The Steering Committee for Human Rights in the fields of Biomedicine and Health (CDBIO)* has achieved the final step of the re-examination process of Article 13 of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention) with the adoption of the clarifications on the scope of the provisions with regard to research and the purposes limitation provided for any intervention on the human genome.

In June 2021, as a first conclusion, the Committee had agreed that taking into account the technical and scientific aspects of theses developments, as well as the ethical issues they raise, it considered that the conditions were not met for a modification of the provisions of Article 13. However, it agreed on the need to provide clarifications, in particular on the terms preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic and to avoid misinterpretation of the applicability of this provision to research.

These clarifications were adopted by the CDBIO at its 1st plenary meeting (31 May 3 June 2022) and presented to the Committee of Ministers on 27 September 2022.

In this video, Anne Forus, Chair, and Pete Mills, member, of the CDBIO Drafting group on genome editing present the context, the content and the importance of these clarifications.

Context

This re-examination process of Article 13 was undertaken within the framework of the Strategic Action Plan on Human Rights and Technologies (2020 2025), as part of the actions planned under its Governance pilar and the specific objective of embedding human rights in the development of technologies which have an application in the field of biomedicine.

As underlined by the DH-BIO in November 2018, ethics and human rights must guide any use of genome editing technologies in human beings in accordance with the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (the Oviedo Convention, 1997) - the only international legally binding instrument addressing human rights in the biomedical field which provides a unique reference framework to that end. The Oviedo Convention represents the outcome of an in-depth discussion at European level, on developments in the biomedical field, including in the field of genetics.

Article 13 of the Convention addresses these concerns about genetic enhancement or germline genetic engineering by limiting the purposes of any intervention on the human genome, including in the field of research, to prevention, diagnosis or therapy. Furthermore, it prohibits any intervention with the aim of introducing a modification in the genome of any descendants. This Article was guided by the acknowledgement of the positive perspectives of genetic modification with the development of knowledge of the human genome; but also by the greater possibility to intervene on and control genetic characteristics of human beings, raising concern about possible misuse and abuses.

More information:

* In January 2022, the CDBIO took over the responsibility of the Committee on Bioethics (DH-BIO) as the committee responsible for the conduct of the intergovernmental work on human rights in the fields of biomedicine and health. The CDBIO is also advising and providing expertise to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on all questions within its field of competence.

Read more from the original source:
Genome editing technologies: final conclusions of the re-examination of Article 13 of the Oviedo Convention - Council of Europe

San Diego, CAThe annual Cell & Gene Meeting on the Mesa in San Diego kicked off this week with a packed schedule of sessions and some 40 company presentations that speak to the significant progress in these burgeoning therapeutic fields.

Organized by the Alliance for Regenerative Medicine, the program has attracted more than 1,700 attendees, 20% of whom are C-level executives. Although opting for a hybrid format, the enthusiastic number of live attendees signaled the thrill and benefits of live conferences and networking.

Commercialization is around the bend

The opening plenary session covered current trends and challenges surrounding gene therapy commercialization. Moderated by Dave Lennon, PhD, CEO of Satellite Bio, the panel discussed critical topics related to bringing these potentially life-changing treatments to market: pricing, the hurdles of early access, accelerated approval requirements, novel go-to-market challenges, and considerations of global equity.

Arguably the key rate-limiting step for commercialization is regulatory approval. Debbie Drane, senior vice president (SVP) of Global Commercial Development and Therapeutic Area (TA) Strategy at CSL Behring, discussed how regulators do not understand all diseases equally. Some of the targeted rare diseases do not have a clinical or regulatory precedent. Regardless of a regulatory bodys familiarity with a disease, Drane thinks making durability claims with gene editing can be tricky. For example, CSL Behrings EtranaDez, potentially the first gene therapy for patients living with hemophilia B, accepted by the FDA for priority review last May, will have to be compared to existing chronic treatments.

Regarding access to gene therapy before approval, Matthew Klein, MD, chief operating officer (COO) at PTC Therapeutics, said, Were in a special situation with one-time administered gene therapies. Thats different than when you have a repeat-administered small molecule, for example, where you can leverage compassionate use programs and expanded access programs to accelerate commercialization on the other side of approval. Obviously, with a one-time administrative therapy, you must think carefully about how that plays out.

Klein laid out PTCs different approaches, including early access programs to leverage treating patients before finalizing pricing and negotiation. Were looking to European countries like France with early access programs that allow us to provide commercial drugs prior to finalizing reimbursement discussions, he said.

Upon drug approval, one of the first things that happen is that patients and families worldwide start to reach out. According to Leslie Meltzer, PhD, chief medical officer (CMO) at Orchard Therapeutics, this is a relationship that needs to be cultivated from the earliest stages of development.

Meltzer said companies need to consider what questions the patient communities might have about the safety and efficacy of therapy and how to motivate participation in a corresponding clinical trial. Meltzer advocates for early and frequent patient engagement with a unified voice on the value of a gene therapy product. This can be transformative in reaching communities and setting expectations about timelines and whats involved with therapy.

The high price of one-shot cures

On pricing, Thomas Klima, Chief Commercial and Operating Officer of bluebird bio, discussed the pricing of the cell-based gene therapy product Zynteglo, approved by the FDA in August to treat beta-thalassemia, which will cost $2.8 million per patient. Klima highlighted that people with the most severe form of beta-thalassemia live their lives tethered to the healthcare system. They require regular transfusions and spend an average of 9.8 hours every three to four weeks in a hospital to receive the blood transfusions necessary for survival. Klima claimed that lifetime treatment for transfusion-dependent thalassemia costs more than $6 millionwhich is in line with the projection of $5.4 million from a recent study by Vertexand argued for the value of bluebirds treatment for $2.8 million.

For how commercialization models can expand and evolve, Christine Fox, president of Novartis Gene Therapies, said that part of the equation is bringing these treatments to countries around the world. At the heart of this problem is bringing patient advocacy and medical advisory to countries greatly affected by the clinical indication.

Overall, there was optimism that there would be an upswing in approved gene therapy products, as evidenced by a growing number of clinical trials using CRISPR gene editing. The first-ever approval of a CRISPR gene-editing therapy could be less than a year away. At the same time, base editing has already entered the clinic, and the first in vivo CRISPR approaches are progressing in clinical trials. This progress reflects how much has been learned in assembling the necessary pieces to get these treatments to commercialization, from development and manufacturing to the clinical and regulatory side of the equation.

More than one way to skin a [gene editing] cat

Another interesting session at the Cell & Gene Meeting on the Mesa offered forecasts of near- and longer-term future breakthroughs in clinical genome editing, featuring the CEOs of LogicBio, Homology Medicines, and Arbor Biotechnology as well as the CSO of Editas Medicine.

Devyn Smith, PhD, CEO at Arbor Biotechnologies, said investors understood the promise of genome editing, noting that the valuations of key public companies have held up remarkably well considering the market turmoil over the past two years. [It] is incumbent on all of us in this space to continue executing and hopefully generating positive clinical data so that momentum continues, Smith said.

Mark Shearman, PhD, CSO at Editas Medicine, agreed. With any new technology, the [focus is] on clinical data and proving that its safe and efficacious. Typically, [investors] also want to see a projection of where the programs going and a timeline over which youll be able to submit an application. Theyre also interested in whether you are in control of the technology and have all the infrastructures to monitor the technology to be confident that you can advance it. Lastly, if you have examples where a regulatory authority has reviewed your process and analytics, confidence boosts when approved or accepted.

Tim Farries, PhD, Principal Consultant and Senior Director with the consultancy Biopharma Excellence, also questioned the benefit of launching gene editing programs on rare diseases with small populations to show the relative ease and benefits before expanding to broader indications and populations. But for the most part, genome editing involves modifying DNA at one specific site. Thats why you see gene editing therapies in monogenic disorders right nowbecause you have to know exactly what part of the genome is contributing at a big effect size to the disease that youre trying to treat, said Albert Seymour, PhD, President and CEO at Homology Medicines. Thats a great place to start as we understand a little bit more about larger monogenic indications.

During a discussion on choosing between developing editing tools or understanding biological targets, all panelists hedged towards editing technology. Fred Chereau, president and CEO of LogicBio, favored starting with the editing technology because its where the safety concerns can emerge. Understanding an editing technologys efficiency and precision helps inform product development.

That said, each disease will require a different approach. According to Smith, certain indications will require a cut-and-kill approach to knock out or down a gene, changing an individual base or a series of bases, or impacting regulatory regions. The reality is there are going to be a lot of different ways weve got to skin this cat, and its not going to be one-size-fits-all, said Smith.

Another question addressed what payers would like to see gene editing show over the next three to five years. Shearman answered, For the rare disease area, this should get worked out pretty quickly because, ultimately, [it] wont be an issue of money based on the number of patients. I think the transition to treating large patient populations is going be an interesting one.

Smith said that someone could be wildly successful and completely upend the payers way of doing things. Its an opportunity for new upstarts to come in and figure out new different approaches to innovate, he said. On trying to fit the current approach to reimbursement into the one-and-done therapies, Smith added, its not even a square peg-round holetheyre in different planets. Something has got to give somewhere. This will require different thinking because applying existing models will limit access to patients.

See the original post:
Approval, Commercialization Highlighted at Cell & Gene Meeting on the Mesa - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Photo: Galpagos finch, by Mike's Birds from Riverside, CA, US, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons.

Editors note:We are a delighted to present a new series by biologist Jonathan Wells asking, Is Darwinism a Theory in Crisis? This is the third post in the series, which is adapted from the recent book,The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith.Find the full series here.

A scientific revolution is fueled in part by growing dissatisfaction among adherents of the old paradigm. This leads to new versions of the theoretical underpinnings of the paradigm. In his 1962 bookThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions, philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn wrote:

The proliferation of competing articulations, the willingness to try anything, the expression of explicit discontent, the recourse to philosophy and to debate over fundamentals, all these are symptoms of a transition from normal to extraordinary research.1

A growing number of biologists now acknowledge that there are serious problems with modern evolutionary theory. In 2007, biologist and philosopherMassimoPigliucci published a paper asking whether we need an extended evolutionary synthesis that goes beyond neo-Darwinism.2The following year, Pigliucci and 15 other biologists (none of them intelligent design advocates) gathered at the Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research just north of Vienna to discuss the question. Science journalist Suzan Mazur called this group the Altenberg 16.3In 2010, the group published a collection of their essays. The authors challenged the Darwinian idea that organisms could evolve solely by the gradual accumulation of small variations preserved by natural selection, and the neo-Darwinian idea that DNA is the sole agent of variation and unit of inheritance.4

In 2011, biologist James Shapiro (who was not one of Altenberg 16 and is not an intelligent design advocate) published a book titledEvolution: A View from the 21st Century. Shapiro expounded on a concept he callednatural genetic engineeringand provided evidence that cells can reorganize their genomes in purposeful ways. According to Shapiro, many scientists reacted to the phrase natural genetic engineering in the same way they react to intelligent design because it seems to violate the principles of naturalism that exclude any role for a guiding intelligence outside of nature. But Shapiro argued that

the concept of cell-guided natural genetic engineering is well within the boundaries of twenty-first century biological science. Despite widespread philosophical prejudices, cells are now reasonably seen to operate teleologically: Their goals are survival, growth, and reproduction.5

In 2015,Naturepublished an exchange of views between scientists who believed that evolutionary theory needs a rethink and scientists who believed it is fine as it is. Those who believed that the theory needs rethinking suggested that those defending it might be haunted by the specter of intelligent design and thus want to show a united front to those hostile to science. Nevertheless, the former concluded that recent findings in several fields require a conceptual change in evolutionary biology.6These same scientists also published an article inProceedings of the Royal Society of London,in which they proposed an alternative conceptual framework, an extended evolutionary synthesis that retains the fundamentals of evolutionary theory but differs in its emphasis on the role of constructive processes in development and evolution.7

In 2016, an international group of biologists organized a public meeting to discuss an extended evolutionary synthesis at the Royal Society in London. Biologist Gerd Mller opened the meeting by pointing out that current evolutionary theory fails to explain (among other things) the origin of new anatomical structures (that is, macroevolution). Most of the other speakers agreed that the current theory is inadequate, though two speakers defended it. None of the speakers considered intelligent design an option. One speaker even caricatured intelligent design as God did it, and at one point another participant blurted out, NotGod were excluding God.8

The advocates of an extended evolutionary synthesis proposed various mechanisms that they argued were ignored or downplayed in current theory, but none of the proposed mechanisms moved beyond microevolution (minor changes within existing species). By the end of the meeting, it was clear that none of the speakers had met the challenge posed by Mller on the first day.9

A 2018 article inEvolutionary Biologyreviewed some of the still-competing articulations of evolutionary theory. The article concluded by wondering whether the continuing conceptual rifts and explanatory tensions will be overcome.10As long as they continue, however, they suggest that a scientific revolution is in progress.

Next,Theory in Crisis? Circling the Wagons.

More:
Dissatisfaction and New Articulations - Discovery Institute

FoodPhotography #climate crisis#farming#flat lay#plants#Uli Westphal#vegetables

Lycopersicum III (2013). All images Uli Westphal, shared with permission

Earlier this year, Russias war in Ukraine obstructed the global food supply in a way that exposed just how precarious the entire system is. The conflict confined25 million tons of corn and wheatto the country, making such a crucial stock inaccessible and compounding the effects of an already urgent crisis.

Combined with disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic and the continual issues of the climate crisis, the war helped propel global food insecurity to levels unseen in decades. Itsestimated thatapproximately 800 million people around the world dont have enough to eat due to skyrocketing prices caused by increased demand for a reduced supply. These problems are predicted to decimate local economies and prompt widespread unrestin the coming years.

Part of combating such an emergency involves understanding the core of modern production and how growing practices have evolved over time. Back in 2010,artistUli Westphaltook an interest in the ways farming and cultivation were affecting the availability of certain plants after a visit to VERN e.V. The German nonprofit cares for thousands of specimens, makes obscure or rare varieties available to the public, and is also aregional network of gardeners, farmers, and local garden sites. They have a large garden plot in a tiny village two hours north of Berlin, where they grow a kaleidoscope of rare and forgotten crop varieties, he shares. I walked into a greenhouse full of tomato plants bearing fruits that I had never seen in my life.

Cucurbita I (2014)

This encounter prompted whats become a years-long project of documenting the planets incredible agricultural diversity. Encompassing both the wild and the domestic, Westphals ongoing and endlessCultivar Seriesilluminates a vast array of specimens through striking flat-lay photos. Fruits, vegetables, legumes, and other produce arranged by color capture the breadth of the worlds crops, comparing their shapes, sizes, and molecular makeuphigher levels of chlorophyll promote the verdant pigments of leafy greens, for example, while carotenoids are responsible for bright orange carrots.

FromAmsterdam and Potsdam, Germany, to Mexico City and Tucson, the sources of Westphals subject matter are broad, with some fare coming fully grown from farmers and others as seeds to be cultivated.Cucumis sativus I features fifty cucumber varieties the photographer grew in a greenhouse once connected to his Berlin-based studiofrom seeds gifted bya Dutch organization, for example, while the pumpkins and peppers in two of his other works were a collaboration withPeaceful Belly Farm in Boise, Idaho.

Zea Mays II (2022)

Whether depicting potatoes or pears, the imagesoffer a rare glimpse of species that often arent available in the grocery store or markets. Since the industrialization of agriculture, our focus has shifted to only a few modern, high-yielding, robust, good looking, uniform, and predictable varieties. This change has led to the displacement of traditional crop varieties, Westphal writes, noting that when a plant isnt actively cultivated, it often falls under threat of extinction, and such strains tend to be protected by conservation organizations like the seed banks hes collaborated with in the past. A majority of all varieties developed by humans have already become extinct during the last 50 years. With them, we not only lose genetic diversity but also a living cultural and culinary heritage.

The photos also elicit questions about contemporary domestication practices that are of increasing concern as biodiversity dwindles. Westphal tells Colossal:

Synthetic biology is evolving at a rapid speed, out-pacing public awareness, debate, and regulation and is altering life in ways that are unprecedented.My main concerns about synthetic biology (and genetic engineering) are the havoc that the inevitable release of significantly altered organisms into ecosystems can cause and the increasing consolidation of corporate control over what we grow and eat.

Three photos fromThe Cultivar Series are on view as part of the group exhibitionFood in New Yorkthrough September 30, 2023, at the Museum of the City of New York, andWestphal is currently working to document the worlds edible plants, of which hes culled a shortlist of 3,000 species.Prints of his flat lays are available on his site, along with similar collections centered on fruits and other consumables, and you can follow his practice on Instagram. (via Present & Correct)

Cucumis sativus I (2014)

Pyrus I (2018)

Capsicum I (2016)

Phaseolus vulgaris I (2013)

Brassica oleacea I (2018)

Solanum tuberosum II (2020)

Do stories and artists like this matter to you? Become a Colossal Member today and support independent arts publishing for as little as $5 per month. You'll connect with a community of like-minded readers who are passionate about contemporary art, read articles and newsletters ad-free, sustain our interview series, get discounts and early access to our limited-edition print releases, and much more. Join now!

See the original post here:
In 'The Cultivar Series,' Uli Westphal Gets to the Root of Crop Diversity and Agricultural Modification - Colossal

A research team led by a University of Massachusetts Amherst scientist has made a significant genetic discovery that sheds light on the use of the drug caspofungin to treat a deadly fungal infection, Aspergillus fumigatus, which kills some 100,000 severely immunocompromised people each year.

Typically, healthy people inhale about 50 to 100 spores of A. fumigatus every day when outdoors. Our body does a great job of identifying them and destroying them, says UMass Amherst associate professor of food science John Gibbons, whose microbial genomics lab studies the fungus.

But in people with compromised immune systems from cancer treatment, organ transplants, HIV, COVID-19 and other conditions, A. fumigatus can cause a really nasty infection, invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, with a 50% mortality rate, Gibbons says. And theres a limited way to treat these infections.

To complicate matters, when given in high concentrations as a treatment for an A. fumigatus infection, the anti-fungal drug sometimes creates a caspofungin paradoxical effect [CPE], which increases the fungal growth rather than eradicating it.

In research published in the journal Microbiology Spectrum, senior author Gibbons, Shu Zhao, a former graduate student in the Gibbons lab, and colleagues describe a first important step in the effort to understand when and why treatment with caspofungin could be more harmful than beneficial. The team, including scientists from Vanderbilt University, the University of Tennessee Science Health Center and the University of So Paolo in Brazil, completed the first genomic and molecular identification of two genes that contribute to the paradoxical effect in A. fumigatus.

This is one of the first studies to apply genome-wide association (GWA) analysis to identify genes involved in an Aspergillus fumigatus phenotype, the paper states.

The team sequenced the genome of 67 clinical samples, about half of which had CPE, spotting genetic differences between the groups and then using GWA, a statistical method, to determine how these genetic variants are associated with growth patterns at high concentrations of caspofungin. We identified a few candidate genes that we thought might contribute to this paradoxical effect, Gibbons says.

The scientists then used the genetic engineering technology, CRISPR, to delete those candidate genes from the genome, creating gene-deletion mutants and enabling the researchers to determine that two of the genes were involved in the paradoxical effect.

It looks like there are many genes and many genetic variants that contribute to this phenotype, Gibbons says. We arent done yet. One idea is that we could potentially generate new drug targets if we find the full collection of genes. We dont understand the mechanisms yet.

Ultimately the team hopes they can use DNA sequencing to understand the genetic basis of different phenotypes in general and to predict for clinical benefits if a patient sample of A. fumigatus has a genotype that is associated with the paradoxical effect.

That would be an important tool that could really improve treatment, Gibbons says.

Link:
Genomic Research Aids in the Effort to Understand How Best to Treat Deadly Infections Caused by a Fungus - UMass News and Media Relations

There is no doubt that GMOs are beneficial to us, but there is sufficient data to demonstrate that GMOs have great potential for harm too.[Istockphoto]

The debate on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) is upon us again and is still emotive and quite divisive.

Although we have more research, we still cannot be absolutely certain that we have adequate science to fully support GM foods. Genetic engineering (also called genetic modification of organisms - GMOs) uses laboratory-based technologies to alter the DNA makeup of an organism. This may involve changing a single base pair (A-T or C-G), deleting a region of DNA or adding a new segment of DNA.

This happens when a scientist tweaks a gene to create a more desirable organism by taking DNA from organism A and inserting it in organism B to improve it. The result is known as recombinant (a combination of DNAs of two organisms) or in cases of drugs the modified drug is known as transgenic. There are many reasons why organisms are genetically modified. For example, to make them more resistant to diseases, insects/bugs or to make them mature/ripen faster, stronger, bigger, better, sweater. For example, food crops have been modified by food engineers to be resistant to specific bugs, bad weather or to grow faster.

Genetic engineering is very different from cloning. Cloning is the process of creating a genetically identical copy or duplication of a cell or an organism. It has far-reaching ethical concerns although people tend to confuse the two, especially when criticising GMOs.

There are many persuasive arguments for and against GMOs. There is no doubt that GMOs are beneficial to us, but there is sufficient data to demonstrate that GMOs have great potential for harm too. Those who support GMOs have advanced persuasive arguments that genetic engineering can help us cure diseases, ensure food security and nutrition, improve the quality of lives and well-being and even lengthen our lives. For example, most drugs such as insulin and vaccinations are all genetically modified or engineered, without which many people would die. There are also ethical, safety and environmental concerns about GMOs.

No side of the argument for or against, can state with absolute certainty that GMOs are devoid of risks and concerns or they are all bad for us. The question is, can scientists guarantee that there will be no side effects after consuming GM foods? Or that huge multinational companies will ensure environmental and safety requirements are complied with when they come to Kenya?

The potential for abuse of GMOs has necessitated very elaborate checks and controls at both international and national levels. The issue of concern now is, does Kenya have such elaborate and well-resourced checks and controls in place? According to the National Biosafety Authority (NBA), Kenya has robust policy, legislative and institutional mechanisms to implement biotechnology innovations having ratified the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2003 and approved the National Policy on Biotechnology Development in 2006 to guide research and commercialization of modern biotechnology products.

The Biosafety Act, 2009 provides for the legal and institutional frameworks governing modern biotechnology which are implemented by the NBA established under the Act in 2010. The NBA developed regulations in 4 areas; contained use, environmental release, export, import and transit; all three in 2011 and for labeling in 2012. The NBA says it has put in place GM safety assessment with the goal to provide assurance that GM foods do not cause harm based on their best available scientific knowledge, although, we are not so certain that we indeed have that best scientific knowledge available so far.

The NBA indicates that, research on genetic modification is done under appropriate experimental conditions; open cultivation of genetically modified crops is safe for human health and the environment; they ensure safe movement of genetically modified materials in and out of the country and ensure accurate consumer information and traceability of genetically modified products in the food supply chain.

They say that they do this through collaboration with other eight bodies in Kenya, including KEBs. Because GMOs require very careful scientific monitoring and control, it is important to ensure that open cultivation is done in phases and only on a case-by-case basis at a time.

Continued here:
Farmers, consumers will embrace GMOs if they understand them - The Standard

Douglas Insights

The key players in the market currently include Scientific Genomics Inc, Thermo Fischer Scientific, Blue Heron, TeselaGen, GenScript, DNA2.0, Integrated DNA Technologies, Eurofins Scientific, Inc, Editas Medicine Inc., among others.

Isle of man, Oct. 10, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Douglas Insights Search Engine is the worlds first engine that offers comparative market analysis, and it has also recently addedSynthetic Biologyto the database. Market analysts, industry specialists, business personnel, and all relevant entities can make use of this comparative engine to identify the drivers, hindrances, obstacles, limitations, and opportunities for growth in each market. With the help of these insights, future market predictions can also be made. The engine users will be able to sort the relevant information by price, publication date, publisher rating, and table of contents, all of which will make access easier.

Synthetic biology refers to using lab-generated technology to help with biological processes and concerns. Synthetic biology refers to the development of testing kits, vaccines, treatments, and infectious diseases. In fact, synthetic biology played a key element in the Covid-19 pandemic as well. The development of the vaccine was accelerated, and new technology was used for vaccine development, showing how Synthetic integral biology was to the ordeal. Other than medical applications, the industry also helps to further develop the food and agriculture industry through genetic engineering and genome synthesis and helps industries by manufacturing Biofuels, biomaterials, industrial enzymes, and other useful products.

There are many drivers in the field of synthetic biology due to its need in the current era. For example, the wide range of applications of synthetic biology is one of the main factors driving the market growth. Synthetic biology can be applied to various industries, including food and agriculture, industrial work, and of course, many medical applications. The medical applications of synthetic biology will be driving the market the most.

Story continues

Compare the report and make your decision - https://douglasinsights.com/synthetic-biology-market

Need a Custom Report? Not to worry, you can create your own project using our service.

Create you own custom project here- https://douglasinsights.com/projects

Other than that, the market will also continue to grow due to the increased funding of research and development projects by many governments. This funding will fuel research into the industry and allow for more applications of synthetic biology to arise moving forward. One example is biofuels, which will be much more common and necessary for the environment in the coming years as well.

However, there are still quite a few factors that are currently restricting market growth. These include biosafety, ethical, and security concerns regarding biological safety. One example of ethical and safety concerns is the possible intentional or unintentional introduction of synthetic organisms into ecosystems which can cause great disruption. These organisms can also breed with naturally occurring microorganisms, causing hybrid species to be released and hampering the environment as we know it. In fact, this is one of the ways in which antibiotic-resistant microorganisms can also be generated.

The largest market share of synthetic biology goes to North America. This is because it is the hub of most of the market's key players and has the most funding for medically forward projects. Other than that, Europe and the Asia Pacific also have large shares in the market and will use them for further development in the arena.

The key players in the market currently include Scientific Genomics Inc, Thermo Fischer Scientific, Blue Heron, TeselaGen, GenScript, DNA2.0, Integrated DNA Technologies, Eurofins Scientific, Inc, Editas Medicine Inc., among others. These players are working on further developments while also adding to the industry at present.

The tools currently used in the synthetic biology market include enzymes, Oligonucleotides, synthetic DNA, Synthetic cells, cloning technology, xeno nucleic acids, and chassis organisms. The technology being used in the market at present includes gene synthesis and genetic engineering, cloning, bioinformatics, sequencing, nanotechnology, micro fluids, among many others.

Key questions answered in this report

COVID 19 impact analysis on global Synthetic Biology industry.

What are the current market trends and dynamics in the Synthetic Biology market and valuable opportunities for emerging players?

What is driving Synthetic Biology market?

What are the key challenges to market growth?

Which segment accounts for the fastest CAGR during the forecast period?

Which product type segment holds a larger market share and why?

Are low and middle-income economies investing in the Synthetic Biology market?

Key growth pockets on the basis of regions, types, applications, and end-users

What is the market trend and dynamics in emerging markets such as Asia Pacific, Latin America, and Middle East & Africa?

Unique data points of this report

Statistics on Synthetic Biology and spending worldwide

Recent trends across different regions in terms of adoption of Synthetic Biology across industries

Notable developments going on in the industry

Attractive investment proposition for segments as well as geography

Comparative scenario for all the segments for years 2018 (actual) and 2031 (forecast)

Compare the report and make your decision - https://douglasinsights.com/synthetic-biology-market

Need a Custom Report? Not to worry, you can create your own project using our service.

Create you own custom project here- https://douglasinsights.com/projects

Follow Douglas Insights For More Industry Updates- @LinkedIn&Twitter

Explore More Press Releases -https://douglasinsights.com/press

Similar Market Research Report Comparisons:

Computational Biology Market: The computational biology market is growing rapidly due to the increasing demand for personalized medicine and drug development, and the need for early diagnosis of diseases. Computational biology is the study of biological processes using computational techniques.

Industrial Microbiology Market: Industrial microbiology is the study of microorganisms that are useful in the production of food, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and other industrial products. The demand for industrial microbiology is driven by the need for efficient and eco-friendly production processes, as well as the need for improved product quality.

Automated Microbiology Market: This market is primarily driven by the increasing demand for rapid and accurate detection of microorganisms in food, water, and pharmaceuticals. The rising incidents of foodborne illnesses and the increasing stringent regulations regarding food safety are also fueling the growth of this market.

Pharmaceutical Rapid Microbiology Testing Market: The increasing demand for rapid microbiology testing in the pharmaceutical industry is driven by the need for faster and more accurate results. Rapid microbiology testing helps in reducing the time required for product release, which is a major advantage for pharmaceutical companies.

About Douglas Insights-

Douglas Insights UK limited is the first company to provide comparison of market research reports by Table of content, price, ratings and number of pages. We understand the value of time. Productivity and efficiency are possible when you take prompt and assured decisions. With our advanced algorithm, filters, and comparison engine, you can compare your preferred reports simultaneously, based on publisher rating, published date, price, and list of tables. Our data portal enables you to find and review the reports from several publishers. You can evaluate numerous reports on the same screen and select the sample for your best match.

See the original post here:
Synthetic Biology Market is Expected to Report a CAGR of ~21% from 2021 to 2029: Industry Size, Growth & Forecast at Douglas Insights - Yahoo...

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Tuesday, October 11th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. Im Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And Im Mary Reichard. Next up: what are the limits of science when it comes to human intelligence?

WORLDs Emily Whitten says two recent books help Christians think through that question.

AUDIOBOOK: If you memorized all of Wikipedia, would you be more intelligent? It depends on how you define intelligence.

EMILY WHITTEN, REVIEWER: Thats a clip from the audiobook version of Robert J. Marks II new book, Non-Computable You: What You Do that Artificial Intelligence Never Will. Marks has thought a lot about how to define intelligence as an electrical engineer, computer engineer, and Distinguished Professor at Baylor University. Hes also spent his career creating computer programs that mimic human thinking. And while computers can do amazing thingshe says theyll never become human.

AUDIOBOOK: Basically, for computers or artificial intelligence, theres no other game in town. All computer programs are algorithms. Anything non-algorithmic is non-computable and beyond the reach of AI.

Marks takes readers deep into the science to prove his point, and casual readers may find his reasoning hard to follow at times. But he does aid readers with pop-culture references and a chapter on real world implicationsI found the section on killer robots especially intriguing.

Another new book that deals with similar themes in a more exciting wayBlake Crouchs sci-fi novel, Upgrade. Heres a FanfiAddict interview with Crouch.

CROUCH: This is about genetic engineering and what that means for humanity. Its about a guy named Logan Ramsay, its set in the near future. Hes with an agency called the Gene Protection Agency.

In the opening pages, Ramsay and his GPA partner track a potential criminal, Henrik Soren, to an airport in Denver.

AUDIOBOOK: My flights about to board. You arent going to Tokyo, not tonight. See the woman sitting at the high top behind us? Thats my partner, Agent Netman. Airport police are waiting in the wings. I can drag you out of here or you can walk on your own steam, but you have to decide right now.

The intel Ramsay gets from Soren leads to a secret lab, and there - in a powerful explosion - Ramsay gets exposed to a gene editing virus.

AUDIOBOOK: We know that someone infected me with a package designed to alter my DNA. We assumed, big mistake, it didnt work. But it was obviously a sleeper package remaining dormant for the first month or so.

Soon, Ramsay becomes stronger and sharper in nearly every way. This genetic upgrade opens new doorsbut it also isolates him from his family and makes him the enemy of those who want to force their upgrade on the rest of humanity.

Like a Jason Bourne movie, Crouch provides plenty of actionwith daring escapes and fights. Unfortunately, his characters use offensive language, and they think and live within an evolutionary framework that leads them to terrible misjudgments.

Still, read carefully, both Non-Computable You by Robert J Marks and Upgrade by Blake Crouch can help us think through important scientific and ethical challenges in our dayand the days to come.

Im Emily Whitten.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.

Continued here:
Emily Whitten: The limits of science and human intelligence - WORLD News Group

The Neanderthals have won a Nobel prize. Well, almost. Even if most people havent heard of Svante Pbo, the Swedish geneticist whose work on ancient genomes and human evolution has landed him with 2022s award for physiology or medicine, or the exact science behind palaeogenomics and ancient DNA, they certainly have heard of Neanderthals.

Honouring his contribution to building this incredibly vibrant field of palaeogenomics, the award is much deserved: you need vision, persistence and pioneering methods to recover and sequence immensely old, fragile genetic material. But its also a recognition of the astonishing revelations about our deep history that have come from palaeogenomics, which holds many untapped secrets about who we are today, including settling the long-debated question of whether Neanderthals and Homo sapiens ever encountered each other and, lets say, warmed up those icy tundra nights (the answer is yes, many times).

For research communities, the prize also feels like a recognition of the relevance of work on palaeogenomics, human origin and archaeology more broadly and its continuing importance. Research in the 21st century on our hominin relations, including Neanderthals, is an entirely interdisciplinary, collaborative endeavour. All kinds of material analyses take place, in all sorts of ways. We use photogrammetry or lasers to record entire caves in 3D; trace how stone tools were moved across the land; examine microlayers within ancient hearths; even pick out the starches preserved in grot between ancient teeth. And the advent of the ability to retrieve palaeogenomics from extraordinarily old contexts was nothing short of revolutionary. Today, DNA can be extracted not only from bones, but even from cave sediments: the dust of long vanished lives, waiting for millennia to be found. It has made it possible to assess individual Neanderthals genetic profiles, and has opened windows into previously invisible population histories and interactions.

More than a decade on from the first big findings, today there is a huge community of palaeogenomics researchers, in large part thanks to Pbo, with many having trained with him. Among the younger generations at the front end of the sampling, processing and analytical work who may be the first to make and recognise key new discoveries many are women. They include Mateja Hajdinjak of the Crick Institute whose work has identified complex patterns of interbreeding among Neanderthals and the earliest Homo sapiens in Europe, and Samantha Brown from the University of Tbingen, whose meticulous work on unidentifiable bone scraps found the only known first-generation hybrid, a girl whose mother was Neanderthal and father Denisovan (closely related hominins from eastern Eurasia). Alongside wielding scientific clout, they are overturning outdated ideas that the hard sciences of statistics and white coats (or, in palaeogenomics, full-body protection) are male domains.

As an incredibly fast-moving field, palaeogenomics has achieved an enormous amount in a relatively short space of time. Innovative approaches are constantly being developed, and it must be admitted, even for those of us working in human origins, that keeping up with new methods and jargon can be challenging. The rapidity of advances, especially in competitive academic contexts, has also led to a number of ethical issues. While many are being tackled, the direction of some research may soon force the field to lay out official standards and draw ethical red lines when, for example, reconstructing the brains of Neanderthals using genetic engineering.

Ultimately, while decoding ancient hominin genomes has allowed us to identify which inherited genes we have today hence the physiology or medicine element of the Nobel prize the recognition of Pbos work seems more about much deeper themes, resonating with something of a Neanderthal zeitgeist. Since the discovery of their fossils more than 165 years ago, science has been engaged in dethroning Homo sapiens, demoting us from special creations to something still marvellous but not entirely unique.

Palaeogenomics bolstered this vision of an Earth that hosted many sorts of human, at least five of which were still walking around just 40,000 years ago; translate that figure to a generational scale, and youd see a chain of just 2,000 people linking hands. Ancient DNA has confirmed that we are both embedded within a rich history of hominin diversity, and that we still embody that history ourselves. Alongside the genetic material we acquired sideways through interbreeding with Neanderthals and other species, a recent study found that less than 10% of our genome is distinctive to Homo sapiens, evolved uniquely in us.

Most strikingly, popular understanding has shifted too. While some still drag out Neanderthal as a slur, it now seems somewhat abstracted from general public views. The archaeological evidence for Neanderthals complex, sophisticated minds, with genetic revelations of how close we really are to them, has transformed opinion on who they were, and what that means for us. The knowledge that the very stuff of Neanderthals is still present today in each human heart, thumping with fear or joy has forged a new emotional connection not just to them, but to all our other hominin relations. It also underlines the fact that they, and we, have always been part of a planetary web of life.

The most profound legacy of Pbos establishment of palaeogenomics is, or should be, humility. Because it turns out that many of the earliest Homo sapiens populations entering Eurasia eventually shared the same fate as the Neanderthals they met and mingled with. Their lineages vanished, culturally but also genetically, leaving behind no descendants among living humans. Perhaps the greatest inheritance they left us is understanding that our story is not one of predestined, exceptional success, but a blend of serendipity and coincidence; and that being the last hominin standing is not necessarily something to be proud of.

Read the rest here:
Behind this Nobel prize is a very human story: theres a bit of Neanderthal in all of us - The Guardian

GEOSCIENCEMichael Uglo

By MICHAEL JOHN UGLOWELCOME all to our sixth lecture on the sciences of the earth.The sciences of the earth also involve living things of all sorts that contribute to the formation of the earth and its earth structures through geologic time.Hence working smarter in this time we call the technology age, we have to make greater use of what is available rather than letting it to the earth to allow the earths natural processes to take place through the lithification processes whereby once-living matter and non-living matter such as silts, shells, sediments and bones are turned into rocks.Materials in the living world are a major source of materials and resources that can be used applications to do with biogeotechnology or geobiotechnology in both the commutative and associative as well in their applications.For instance, in the biology of evolutionary applications, it is the huge area of biotechnology and genetic engineering that are a resource on the earth. Natural selection and genetic drift result in the species and populations of organisms and biodiversity seen on the planet earth both in the past for extinct life and in the present.

As a link, people have been doing artificial selections of organisms for so many years to contain the favourable characters of the organisms. There were cross-breedings done in plants to produce hybrid plants that produce good yields as well as producing plants that are drought-resistant and plants that can thrive in lengthy wet seasons and water-logged areas.Cross-breeding is also done in the rice plant as an example, to come up with the hybrid rice to grow in the dry ground instead of only water-logged areas and wetlands.The natural immunity to counter cancer is no longer effective. Cancers have evolved to decimate populations of organisms. Microbes such as bacteria, fungi and viruses have evolved to outpace the available effective drugs for their treatment. Soon microbes will become resistant to all the effective available drugs because they are continually evolving.In the field of agriculture, pests and weeds have become resistant to available pesticides and weedicides. The trend is continuing and the industry is going through a chemical treadmill to treat resistant weeds and pests.

Hence, understanding the evolutionary genetics at the molecular level in the nucleotides of the DNA and RNA is vital. Knowing how the genes programme the enzymes and proteins to produce parts of plants, animals and microbes will result in the understanding of the first-hand information on how the nitrogen bases and genes programme the synthesis of the organic polymers. This will also help in the understanding of the basis of genetic mutations and protein alterations to find a cure for cancer as well as the effective diagnosis of the problems arising in medicine, agriculture as well as in botany and other fields.For instance, in engineering an evolutionary computer-algorithm results in solving very complex and multi-faceted engineering problems. The algorithms programmed by man are not so multi-dimensional like the evolutionary algorithm in superiority.Materials found naturally on the earth are the rocks, soil, minerals and water. There are also metals and precious stones that are found on the earth such as gold, silver and gemstones. Other important materials are diamonds which are allotropes of carbon just like graphite and the fullerenes Buckminster as a resource base for carbon nanotubes.These materials become very important resources for life, agriculture, industry and technology.Specific areas have various resources of those earth materials. The rocks become a resource for construction work such as in buildings and roads. Materials such as sandstone, mud, soil, granite, limestone and marble are very important for civil works and engineering construction. For instance, marble can be quarried and cut at site for construction like a local resource.Caliche is a soft limestone material that can be used as a resource. It is found at the site of limestone bedrock as well as calcium carbonate soils. Caliche are collected and squashed to be mixed with cement for making building structures as well as structural walls.The rammed earth that is 30 per cent mud and 70 per cent sand is also made to be used for buildings and other structures in civil constructions and engineering. Like caliche, their porosity is very important for holding water and creating chemical bonds with the additives like the cement which are to be used as the structures of walls which adds the compression.

The caliche and rammed earth structures as well as stone products can be used as finishing characteristics of constructions. They can become good heat radiators or thermal bodies in winter. These structures can also be used for providing cool environments in summer. Further, these materials are fire-proof.At the sites of the clay soil, brick plants can be located to make and supply bricks for constructions. Bricks are made by conditioning and heating the clay or it is baked for uses such as structural tiles, roof tiles, pavers and floor tiles.The caliche block, rammed earth and stone with brick structures become very useful for structural constructions such as structural walls, road constructions as well as buildings.Soils are always tested in laboratories to see their structures for construction work. Some soils are not so suitable for constructions, especially soils with very high expansibility factor.s And example opf such soils is bentonite. AAll rocks and soil resources are good to use locally because these reduces the cost of transport. The material cost will come down because of the low transport costs. Also, non-renewable resources are to be used whereby the ecology of the site must not be affected with more extractions. They have to be used sustainably.My Prayer for PNG today is: I will proclaim to all your people, the wonders you have done for me. You are indeed a God of goodness, you draw me gently to your heartNext week: Physical events

Continue reading here:
Earth materials in technology The National - The National