I may be biased because of this class, but my first reaction was one of disgust. The author's way of describing the whole ordeal might have been reductionist by virtue of the science itself, but seemed to suggest and praise humanity for "cracking the code" to nature. Synthetic biology evolved through the fact that the DNA of any creature is actually written in an universal code that can be cut and combined, and thereby allowing unbelievable crosses to take place. The attitude of the author is obviously one of positive support as he exclaims the "mastery" that scientists have come to possess and welcomes our entrance to a science future.
Then perhaps, I had trouble voicing by discontent as author, Rutherford starting explaining the benefits of such creatures like Freckles. According to the creator of Freckles, spider silk can be used in ligament repairs, entering the body with its lethal rejection of the silk. How could I disapprove of a practice that can actually save lives? What this really boils down to is the fact that with the knowledge of synthetic biology and the such, scientists indeed have a lot of power in their hands, and will be able to perform, create, and solve many problems. Though, at the same time as we are saving more lives, I am afraid of the US political and economic nature to commoditize such novelties. Within the next couple years, I wonder what political development will occur to keep such sciences and motivations behind these sciences in check.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/14/synthetic-biology-spider-goat-genetics
No comments:
Post a Comment