Public perception and Synthetic Reality

If synthetic biology fulfills its promise it has potential to replace the world created by Darwinian evolution with one created by us. At least that’s what Michael Specter’s recent story published in September 28th issue of The New Yorker suggests. In last few months the synthetic biology has drawn increased media attention, and as a matter of fact the The New Yorker story is one of the most comprehensive collections about this very nascent field. Despite several major breakthroughs in last few years the public awareness about the synthetic biology is very poor. A recent groundbreaking survey of 1,001 U.S. adults conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates and the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies has found that only 22 percent of Americans have heard of synthetic biology.

A further digging of the survey report hints that regardless of their awareness of synthetic biology, a strong majority of adults think that the risks will outweigh the benefits especially individuals who regularly attend religious services. I can also understand the feelings of those who believe in god because if synthetic biology truly succeeds everyone of us will be their own Darwins. Critics of synthetic biology generally raise the concern that scientist might be playing with God when they create new life forms, that’s where public awareness really matters. If the public does not realize mankind can use synthetic biology to make new drugs or renewable energy, it will look like we are playing with god. No doubt there are serious concerns especially possibilities for deliberate abuse like bioterrorism risk which many suggest as extremely unlikely scenario. However to accomplish a dream of synthetic reality, we will also need an education system such as International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition, an undergraduate synthetic biology contest run by the MIT, that will encourage skepticism and the study of science. What really worries me is lack of participation from New Zealand, like previous years this year again there is no team from New Zealand. Although last year two members of Auckland Bioengineering Institute, Dr Michael Cooling and James Lawson, were the mentors of gold medal winning team of the Newcastle University. CellML technology developed at the Auckland Bioengineering Institute played a major role in their endeavor which also suggests we have sufficient core expertise to participate and win iGEM contests. Yesterday I was surprised to learn that 12 year olds Indu Voruganti, Will Allen and 11 year olds Ahmad Rana, Ashley Kim had developed an innovative synthetic biological approach to cure the nasal allergy. I am sure we have equally talented undergrads, all they need is more awareness with a little guidance. This year 2 teams from Australia are participating in iGEM and we should hope to send at least one NZ team for next year’s iGEM.

PS: Drop me an email or a comment if you might be interested to form a NZ team. I have few brainstorming ideas to start with!!!!