Recently, a scientific research project aimed at “synthesizing complete human DNA from scratch” was quietly launched in a well-known biological laboratory in the United States, triggering widespread concern and controversy among the global scientific community and ethical groups. The project seeks to chemically construct a complete set of chromosomes with human genetic characteristics, thus laying the foundation for disease modeling, new vaccine development, and even future artificial life research. Although the research team emphasizes that the project “does not yet involve embryo cultivation,” the radical goals and potential risks of the project have attracted the close attention of a number of organizations, ranging from UNESCO to the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH).
From “synthetic human genome” to human DNA imitation
One of the project’s initiators, Harvard geneticist Benjamin Locke, said in a press release, “We are working to build a fully synthetic human DNA library that does not copy a specific individual’s genes, but rather mimics the overall structure of a standard healthy human chromosome. This is not only a technological breakthrough, but also promises to provide important samples for precision medicine.” According to the project brief, the team will use advanced DNA synthesis techniques to stitch together 23 pairs of human chromosomes step by step. The entire project is expected to take five to seven years and is being funded by several biotech companies with a total budget of $120 million. Although the researchers insist that the project is currently “limited to chemical construction at the laboratory level,” the roadmap includes plans to “introduce synthetic DNA into animal cells for stable expression testing.
The academic community is divided
This radical project has quickly generated different voices within the scientific community:
Lisa Baker, a professor of bioethics at the University of California, San Francisco, pointed out: “We are concerned that this research will accelerate the emergence of artificial humans or cloned individuals, and that although it has not yet hit a legal red line, it will be difficult to prevent the technology from crossing ethical boundaries as soon as it matures.”
On the other side of the spectrum, some supporters believe that the research could be a key to attacking difficult genetic diseases. “If a fully controlled DNA sample can be synthesized, we can test drug efficacy without jeopardizing real patients,” said David Zhang, a bioengineering expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
A similar controversy arose in 2016, when the world’s first proposal for a “synthetic human genome project (GP-write)” sparked a public outcry. The current project is seen as a continuation and upgrade of GP-write.
The U.S. government’s attitude is ambiguous
According to the Washington Post, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has not yet taken a position on the project, but is working internally on a draft policy on the ethical boundaries of “synthetic life-form research.” The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) also held a closed-door meeting this week to assess the potential impact of the research on human genetic diversity and future medical ethics.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) plans to make clear revisions to the reporting requirements for “in vivo or in vitro testing using synthetic human DNA” by the end of the year, sources familiar with the matter said.
Meanwhile, UNESCO’s Committee on Bioethics has also expressed “serious concern” about the project and included it in the next round of global ethical review.
China, the EU, and other countries and regions are on alert
At the international level, the bioethics office of China’s National Health Commission issued a brief statement saying it is “highly concerned about the global developments in the field of synthetic genes, and will adhere to the principle of prudence to maintain a balance between scientific and technological development and ethical bottom line.” The European Commission, on the other hand, said it will strengthen the regulation of synthetic gene technology in collaborative projects between local research institutions and third parties, and recommended that member states legislate to prevent potential misuse.
Human anxiety under the technological stampede
On social media platforms, the news quickly hit the hot searches, and the public had mixed reactions. Some people expressed surprise and curiosity: “Are we going to witness the birth of the first batch of ‘synthetic human beings’?” Some people also expressed their concern: “When scientists can synthesize the DNA of the entire human body, can human beings be ‘printed’ as well? Where is the ethical bottom line?” Some civil ethics organizations have submitted petitions to the U.S. Congress, requesting that the project be suspended until public community-wide deliberations are completed. Jonathan Murphy, head of a non-profit ethics organization in New York, said, “Whether or not this is the key to the future, opening this door in the absence of ethical consensus is tantamount to walking a tightrope.”
How to balance scientific progress and human boundaries?
The controversy over “artificial human DNA synthesis” epitomizes the technological leaps and boundaries, but also signals the ethical challenges facing the world. As new interdisciplinary disciplines such as biosynthesis, brain-computer interfaces, AI, and gene fusion continue to break through the old boundaries, establishing a globally synergistic ethical governance mechanism may become a key issue in the field of life sciences in the 21st century. As an anonymous ethicist said, “Science cannot be stopped, but where it should go must be decided by all mankind.”
Leave a comment