Biohackers: The Science, Politics, and Economics of Synthetic Biology

Abstract

(often referred to as synbio), you’ll get six different answers. While it may frustrate policymakers, this semantics problem signifies synthetic biology’s position as one of the most dynamic and misunderstood sectors of the life sciences today. For the purposes of this paper, we define synthetic biology as the deliberate design and construction of a biological system to produce effects that would not ordinarily occur in nature. It is the process of combining raw DNA components into “synthesized” DNA strands that, when introduced into a living cell, create an organism that behaves according to the designer’s intent. That could mean reprogramming the genome of a bacterium so that it manufactures a vaccine, engineering algae to create biofuels, altering a plant’s DNA to make its flowers glow in the dark, or constructing a more powerful influenza virus from scratch (for research purposes or otherwise). Synthetic biology has the potential to solve, and to create, social problems. It represents a tremendous economic opportunity and a considerable threat to public health and security. Now entering a decisive development phase, synbio technologies are beginning to be both commercialized and democratized. As more products created via synthetic biology are going to market, the tools and materials used to apply the technology are also becoming cheap and accessible enough for startups and hobbyists to get involved. The general public has little understanding of the technology and its implications; it therefore arouses attitudes of both enthusiasm and alarm. Given that synthetic biology involves creating new forms of life, these attitudes are neither unjustified nor surprising. It is critical that measures be taken to facilitate discussion and accelerate understanding of synthetic biology so that a code of ethics and policies for its use can be developed. The best way to understand the issues and determine policies to regulate the synbio field is to cautiously embrace a culture of open, transparent, and participatory science that promotes discussion of opportunities and consequences at every turn.