feature
: : ian clothier
the
human genome project
Report from the 9th International Conference on Thinking and the Royal Commission
into Genetic Modification, New Zealand. view
dna animated (needs
animated gif viewer).
The human genome
project is perhaps the single most significant world wide event in recent times.
How we collectively feel about someone else owning the blueprint to our selves,
is likely to be the hottest subject of our generation. The prospect of human cloning
is perhaps the deepest issue in the history of humanity.
At
breakthroughs 2001, the Ninth International Conference on Thinking
held in January this year, the topic of genetic modification was the subject of
presentations in both Health and Business streams.
International
plenary speaker Professor Bob Williamson (Melbourne and Monash Universities) has
a major research interest in the genome project. As a scientist, he is also interested
in the ethics of human genetic research. How can we ensure that the knowledge
is used for the benefit of all?
Genetics
offers the potential of diagnosis for hereditary disease sufferers, and intervention
(prenatal diagnosis, gene therapy or lifestyle change) to correct genetic problems.
Gene technologies are creating new medicines, food and fibre.
Should
dna information be patented, and what is the consequence for distinct dna population
groups, such as many indigenous peoples? At first many scientists
balked at patenting, according to Dr James Watson in his presentation to conference.
But
it was soon realised that pursuing the medical benefits of dna research was hinged
on attaining the funds to explore the vast store of data unlocked in the workings
of the four bases of dna - A,G, T and C.
Dr
Watson held postdoctoral positions at research facilities in the US prior to establishing
genetic research company Genesis. Scientists have become business people, of which
Watson is a good example.
Coincidentally
to the conference, a Royal Commission into Genetic Modification has been established
in New Zealand and is currently hearing submissions from the public and interested
individuals and groups. Dr Mark Hampton gave evidence that world wide, 25 million
mice would be raised this year, many new "lines" with altered genes.
The
mice are used to search for cures, treatments and whether an illness such as stomach
cancer is inherited. Recently, French doctors grew skin with hair follicles using
stem cells taken from adult mice - potentially a breakthrough for severe burn
victims, skin cancer sufferers and a possible cure for baldness, according to
France's National Institute for Science and Medical Research.
So
where are the problems? Dr Elaine Ingham of Oregon State University made a submission
to the Royal Commission via video link from the US. She spoke about a plant killing
genetically modified bacteria that her research team prevented from being released
into the environment.
Ingham's
team had developed an alcohol producing bacteria that was approved for field trials.
The bacteria, klebsiella planticola, produced alcohol from post harvest crop residue.
The left over sludge, which also contained the bacteria, could be returned to
the fields as fertiliser.
The US regulatory authority did not test for the consequences of the bacteria
on plants. Nor did it require the applying scientists to do so. Independently,
Dr Ingham tested the bacteria to gauge the impact: "after seven days, all
wheat plants turned to slime."
The
path of turning genetic research into benefits for crop growers, with a consequent
financial benefit to companies, is not smoothly paved. Ingham's example serves
as a stern warning to establish procedural controls. The Monsanto launch of it's
genetically altered corn failed for many reasons, but it did fail. Humanity as
a whole is not ready for genetic modification where a financial benefit accrues
to a company and a corresponding loss accrues to the genetic structure of generations
of consequent crops. Such a benefit and loss simply do not equalise in the minds
of many.
It is
clear that in 2001, geneticists are well down the road to genetic manipulation
and that includes the patenting of knowledge. The benefits to dna research to
indigenous populations, like all populations, is the cure for hereditary illness
and the risk is loss of ownership.
However,
the issue has become not so much whether we will have such research, and whether
it will be patented, but what international agreements can be reached on guidelines
for research and procedural testing of genetic modifications. We have passed through
the gate, and can now only landscape the road. As for human cloning, it appears
that the dna journey, like time, is a one way street.
To
comment click here.
links
to dna sites
This
page, part of an exhibition made possible by the Smithsonian Institution Libraries
and the Washington Project for the Arts, has a jpg of the original paper by Watson
and Crick molecular structure of nucleic acids: a structure for deoxyribose
nucleic acid.
http://www.sil.si.edu/Exhibitions/Science-and-the-Artists-Book/bioc.htm#27
This page
has many dna graphics, including the animated gif that can be found at this site.
http://academy.d20.co.edu/kadets/lundberg/dna.html
For
a readable introduction to the Human Genome Project, this site created by the
Australian Academy of Science is a good place to start.
http://www.science.org.au/nova/006/006key.htm
The Human Genome
Mapping Consortium is an international group of institues working on the genome
project. Here is their press release on the publishing of the human genome map.
http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/NEWS/physical_map.html
For academic
papers on the subject, visit the website of the academic journal nature,
found here:
http://www.nature.com/genomics/
