ArticleScience and engineering ethics2017
Synthetic Biology, Genome Editing, and the Risk of Bioterrorism.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The view of synthetic biology in the field of ethics: a thematic systematic review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Pooled it
- The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Pooled it
- The need for adaptability in detection, characterization, and attribution of biosecurity threats.Nature communications · 2024Review
- A Cross-Border Biorisk Toolkit for Healthcare Professionals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Comparison of nine extraction methods for bacterial identification using the ONT MinION sequencer.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Modelling genetic stability in engineered cell populations.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Overstatements and Understatements in the Debate on Synthetic Biology, Bioterrorism and Ethics.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Disease X: availability bias, biotechnology and seeing beyond zoonotic risk.Public health · 2021Article
- Who Should We Fear More: Biohackers, Disgruntled Postdocs, or Bad Governments? A Simple Risk Chain Model of Biorisk.Health securityArticle
- The Importance of Biosecurity in Emerging Biotechnologies and Synthetic Biology.Avicenna journal of medical biotechnologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The SynBioSecurity argument says that synthetic biology introduces new risks of intentional misuse of synthetic pathogens and that, therefore, there is a need for extra regulations and oversight. This paper provides an analysis of the argument, sets forth a new version of it, and identifies three developments that raise biosecurity risks compared to the situation earlier. The developments include (1) a spread of the required know-how, (2) improved availability of the techniques, instruments and biological parts, and (3) new technical possibilities such as "resurrecting" disappeared pathogens. It is first shown that the general argument from SynBioSecurity needs to be qualified and that many improvements to biosecurity have already been implemented, most notably in the United States. Second, I suggest a new strain of the argument: the situation that most branches of synthetic biology fall under the gene technology regulation in the European Union and that this regulation in its current form does not adequately address SynBioSecurity risks together provide a weighty reason to review and possibly refine the legislation as well as the supervisory practices. Ethically speaking, the rise in the relative risk of bioterrorism brings to the fore new extrinsic issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28074376What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.