Why is biotechnology necessary

Biotechnology is most important for its implications in health and medicine. Through genetic engineering — the controlled alteration of genetic material — scientists have been able to create new medicines, including interferon for cancer patients, synthetic human growth hormone and synthetic insulin, among others. In recent years, scientists have also attempted to employ the methods of genetic engineering to correct certain inherited conditions, and have been making great strides in their ability to manipulate genetic materials.

These advances suggest the prospect of human control over the very genetic makeup of man, and thus the ability to manipulate our inherited traits. The consequences of man's growing power over human genetics are enormous, and they become ever more immediate each day. Many observers have suggested that just as the late 20th century has been the age of computer technology, so the early 21st century will be the age of biotechnology.

But how can we be sure that this new power will be used correctly? How much control should individuals be allowed to exercise over the genetic makeup of their children?

How much do we want to know about our own genetic tendencies or dispositions? How will society be affected if we come close to actually answering the age-old nature-versus-nurture question?

What are the implications of human cloning? So do nearly all of your cotton clothes. But perhaps the biggest application of biotechnology is in human health. It follows us through childhood, with immunizations and antibiotics, both of which have drastically improved life expectancy. And one company is betting that organ transplant waiting lists can be eliminated by growing human organs in chimeric pigs. Along with excitement, the rapid progress of research has also raised questions about the consequences of biotechnology advances.

Biotechnology may carry more risk than other scientific fields: microbes are tiny and difficult to detect, but the dangers are potentially vast.

Further, engineered cells could divide on their own and spread in the wild, with the possibility of far-reaching consequences. Biotechnology could most likely prove harmful either through the unintended consequences of benevolent research or from the purposeful manipulation of biology to cause harm.

One could also imagine messy controversies, in which one group engages in an application for biotechnology that others consider dangerous or unethical. So, they reasoned that importing a natural predator , the cane toad, could be a natural form of pest control.

What could go wrong? Well, the toads became a major nuisance themselves, spreading across the continent and eating the local fauna except for, ironically, the cane beetle. To avoid blundering into disaster, the errors of the past should be acknowledged. The world recently witnessed the devastating effects of disease outbreaks, in the form of Ebola and the Zika virus — but those were natural in origin.

The malicious use of biotechnology could mean that future outbreaks are started on purpose. Whether the perpetrator is a state actor or a terrorist group, the development and release of a bioweapon, such as a poison or infectious disease, would be hard to detect and even harder to stop.

Unlike a bullet or a bomb, deadly cells could continue to spread long after being deployed. The US government takes this threat very seriously , and the threat of bioweapons to the environment should not be taken lightly either.

Developed nations, and even impoverished ones, have the resources and know-how to produce bioweapons. And new gene editing technologies are increasing the odds that a hypothetical bioweapon targeted at a certain ethnicity , or even a single individual like a world leader, could one day become a reality.

While attacks using traditional weapons may require much less expertise, the dangers of bioweapons should not be ignored. It might seem impossible to make bioweapons without plenty of expensive materials and scientific knowledge, but recent advances in biotechnology may make it even easier for bioweapons to be produced outside of a specialized research lab.

And the openness of science publishing, which has been crucial to our rapid research advances, also means that anyone can freely Google the chemical details of deadly neurotoxins. In fact, the most controversial aspect of the supercharged influenza case was not that the experiments had been carried out, but that the researchers wanted to openly share the details.

On a more hopeful note, scientific advances may allow researchers to find solutions to biotechnology threats as quickly as they arise. Recombinant DNA and biotechnology tools have enabled the rapid invention of new vaccines which could protect against new outbreaks , natural or man-made. For example, less than 5 months after the World Health Organization declared Zika virus a public health emergency , researchers got approval to enroll patients in trials for a DNA vaccine.

While humans have been altering genes of plants and animals for millennia — first through selective breeding and more recently with molecular tools and chimeras — we are only just beginning to make changes to our own genomes amid great controversy. For instance, if gene therapy in humans is acceptable to cure disease, where do you draw the line?

Many others lie somewhere in between. How do we determine a hard limit for which gene surgery to undertake, and under what circumstances, especially given that the surgery itself comes with the risk of causing genetic damage? And what about ways that biotechnology may contribute to inequality in society? Advances in biotechnology are escalating the debate, from questions about altering life to creating it from scratch. For example, a recently announced initiative called GP-Write has the goal of synthesizing an entire human genome from chemical building blocks within the next 10 years.

The project organizers have many applications in mind, from bringing back wooly mammoths to growing human organs in pigs. But, as critics pointed out, the technology could make it possible to produce children with no biological parents , or to recreate the genome of another human, like making cellular replicas of Einstein.

In response, the organizers of GP-Write insist that they welcome a vigorous ethical debate, and have no intention of turning synthetic cells into living humans.

Since virtually all of biology centers around the instructions contained in DNA, biotechnologists who hope to modify the properties of cells, plants, and animals must speak the same molecular language. Since the publication of the complete human genome in , the cost of DNA sequencing has dropped dramatically , making it a simple and widespread research tool.

Benefits: Sonia Vallabh had just graduated from law school when her mother died from a rare and fatal genetic disease. DNA sequencing showed that Sonia carried the fatal mutation as well. But far from resigning to her fate, Sonia and her husband Eric decided to fight back, and today they are graduate students at Harvard, racing to find a cure. For example, researchers were able to track the Ebola epidemic in real time using DNA sequencing.

And pharmaceutical companies are designing new anti-cancer drugs targeted to people with a specific DNA mutation.

Entire new fields, such as personalized medicine , owe their existence to DNA sequencing technology. Risks : Simply reading DNA is not harmful, but it is foundational for all of modern biotechnology. As the saying goes, knowledge is power, and the misuse of DNA information could have dire consequences.

Finally, DNA testing opens the door to sticky ethical questions, such as whether to carry to term a pregnancy after the fetus is found to have a genetic mutation. Biotechnology will become as common as having a cellphone or going online. There is going to be an even larger number of biotech companies, both big and small, along with an increasing number of venture companies. In small villages or even at home, biotechnology might be used, just like in Science Fiction novels.

You might simply ask a machine to make some household chemicals you need, rather than go buy it at the supermarket. Biotech trash converters could do away with waste. Biotechnology could also help to tackle large national issues such as healthcare. Global healthcare spending, currently, is about 8 trillion US dollars. That price tag could be as high as we have to go, thanks to biotechnology.

I think all of these will become rather routine. So by , I think it is realistic to say that biotechnology will become a part of our life, from drugs, medicine and therapeutics to environmentally friendly chemicals, fuels and materials. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum. The global trading system needs an overhaul.

Greater agility and resilience is required to tackle challenges like the climate crisis. MIT researchers are training the next generation of social robots. A new framework allows robots to understand what might help or hinder another robot. I accept. Take action on UpLink.

Forum in focus. Read more about this project. Explore context. Explore the latest strategic trends, research and analysis. What are these risks?

What will the council do to avoid them?