14 DAY TRIAL // In a new statistical research, experts sought to determine whether the general public agrees with work being done in the field of synthetic biology, and learned that the vast majority is OK with such studies.
The work was prompted by the recent innovation achieved at the J. Craig Venter Institute, where researchers transplanted a synthetic genome into a living cell in May.
The news made headlines around the world, and even US President Barack Obama and Congress commented on it at the time, referring to its vast implications.
A relative new field of research, synthetic biology carries with it great promise, for creating new approaches for fighting diseases, as well as for developing methods of fighting against global warming and climate change.
This type of research also carries some degree of risk. In this case, the old saying “no pain, no gain,” is very true. What the new study tries to learn was whether people agreed with conducting synthetic biology research, in spite of the risks.
Experts therefore conducted a poll on American respondents, and learned that more than 65 percent of people agreed with this, while the rest said that they supported a ban on synthetic biology research.
The ban, they said, is useful until researchers can get a better idea of the far-reaching implications research in this field has. For example, creating biological weapons could be made easier than ever.
After the Venter Institute achievement, Obama put together a presidential commission, whose job is now to determine whether the government should play a role in regulating or supporting synthetic biology.
The group was also asked to determine the extent to which federal authorities should become involved in the field, if this is indeed necessary.
Of the 1,000 people who took the poll, more than half believe that the government should regulate the field, while 36 percent say that authorities should work with the industry, and develop common regulations.
“The message then and now is that there's not a lot of public trust in the industry to self-regulate,” explains expert David Rejeski, quoted by LiveScience.
He is the director of the science and technology innovation program at the Woodrow Wilson Center. The organization conducted a similar poll about nanotechnology, back when the field was still emerging.
“The closer the technology gets to your mouth, the more people get concerned about it. You are going to have people who are just going to reject the science based on moral concerns, and I don't think you're going to move them,” Rejeski concludes.