DUNK ~ It's called Shutting The Door, after the Horse Has Bolted!

In view of the Gulf of Mexico Experiment having got out of hand?

We need a real debate about Synthia ~ Article in Daily Telegraph, UK

There has been too little discussion about he new technology used to create a synthetic life-form.

By Geoffrey Lean
Published: 8:03PM BST 21 May 2010

9 Comments

Who is Synthia? What is she? The 99.999 per cent of us who are not brilliant geneticists are struggling with an updated version of Shakespeare’s questions, following yesterday’s announcement that the controversial genius Dr Craig Venter has produced the first synthetic life-form.

The answer is that, despite some of the wilder hype, Dr Venter has not created life itself, but a new man-made species. He has produced the DNA for an artificial bacterial cell in a test tube, and then inserted it into the already living cell of a different kind of bacteria, transforming it into the new species. In business terms, the achievement – although undoubtedly stunning – is not a start-up, but a takeover.


Related Articles
Is there an epidemic on hold?
Coalition may be a lighter shade of green
Star Wars 3D holograms 'close to reality'
Pour champagne like beer, says professor
Vodafone makes a connection in Turkey
Spending Review: Honesty is the best policy before the bigger fuel bills start to biteThe discovery opens up the opportunity of creating new forms of life which could create new foods or clean fuels, clean up the environment or combat climate change. Or they could become terrifying new biological weapons, or escape to wreak enormous, if unintended, destruction.

Whatever happens, the law of unintended consequences will surely apply. Genes from GM crops, for example, have spread to create superweeds, and cotton modified to resist bollworm has recently been found to have caused an explosion of other crop pests in China.

So far, there has been little debate over the new technology: few people even realised it was being developed. That needs to change. Meanwhile, campaigners have given the synthetic organism






Hi, Dunc ...

According to the Department of Environmental Protection [DEP] website, 23 samples were taken and tested for dispersants between June 22 and Aug. 16, resulting with two “hits.”

Both “hits” were on Aug.16, one in Escambia/Santa Rosa counties and the other in Bay County, no samplings have been listed since.

Since the well was ‘capped’, two out of four test samples by Florida’s DEP found ingredient in Corexit. Before the well was capped, no dispersant had been found in almost 20


TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?

The discovery opens up the opportunity of creating new forms of life which could create new foods or clean fuels, clean up the environment or combat climate change. Or they could become terrifying new biological weapons, or escape to wreak enormous, if unintended, destruction.













water samples tested by the state.

Deepwater Horizon Response Water Sampling, Florida Department of Environmental Protection:


Dunk ~ The BUCK STOPS HERE ~ $110 million dollars later!


Synthetic Genomics | Options for Governance
Overview

Synthetic genomics combines methods for the chemical synthesis of DNA with computational techniques to design it. These methods allow scientists and engineers to construct genetic material that would be impossible or impractical to produce using more conventional biotechnological approaches. For example, using synthetic genomics it is possible to design and assemble chromosomes, genes and gene pathways, and even whole genomes.

Scientists foresee many potential positive applications including new pharmaceuticals, biologically produced (“green”) fuels, and the possibility of rapidly generating vaccines against emerging microbial diseases.

However, as with many technologies, there is the potential for misuse and accidents. Finding ways to mitigate possible nefarious uses and to prevent accidents in the laboratories of legitimate users so that positive uses are not undercut is an important concern of scientists, governments, and a large variety of stakeholders.

This report is the result of a 20-month examination of the safety and security concerns posed by this new technology. Including the authors, a core group of 18 individuals with a wide range of expertise undertook three tasks: assess the current state of the technology, identify potential risks and benefits to society, and formulate options for its governance. The report discusses options that would help to enhance biosecurity, foster laboratory safety, and protect the communities and environment outside of laboratories. Three sets of options apply respectively to commercial firms that supply DNA; the oversight or regulation of DNA synthesizers and reagent used in synthesis; and the legitimate users of the technologies, such as university researchers.