:: Volume 22, Issue 5 (Iranian South Medical Journal 2019) ::
Iran South Med J 2019, 22(5): 347-363 Back to browse issues page
Ethical Debates on Synthetic Biology
Amirreza Bolkheir1 , Iraj Nabipour 2
1- Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otoloaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2- The Persian Gulf Marine Biotechnology Research Center, The Persian Gulf Biomedical Sciences Research Insti-tute, Bushehr University of Medical Sciences, Bushehr, Iran>barinabipour@gmail.com
Abstract:   (2205 Views)
Background: As an emerging interdisciplinary area of science with a multitude of potential facilities and applications, synthetic biology integrates different disciplines with one another ranging from basic science to engineering. This interdisciplinary branch therefore encompasses sciences that require specific development and ethical approaches.
Materials and Methods: Science management principles were used to design the framework of discrete ethical issues of synthetic biology in terms of the creation, storage, distribution and application of synthetic biology.
Results: There is a debate over whether or not the artificial organisms created as living machines deserve ethical considerations. The free storage of knowledge as open libraries about manufacturing the parts, devices and biological systems is another issue. In this respect, technological gap and justice could also be debated. Biosafety and biosecurity are also important in applying synthetic biology, as this science is increasingly facing the community of garage biologists. In biosecurity, creating organisms with dual applications raises ethical issues regarding bioterrorism.
Conclusion: The complexity and broad scope of ethical issues regarding the application of synthetic biology products require that distinct ethical principles be developed in collaboration with experts in ethics and law and futurists in discourse with the civil community.
Keywords: Synthetic biology, biosecurity, biosafety, biological ethics, bioterrorism
Full-Text [PDF 707 kb]   (322 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review | Subject: History of Medicine. Medical Miscellany
Received: 2019/07/17 | Accepted: 2019/09/21 | Published: 2019/12/1
1. Biology, S. T. E. O. S. 27 Oct. Synthetics: The Ethics of Synthetic Biology. Centre for Ethics and Technology. (Accessed August, 2010, at https://www.stopogm.net/sites/stopogm. net/files/webfm/plataforma/synthetics322.pdf)
2. Issues U. S. P. C. F. T. S. O. B. New Directions: The Ethics of Synthetic Biology and Emerging Technologies. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, 2010 May.
3. Newson AJ. Synthetic Biology: Ethics, Exeptionalism and Expectations. Macquarie Law J 2015; 15: 45.
4. Douglas T, Savulescu J. Synthetic Biology and the Ethics of Knowledge. J Med Ethics 2010; 36(11): 687-93. [DOI:10.1136/jme.2010.038232]
5. Stemerding D, Rerimassie V, Srinivas R, et al. Ethics Debates on Synthetic Biology in Three Regions. 2014, 1-49.
6. F. E. C. O. N. H. B. Synthetic biology - Ethical Considerations. Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology. ECNH, 2010.
7. Nielson L. Ethics of Synthetic Biology. Ethics of Synthetic Biology by the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission. Opinion No 25, European Commission, 2010, 1-109.
8. Deplazes A, Ganguli-Mitra A, Biller-Andorno N. The Ethics of Synthetic Biology: Outlining the Agenda. In: Schmidt M, Kelle A, Ganguli-Mitra A, Vriend H, editors. Synthetic Biology: The Technoscience and its Societal Consequences. Netherlands: Springer, 2010, 65-79. [DOI:10.1007/978-90-481-2678-1_5]
9. Rogers W. Ethical Issues in Synthetic Biology: A Commentary. Macquarie Law J 2015; 15: 39.
10. Bensaude Vincent B. Between the Possible and the Actual: Philosophical Perspectives on the Design of Synthetic Organisms. Futures 2013; 48: 23-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.futures.2013.02.006]
11. Boldt J. Synthetic Biology: Origin, Scope, and Ethics. Minding Nat J 2010; 3(1): 20-6.
12. Machery E. Why I stopped worrying about the definition of life…and why you should as well. Synthese 2012; 185(1): 145-64. [DOI:10.1007/s11229-011-9880-1]
13. Registry of Standard Biological Parts. Registry of Standard Biological Parts - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. (Accessed April 8, 2018, at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title= Registry _of_Standard_Biological_Parts&oldid=769710148)
14. International Genetically Engineered Machine. International Genetically Engineered Machine - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. (Accessed April 8, 2018, at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Genetically_Engineered_Machine&oldid=820088507)
15. OECD. Emerging Policy Issues in Synthetic Biology. Paris: OECD, 2014.
16. Parliament HO, P. O. O. S. A. Regulation of Synthetic Biology. Edward Elgar, 2014.
17. Bubela T, Hagen G, Einsiedel E. Synthetic Biology Confronts Publics and Policy Makers: Challenges for Communication, Regulation and Commercialization. Trends Biotechnol 2012; 30(3): 132-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.tibtech.2011.10.003]
18. Stemerding D, Rerimassie V. Ethics Debates on Synthetic Biology in the eu. 2013, 1-24.
19. Martin P, Balmer A. Synthetic biology: social and ethical challenges. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, 2008.
20. Mercer D. iDentity and Governance in Synthetic Biology: Norms and Counter Norms in the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) Competition. Macquarie Law J 2015; 15: 83-103.
21. Schmidt M, Ganguli-Mitra A, Torgersen H, et al. A Priority Paper for the Societal and Ethical Aspects of Synthetic Biology. Syst Synth Biol 2009; 3(1-4): 3-7. [DOI:10.1007/s11693-009-9034-7]
22. Mooallem J. Do-It-Yourself Genetic Engineering. New York Times, 2010, 10.
23. Schmidt M. Diffusion of Synthetic Biology: A Challenge to Biosafety. Syst Synth Biol 2008; 2(1-2): 1-6. [DOI:10.1007/s11693-008-9018-z]
24. Dhyanastha K. How Synthetic Biology can Benefit from Open Source. Suyati. (Accessed December 10, 2015, at https://suyati.com/blog/how-synthetic-biology-can-benefit-from-open-source/)
25. Bentham HJ. An Open Source Future for Synthetic Biology. (Accessed september 9, 2014, at https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/ more/bentham20140909)
26. Nelson B. Synthetic Biology: Cultural Divide. Nature 2014; 509(7499): 152-4. [DOI:10.1038/509152a]
27. European Science Commission DG Sanco, Brussels. Synthetic Biology Workshop: From Science to Governance. 2010 March, 18-19.
28. Willemarck N, Pauwels K, Breyer D, et al. Synthetic Biology: Latest Developments, Biosafety Considerations and Regulatory Challenges. Biosafety and Biotechnology, 2013.
29. Wei W, Pei L, Xu J, et al. Biosafety Considerations of Synthetic Biology: Lessons Learned from. Curr Synthetic Sys Biol 2014; 2(3): 1-3. [DOI:10.4172/2332-0737.1000115]
30. Kelle A. 4. Synthetic Biology as a Field of Dual-Use Bioethical Concern. On the Dual Uses of Science and Ethics. 2013, 45-63. [DOI:10.22459/DUSE.12.2013.04]

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 22, Issue 5 (Iranian South Medical Journal 2019) Back to browse issues page