryInformation8ECompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q