Global Coalition Sounds the Alarm on Synthetic Biology,

[Guest guest]

Thu, 18 May 2006 18:52:22 -0400

etcgroup

ETC Group: Global Coalition Sounds the Alarm on Synthetic

Biology,

 

 

 

 

 

19th May 2006 NEWS RELEASE

 

Global Coalition Sounds the Alarm on Synthetic Biology,

 

Demands Oversight and Societal Debate

 

Today, a coalition of thirty-five international organizations

including scientists, environmentalists, trade unionists, biowarfare

experts and social justice advocates called for inclusive public

debate, regulation and oversight of the rapidly advancing field of

synthetic biology - the construction of unique and novel artificial

life forms to perform specific tasks. Synthetic biologists are

meeting this weekend in Berkeley, California where they plan to

announce a voluntary code of self-regulation for their work (1). The

organizations signing the Open Letter are calling on synthetic

biologists to abandon their proposals for self-governance and to

engage in an inclusive process of global societal debate on the

implications of their work (see attached Open Letter).

 

" The researchers meeting in Berkeley acknowledge the dangers of

synthetic biology in the hands of 'evildoers,' but they naively

overlook the possibility - or probability - that members of their own

community won't be able to control or predict the behavior of

synthetic biology or its societal consequences, " said Jim Thomas of

ETC Group.

 

" Scientists creating new life forms cannot be allowed to act as judge

and jury, " explains Dr. Sue Mayer, Director of GeneWatch UK. " The

possible social, environmental and bio-weapons implications are all

too serious to be left to well-meaning but self-interested

scientists. Proper public debate, regulation and policing is needed. "

 

In the last few years, synthetic biologists, by re-writing the

genetic code of DNA, have demonstrated the ability to build new

viruses and are now developing artificial life forms. In October last

year, synthetic biologists at the US Center for Disease Control re-

created the 1918 Spanish flu virus that killed between 50-100 million

people (3) and last month scientists at the University of Wisconsin-

Madison created a new version of E. coli bacteria (4). Meanwhile,

genomics mogul Craig Venter, whose former company, Celera, led the

commercial race to sequence the human genome, now heads a new

company, Synthetic Genomics (5), that aims to commercialize

artificial microbes for use in energy, agriculture and climate change

remediation. It is one of around 40 synthetic biology companies

undertaking gene synthesis and/or building artificial DNA.

 

" Biotech has already ignited worldwide protests, but synthetic

biology is like genetic engineering on steroids, " says Dr. Doreen

Stabinsky of Greenpeace International. " Tinkering with living

organisms that could be released in the environment poses a grave

biosafety threat to people and the planet, " adds Stabinsky.

 

In October 2004, an editorial in the journal Nature warned, " If

biologists are indeed on the threshold of synthesizing new life

forms, the scope for abuse or inadvertent disaster could be huge. "

The editorial suggested that there may be a need for an " Asilomar-

type " conference on synthetic biology - a reference to an historic

meeting in 1975 where scientists met to discuss biosafety risks

associated with genetic engineering and opted for self-governance

which ultimately pre-empted and avoided government regulation.

Following the Asilomar model the " Synthetic Biology Community "

intends to use their second conference (Synthetic Biology 2.0, 20-22

May 2006) to adopt a code of self-governance for handling the

biosafety risks.

 

According to the Open Letter, the effect of the Asilomar declaration

was to delay the development of appropriate government regulation and

to forestall discussion on how to address the wider socio-economic

impacts. Asilomar proved to be the wrong approach then, and Synthetic

Biology 2.0 is the wrong approach now.

 

" We scientists must come to terms with the fact that science can no

longer claim to be living in an abstract realm disconnected from the

rest of society, " said Alexis Vlandas of International Engineers and

Scientists for Global Responsibility (INES).

 

The signatories to the Open Letter urge the synthetic biologists

meeting in Berkeley to withdraw their declaration of self-governance

and join in seeking a wider, inclusive dialogue.

 

ENDS

 

For further information:

 

North America:

 

Jim Thomas - ETC Group, email: jim, ph: +1 613 2412267

 

Pat Mooney - ETC Group, email: mooney , cell: +1 613

2610688

 

Hope Shand - ETC Group, email: hope ph: +1 919 960-5767

 

Edward Hammond - Sunshine Project (biological weapons expert)

email: Hammond, cell: +1 510 717 7772

 

Beth Burrows - Edmonds Institute: email: beb, ph: +1

425-775-5383

 

 

 

Europe:

 

Dr Sue Mayer - GeneWatch UK, email: sue.mayer,

ph: +44 1298 871898 (office); mobile: + 44 7930 308807

 

Alexis Vlandas - International Network of Engineers and Scientists

email: alexis.vlan, ph: +44 7747 036446

 

A background note for press is available from the ETC Group at

www.etcgroup.org and at www.etcblog.org

 

Notes to Editors:

 

1. Go here to read about Synthetic Biology 2.0 Conference and

proposals for self-governance: http://syntheticbiology.org

 

2. Tumpey, TM et al (2005) Characterization of the Reconstructed

1918 Spanish Influenza Pandemic Virus. Science 310: 77 - 80.

 

3. Posfai, G et al (2006) Emergent Properties of Reduced-Genome

Escherichia coli. Published online April 27 2006; 10.1126/science.

1126439 (Science Express Reports).

 

4. http://www.syntheticgenomics.com/

 

 

Text of Open Letter:

 

An Open Letter from Social Movements and other Civil Society

Organizations to the Synthetic Biology 2.0 Conference May 20-22, 2006

Berkeley, California concerning the " community-wide vote " on

Biosecurity and Biosafety resolutions (to be implemented Jan 1, 2007.)

 

We are writing to express our deep concerns about the rapidly

developing field of Synthetic Biology that is attempting to create

novel life forms and artificial living systems. We believe that this

potentially powerful technology is being developed without proper

societal debate concerning socio-economic, security, health,

environmental and human rights implications. We are alarmed that

synthetic biologists meeting this weekend intend to vote on a scheme

of voluntary self-regulation without consulting or involving broader

social groups. We urge you to withdraw these self-governance

proposals and participate in a process of open and inclusive

oversight of this technology.

 

Asilomar 2.0? In 1975 a group of scientists convened at Asilomar to

try to address the safety hazards associated with genetic

engineering. The Asilomar meeting promoted self-regulation that had

the result of preempting public debate and preventing government

action. Synthetic Biology 2.0 follows down the same self-regulation

road. The scope of discussion at Asilomar was narrowly limited to

questions of safety hazards - explicitly excluding broader socio-

economic and ethical issues. The effect of the Asilomar declaration

was to delay the development of appropriate government regulation and

to forestall discussion on how to address the wider socio- economic

impacts. Asilomar proved to be the wrong approach then, and Synthetic

Biology 2.0 is the wrong approach now.

We recognize that you are justifiably concerned about certain risks

of Synthetic Biology, but society requires strong mandatory measures

in accordance with the precautionary principle to curtail these

risks. As the chair of the recent Boston 'Town Hall Meeting'

speaking about the recent proposals said: " I don't think this will

have a significant impact on the misuse of this technology. " We agree

that these proposals will be ineffectual. Moreover, the social,

economic, ethical, environmental and human rights concerns that arise

from the field of synthetic biology go far beyond deterring

bioterrorists and " evildoers. " Issues of ownership (including

intellectual property), direction and control of the science,

technology, processes and products must also be thoroughly considered.

 

Society - especially social movements and marginalized peoples - must

be fully engaged in designing and directing dialogue on the

governance of synthetic biology. Because of the potential power and

scope of this field, discussions and decisions concerning these

technologies must take place in an accessible way (including

physically accessible) at local, national and global levels.

 

In the absence of effective regulation it is understandable that

scientists are seeking to establish best practices but the real

solution is for them to join with society to demand broad public

oversight and governmental action to ensure social wellbeing.

Moreover, in the years since Asilomar, science has become more

strongly linked to commercial interests, so this can appear as an

industry saying that it should only police itself. We urge you

therefore to withdraw your declaration of self-governance and join

with us in seeking a wider inclusive dialogue.

 

List of Organizations Signing the Open Letter

 

Accion Ecologica (Ecuador) - www.accionecologica.org

California for GE Free Agriculture - www.calgefree.org

 

Centro Ecologico (Brazil)

 

Clean Production Action - www.cleanproduction.org

 

Corporate Europe Observatory - www.corporateeurope.org

 

Corporate Watch (UK) - www.corporatewatch.org

 

Edmonds Institute - www.edmonds-institute.or/

 

ETC Group - www.etcgroup.org

 

Farmers Link - www.farmerslink.org.uk

 

Friends of the Earth International - www.foe.org

 

Foundation on Future Farming (Germany) - www.zs-l.de

 

Foundation Science Citoyennes (France) - www.sciencescitoyennes.org

 

Gaia Foundation - www.gaiafoundation.org

 

GeneEthics Network (Australia) - www.geneethics.org

 

Genewatch (UK) -www.genewatch.org

 

GRAIN - www.grain.org

 

Greenpeace International - www.greenpeace.org

 

Henry Doubleday Research Association (UK) - www.gardenorganic.org.uk

 

Indigenous People's Biodiversity Network

 

International Center for Technology Assessment - www.icta.org

 

International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global

responsibility - www.inesglobal.com

 

Institute for Social Ecology - www.social-ecology.org

 

Institute for Bioethics, Culture and Disability -

www.bioethicsanddisability.org

 

International Union of Food and Agricultural Workers - www.iuf.org

 

Lok Sanjh Foundation (Pakistan) - www.loksanjh.org

 

National Farmers Union (Canada) - www.nfu.ca

 

Oakland Institute - www.oaklandinstitute.org

 

Polaris Institute - www.polarisinstitute.org

 

Pakistan Dehqan Assembly

 

Practical Action - www.practicalaction.org

 

Quechua Ayamara Association for Sustainable Livelihoods, (Peru) -

www.andes.org.pe

 

Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology (India) -

www.navdanya.org/

 

Soil Association - www.soilassociation.org

 

Sunshine Project - www.sunshine-project.org

 

Third World Network - www.twnside.org.sg

_____________

ETC Group mailing list

http://lists.etcgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/etcgroup