21 December, 2010

Since 1991, a Eurobarometer team has conducted a public survey to find out about the opinions and perceptions of Europeans about biotechnology every 2 – 4 years. The most recent Eurobarometer was conducted in January and February 2010 and was published in November. A representative sample of the total EU-27 population at the age of 15 years or older (almost 407 million people) was asked a wide range of questions about technologies in general, several applications of biotechnology and governance issues. For the purpose of this report LIS Consult focused on the application of biotechnology in food and analysed the data for the total EU-27 sample. In some cases a sample of the EU member states representing the major countries and showing the range from low to high ratings was analysed . Also data from previous Eurobarometers were used to analyse trends in public opinion about GM food. The relationship between level of support to public perceptions on risks, benefits, naturalness and fairness was investigated and  the impact of specific applications and  the use of different technologies using genetic material from other species or from the same species was analysed. Previous analysis of public surveys about biotechnology have highlighted the importance of public trust in the regulatory process, public authorities and other professionals responsible for biotechnology, such as industry and environmental organisations. Therefore, the report also includes an analysis of the impact of trust on public support of GM food.

A full version of the report can be downloaded here (in PDF format, 255 kB)

21 December, 2010

EU-SOL Newsletter nr. 07 is online with the following content:

1. Distinguished by taste: Interview with Frank van Kleef, Royal Pride Holland
How do EU-SOL’s goals relate to the present and future needs of producers? We tried to find out by asking Frank van Kleef, owner-director of Royal Pride Holland, one of the largest tomato growers in the Netherlands. A quick look at Royal Pride Holland’s website is enough to discover that this is not an average tomato grower. Apart from the size of45 hectare, Frank van Kleef and his partners are well aware of current changes in the demands of consumers and retailers for tasteful tomatoes at a reasonable price that are grown in an environmental friendly way. Van Kleef argues that breeders should take their responsibility and introduce only good-tasting varieties on the market.

2. European public nuanced about biotechnologies: Analysis of the 2010 Eurobarometer about biotechnology

Apart from taste, consumers are increasingly interested in production methods. In EU-SOL we are interested to know whether and how consumers distinguish between different kinds of DNA based technologies, such as genetic engineering and the use of DNA markers. Unfortunately, the most recent Eurobarometer did not include questions about DNA markers. Nonetheless, combined analysis of the 2010 and previous Eurobarometers indicate that at least a significant part of the European public distinguishes between different applications and technologies, which stems hopeful about public acceptance of Marker Assisted Selection.

Increasing productivity of food crops is particularly interesting for developing economies such as China; a country that has to deal with continuing economic growth and a shrinking supply of arable land while confronting severe water shortages. Although the productivity of rice, wheat and corn could still be further enhanced, there is still much to gain in other, traditionally less popular crops such as potato. This is why the Chinese government has an agreement with the International Potato Center to jointly launch a major potato research center in Beijing. There is no doubt that the potato genome sequence drafted by the Potato Genome Sequencing Consortium will be playing an important role in this initiative.

The complete EU-SOL Newsletter can be downloaded here (in PDF format, 3.5 Mb).

Several bio-engineers are working on very radical concepts of biological systems; concepts that involve the fundamental principles of genetics and cellular mechanisms.

One example is the effort to add two new base-pairs or “letters” to the natural four-letter genetic alphabet by Floyd Romesberg, a chemical biologist at the Scrips Research Institute. Romesberg expects the new base pairs will be used to synthesize DNA with novel and unnatural properties.

Another method develop biological systems with unnatural properties was developed more recently by a research group from Cambridge University, in the UK. It concerns a novel system that can incorporate unnatural amino acids in biosynthesis of peptides and proteins far more efficiently than present technologies. Such entirely novel, orthogonal life-forms are also interesting because of their incompatibility with existing life-forms, which would make them relatively safe to use.

More about radical biology

Engineered cells produce entirely new proteins (PDF file)

Robert Adler, Artificial letters added to life’s alphabet, New Scientist, 30 January 2010

Allison A. Henry et.al., Efforts To Expand the Genetic Alphabet: Identification of a Replicable Unnatural DNA Self-Pair, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2004, 126 (22), pp 6923–931 DOI: 10.1021/ja049961u

Government funding for synthetic biology is on the rise, but the way in which society responds to new technologies is an important factor in their success or failure. With synthetic biology, so far, civil society organizations (CSOs) seem to build on their 1980’s genetic engineering strategy: they focus on the risks of synthetic biology, and call for a moratorium and stricter regulation. Scientists and public policy authorities seem to have learned their GMO lessons. There is an increased awareness of the importance of public engagement in potentially controversial technological developments.

A new and first-of-its-kind analysis by the US Woodrow Wilson Center found that the U.S. government has spent around $430 million on research related to synthetic biology since 2005, with the Department of Energy funding a majority of the research. By comparison, the analysis indicated that the European Union and three individual European countries – the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and Germany – had spent approximately $160 million during that same period. Estimates have placed the current annual synthetic biology research market at $600 million, a sum that has the potential to exceed $3.5 billion over the next decade. The list of potential applications in energy, environment, health and other areas is long and growing. Along with its potential benefits, there are also concerns about the ethical, legal and social implications of synthetic biology. In response to these concerns, approximately 4 percent of the U.S. funding and 2 percent of the European funding is being spent for so-called ELSI research.

CSO testimony

Synthetic biology is also increasingly grasping attention from CSOs. In a hearing by the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee, Friends of the Earth, the ETC Group and the International Center for Technology Assessment sent a testimony to the committee’s chairman, calling on the Congress to implement a moratorium on the release of synthetic organisms into the environment and also their use in commercial settings. This moratorium should remain in place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities, and until due consideration of the associated risks for the environment, biodiversity, and human health, and all associated socio-economic repercussions, are fully and transparently considered. Testbiotech, a German CSO concerned with the ecological, social and ethical aspects of biotechnology, has launched an initiative with more or less the same demands.

Public dialogue

Besides CSO’s responses and activities, there are strong calls for more effective public engagement, without which “there will be no synthetic biology in Europe” according to Colin Macilwain in a column in Nature of June 16^th, 2010. This lesson, learnt from the European debate on genetically modified crops, is at the heart of Academies of Science, Research Councils and Technology Assessment institutes in several European countries. Recently, a public panel debate in Berlin, hosted by the German Ethics Council, attracted several hundreds of people. The most extensive public involvement activity to date, is the British Synthetic Biology Dialogue, which engaged both stakeholders and citizens all over the country in a debate on synthetic biology. It resulted in a broad spectrum of conclusions. Strikingly, apart from the issues of newness and risks, most conclusions are related to the governance of science and technology in a more general sense.

More about funding

Pauwels, Eleonore. Review of quantitative and qualitative studies on U.S. public perceptions of synthetic biology. SystSynth Biol (2009) 3:37–46 DOI 10.1007/s11693-009-9035-6

More about CSO’s responses

Friends of the Earth, International Center for Technology Assessment, ETC group, Offering Testimony from Civil Society on the Environmental and Societal Implications of Synthetic Biology,  May 26, 2010

Christoph Then, Sylvia Hamberger, Synthetische Biologie Teil 1: Synthetische Biologie und künstliches Leben – Eine kritsiche Analyse, München, Juni 2010

More about public dialogue

Colin Macilwain, World view: Talking the talk, Nature 465, 867 (2010) | doi:10.1038/465867a

BBRSC Synthetic Biology Dialogue

Nicole Kronberger et.al.. Communicating Synthetic Biology: from the lab via the media to the broader public, Syst Synth Biol (2009) 3:19–26 DOI 10.1007/s11693-009-9031-x