Presentation - Eric Hoffman

Presentation - Eric Hoffman

 

A Call for Precautionary Oversight of Synthetic Biology

 

Introduction

Today I was asked to speak to everyone about the global challenges of synthetic biology. To those of you unfamiliar with synthetic biology, it is taking genetic engineering to a new extreme. Instead of the “old” forms of genetic engineering which involved the cutting and pasting of genes between organisms, synthetic biology is the attempt to write genetic code and entire genomes from scratch.

Most of the public hadn’t heard about synthetic biology until May 2010 when Craig Venter announced the creation of the first-ever organism whose genome was synthesized by a computer. Even though this genome was mostly a copy of a natural goat pathogen, it was still a technical breakthrough. Despite a lack of public awareness, the field had been growing rapidly well before Venter’s announcement and continues to develop rapidly today without any real oversight or governance.

Synthetic biology is now a global technology and a global industry. DNA is synthesized and sold all around the world.  People in the “Do-it-Yourself Biology” movement are able to create organisms with synthetic biology tools in their backyards and college students are encouraged to use synthetic biology as part of the “International Genetically Engineered Machines” competition. Governments, mostly the U.S and the E.U are spending millions of dollars in this field.

There are no laws preventing a company from using synthetic organisms that may leak into the environment and no real safeguards to prevent a rouge biologist from synthesizing deadly viruses such as the Spanish Influenza or smallpox – both of which have already been synthesized and proven to work in a lab. In the U.S. the only regulations on the books involve voluntary guidelines for DNA synthesis companies to flag orders that could be used to produce pathogens – but this is voluntary.

 

The state of the art and its potential future

The organisms currently being re-designed through synthetic biology are also the most common on our planet – algae, yeast, viruses and E. coli. Craig Venter, for example, is working with Exxon Mobile to create synthetic algae that directly produce petroleum. To highlight some environmental concerns posed by synthetic organisms lets take a moment to reflect on just how important algae are to the global ecosystem, by way of example, and why it may be a bad idea to let Craig Venter reengineer them.

Algae are ubiquitous; they are found in every biosphere on our planet and are the base for most of the planet’s food chains. Algae are responsible for up to 40% of the oxygen we breathe, and in fact each and every one of us is breathing in algae as we sit in this room together today. Needless to say, algae are pretty important to all life on earth. 

Now - picture Craig Venter reengineering algae with synthetic DNA to produce more oil and in turn less oxygen. Picture that oil-producing algae blowing in the wind out of an open-pond facility into a worker’s lungs or into a local river. And picture that algae reproducing every day and flowing into an ocean, and swapping genes with wild algae. These scenarios are all the more troubling since it is impossible to predict how novel organisms will act in the environment and since our government sees little value in actually assessing such risks before these organisms and their products are developed.

Another global concern outside of the environmental release of synthetic organisms is the impact synthetic biology will have on the global economy and what that means for social justice and environmental sustainability.

Synthetic biologists envision a future in which our oil-based economy is replaced by a biomass economy. This “bio-economy” would look like this: Synthetic organisms will be created and tailored to break down any type plant matter imaginable. That means any and all types of plant matter can become the feedstock for synthetic bugs to split out biofuels, chemicals, medicines, and plastics. We’ve seen the problems that arise from using corn to produce fuels (such as increased food prices due to a major shifting of food-producing land, water, and fertilizers being used to produce fuels), so its not hard to imagine what could happen when we try make fuels from not only corn but any and all plant matter on the planet.

Picture a world where all the earth’s arable land that was dedicated to food production has shifted to wide-scale planting of monocultures to feed these synthetic bugs. Since land, water, and fertilizers are already in short supply for food production, the picture that begins to emerge is not looking good. Nearly all the synthetic biology corporations, research, funding and patents are housed in the U.S. and Europe and a vast majority of the planet’s biomass – over 86% of the earth’s plant matter - is in the global South. So this picture would not be one of sustainability but rather resource exploitation and a deepening of political and economic injustices by and for the benefit of northern countries.

As Craig Venter has said proudly, “Whoever produces abundant biofuels could end up making more than just big bucks —they will make history…The companies, the countries, that succeed in this will be the economic winners of the next age to the same extent that the oil-rich nations are today.”

So this bio-economy isn’t just about producing the next generation fuels – it is about controlling the future economy. Corporations and northern governments are already gearing up for this battle and we need to start mobilizing all those concerned in civil society, social movements, indigenous communities, and academia alike.

 

A call to action

Thankfully, opportunities are arising at the national and international level to address these global concerns. One of these is at the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, where the 193 Parties to the Convention voted unanimously last year to urge the use of the Precautionary approach when dealing with synthetic organisms. The CBD also agreed to continue looking at synthetic biology as an emerging issue over the next few years, and will do so this coming November at the meeting of their scientific and technological review body in Montreal.  This provides an opportunity to continue to push for a moratorium on the release and commercial use of synthetic organisms until the proper risk assessments and safety protocols have been established.

Another opportunity for engagement is at the upcoming UN Conference on Sustainable Development, better known as Rio+20. At this meeting, twenty years after the original Rio Conventions, there will be a major push for a new “Green Economy” – which is the same thing as the “bio-economy” we discussed earlier. This supposed “green economy” will be dependent on synthetic biology and other emerging technologies such as nanotechnology and geoengineering. Northern governments and corporations are already actively fighting for this “green economy” agenda. Civil society and social movements must begin organizing now to be prepared for this fight over the future of global environmental governance and who will control and benefit from this future bio-economy.

It is crucial for groups to participate in these international fora. While the Precautionary Principle may not be taken seriously enough in the U.S. it is the cornerstone to the CBD and other UN conventions. Even though the U.S. is not a signatory to the CBD it is still a major player in the back-room discussions and U.S. civil society groups can have a major impact on the future of these negotiations. Since synthetic biology is still a new issue to the Convention and many governments we are in a good position to frame the debate and educate Parties on our very real concerns.

One campaign about to be launched to help us advocate in these arenas is the publication of “The Principles for the Oversight of Synthetic Biology.” Friends of the Earth, the International Center for Technology Assessment, and others have drafted these principles to serve as a collective call from civil society for the proper oversight of this technology, and outlines what the oversight of synthetic biology must look like if the field is to continue in a way that does not threaten environmental sustainability, public health, or social justice.

So whether we are talking about attempts to redesign the human genome with synthetic biology, or attempts to create drugs that go into our bodies or fuels that go into our cars, synthetic biology  is a global issue that should concern us all here in Tarrytown.

Even though these are big challenges, there are a number of opportunities for us to work together, to build coalitions, and to fight for the regulation of all emerging technologies and human biotechnologies that threaten a just and sustainable human future. Let’s use our time here together this week to come up with campaigns and action steps to begin making this just human future a reality.

Thank you.