Indirectly GM bees

 March 2022

"Even with the complete genetic information of a synthetic micro-organism, it is beyond the capacity of any existent bioinformatic analysis to fully predict the capability of a synthetic organism to survive, colonise and interact with other organisms under natural conditions, given the uncountable diversity of potential microhabitats and their temporal variability." (European Food Safety Authority, 2020)

By "synthetic micro-organism" is meant GM bacteria, GM fungi and GM yeast*. In their natural form all of these are a permanent feature inside, on and around higher plants and animals where they interact with each other and with their host to play a vital role in health and disease.

Holistic gene reality

August 2018

In 2012, entrepreneur Craig Venter was going to save the world with synthetic microbes. In his view life is simply "DNA software" with a "cell there to read it" [1].

He set about creating a cell with the smallest number of genes, "a cell so simple that we can determine the molecular and biological function of every gene". His plan was to identify a core set of genes and synthesise a minimal genome able to produce an independent, replicating cell. The ultimate goal was the construction of a designer cell with whatever properties human beings desired.

By the time he published a paper on his project four years later, Venter had realised the whole life thing is more complex than he'd envisaged: the genes not critical for simply staying alive in a perfect, stress-free environment are nevertheless needed for "robust growth".

The gene drive offensive

February 2018

The threat posed by gene drives to our environment, our health, our food supply, our livelihoods and our peace appears to be from the enemy within.

Gene drives are created using a relatively simple and cheap molecular technology, and are designed to cut-and-paste themselves into specific locations in the genome of a target organism. Because of a gene drive's unnatural self-spreading properties, the genetic disruption it causes ends up in all offspring and becomes ubiquitous in the population within a very few generations. If the gene-drive is incompatible with survival or reproduction, it will drive the target population to extinction.

CRISPR muscle man

February 2018

Slaves of the world arise and revolt! You need, no longer, be subject to your cruel gene-masters. CRISPR-man will sell ...er, show you the way to freedom.

This new-found slavery has been laid bare by the biohacker movement.

Impossible bleeding burgers

September 2017

'Synbio', a.k.a. synthetic biology or synthia, began to look like becoming a reality in our food in 2014. Natural artificial additives such as stevia, vanilla and saffron look-alikes produced in vats of GM yeast were set to hit our plates [1].

The following year, 'Muufri' cowless milk emerged. Muufri has six key natural artificial cow's milk proteins produced in vats of GM yeast [2].

One year on, 'Soylent' meal alternatives became the must-have for the modern man who doesn't have time to shop, cook or sit down to eat. Soylent is "proudly made with GMOs" and doesn't even pretend to have any natural ingredients [3].

Keep it real

November 2016

Photo: Creative Commons

'Factory farming' just got a whole new meaning. It used to mean thousands of cows crammed in a muddy pen, or pigs living their lives out stuffed in crates, or tiers of chickens in boxes, all fed GM feed. Now it means farming in a factory. Farming, that is of microbes genetically transformed to produce food-like substances.

Climate-smart crops or profit-smart?

March 2016

Biotech industry claims that GM crops are climate-smart are not new.

Herbicide-tolerant crops have been successfully hyped as enabling no-till farming to promote carbon storage in the soil and saving carbon release from fossil fuels.  It's a good story, but doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny: even without tillage, little carbon actually stays in the soil long enough to be considered sequestered [1], and all commercial-scale GM crops are inherently dependent on fossil-fuels to supply the necessary agri-chemicals and run all the machines.

Synbio bugs

March 2016

Back in 2010, the first 'creation' of a 'synthetic' organism was announced [1].

The 'synthetic organism' was mycoplasma, the smallest known cell, many times smaller than a bacterium.  Like all such microbes, mycoplasma don't have a defined cell nucleus like higher organisms, but have a single DNA-bearing structure ('chromosome').

What was actually synthesised was replica DNA of a sample mycoplasma.  This had been manufactured in computer-designed chunks, then assembled into a chromosome in yeast cells and inserted into a mycoplasma cell whose chromosome had been extracted.  The synbio-bug grew much as usual.

Synthetic science

March 2016

New varieties of biotechnology, each more extreme than the one before, are emerging from the lab at breakneck speed.
These have come to be known as 'synthetic biology', a curious name (see below) for a nebulous field, which seems to refer to any means of artificial reconstruction of life. It encompasses anything minorly more sophisticated than old-fashioned GM, to wholesale changes in metabolism, cell components, populations and ecosystems.

---

What is 'synthetic biology'?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines 'biology' as the science of physical life, and 'science' as systematic knowledge. This makes 'synthetic biology' the synthetic science of life.

We are, indeed, talking about an entirely synthetic branch of science, but it seems that the systematic knowledge part actually refers to synthetic life. This makes 'synthetic biology' the synthetic science of synthetic life.

Perhaps 'biological synthology' describes this latest biotech venture most accurately.

---

The synthetic answer to a future world in which today's trends extrapolate into ever-more mouths to feed and ever-scarcer arable land, is to reconfigure crop plants to grow better.

Unstitching the media stitch-up

October 2014

2013 March against Monsanto, Washington DC, USA. CC photo by Stephen Melkisethlan

The GM-media stitch-up which became evident when our previous Environment Minister was strutting his stuff on the pro-GM stage [1,2] seems to be part of an orchestrated, world-wide GM-good-news-only drive (see below for examples).

Given what has been reaching the news lately, you might be getting the impression that 'the GM debate is over' and that GM-concern campaigning is dead in the water.

No so.

Genetically edited

October 2014

CC photo by Antoine.Couturier on Flickr

The first use of 20th century technology to re-jig living organisms to conform to human specifications was mutagenesis. 

 

Mutagenesis involves a scatter-gun induction of random DNA modification using chemicals or radiation. Survivors of the onslaught are screened for commercially useful new characteristics. The desired mutation is purified of the collateral genomic wreckage around it by repeated breeding with healthy mates.

 

It seems that mutagenesis was considered no more than an accelerated version of natural Darwinian random mutation followed by selection of a human-defined 'fittest'. No one told consumers what was being done to their food, and no safety-testing was ever considered (See below).

 

The second wave of organism-fixing technology stemmed from the discovery of how to engineer DNA and insert it into living cells.

Synthetic biology coming soon. Is it 'natural'?

October 2014

'Synbio' vanillin could soon be in ice cream and cakes.
CC photo by St0rmz on Flickr

When 'Synthia' first popped into the headlines, it referred to cells containing entire, simplified, man-made chromosomes [1].

 

Since then, “synthetic biology” has been used to mean so many different technical tricks, it “defies easy definition”. The only common factor seems to be the use of “a tool-box of well-defined genetic parts to build new functions” to create a novel organism. 'Synthetic biology' seems to cover anything from good old-fashioned insertion of chunks of DNA, to the products of any genome re-configuration, to whole genome assembly, and anything else which makes the end-genome different.

 

'Synthia' has popped into the headlines again because a new version of it could creep into our food chain if we don't watch out.

 

A Swiss company, describing itself as a “pioneer and global leader in sustainable, fermentation-based approaches to ingredients for health, wellness and nutrition” is busy “address(ing) an increasing consumer demand for high-quality, trustworthy and affordable products that are considered 'natural'”.

 

What could possibly be ominous about this?