Difference between revisions of "Team:Edinburgh/Practices/Synenergene"

Revision as of 14:00, 18 August 2015

Synenergene Collaboration

After our meetings with Susan Deacon and Anna Ross, we had a better idea of how our biosensor could be implemented in both the private and public sectors.This sounded all well and good on paper, but just as were beginning to learn in the lab, theory and practice are two very different things; nothing goes according to plan. Indeed, it was not sufficient to simply identify potential markets for our biosensor; rather, we needed to consider potential obstacles that may present themselves if our biosensor was actually introduced to these markets.

Fortunately, we were one of eight teams selected worldwide for a grant and collaboration with the European Union initiative ‘Synenergene’, whose purpose is to facilitate an open dialogue between synthetic biology, the public and wide variety of stakeholders in order to promote a mutually beneficial understanding of each other’s goals and needs. With their help, we learned to work through hypothetical scenarios in order to construct a theoretical framework for the real-world implementation of our biosensor.

After a series of skypes with the entire Synergene pannell, each team was allocated to a specific supervisor. Our team was assigned to Dr. Laurens Landeweerd, a philosophy assistant professor at Radboud University Nijmegen’s Institute for Science Innovation and Society and researcher at Delft University of Technology (section Biotechnology&Society).

Dr. Landeweerd suggested we should first consider dilemmas of a practical nature, which we may call ‘application scenarios’. Examples of these include situations where our biosensor provides inaccurate results, or faces legal/manufacturing difficulties. Click on the link below to read our report that details, and provides solutions to, several application scenarios:

Back

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 	<div class="row">
 <!-- TITLE: -->
-             <h2>A Chat with Policy Experts</h2>
+             <h2>Synenergene Collaboration</h2>
 <!-- TEXT -->
              	<p> <!-- This is the start of a paragraph -->
-                 	Coming away from the sandpit, it was time to put our ideas to the test. First, we needed to find out whether our biosensor would actually be useful, and if it was, how (or even if) it could be put into practice in the real world. Consequently, we got in contact with two experts on UK drug policy, Susan Deacon, former Scottish MSP and member of the RSA Commission on Illegal Drugs, Communities and Public Policy, as well as Anna Ross, doctoral researcher at the University of Edinburgh.
+                 	After our meetings with Susan Deacon and Anna Ross, we had a better idea of how our biosensor could be implemented in both the private and public sectors.This sounded all well and good on paper, but just as were beginning to learn in the lab, theory and practice are two very different things; nothing goes according to plan. Indeed, it was not sufficient to simply identify potential markets for our biosensor; rather, we needed to consider potential obstacles that may present themselves if our biosensor was actually introduced to these markets.
                  	<br> <!-- This is enter -->
@@ Line 21: / Line 23: @@
                  	<br>
-					We headed to Susan Deacon’s office in Edinburgh, City Centre to learn more about the current political climate and prevailing attitudes towards drug policy. Thankfully, she reaffirmed our suspicions that our biosensor could in fact be sold on the free market without facing serious legal opposition, as similar testing kits already exist for retail. However, she gave us advice that would significantly change how we envisioned the implementation of our biosensor.
+					Fortunately, we were one of eight teams selected worldwide for a grant and collaboration with the European Union initiative ‘Synenergene’, whose purpose is to facilitate an open dialogue between synthetic biology, the public and wide variety of stakeholders in order to promote a mutually beneficial understanding of each other’s goals and needs. With their help, we learned to work through hypothetical scenarios in order to construct a theoretical framework for the real-world implementation of our biosensor.
 					<br>
@@ Line 27: / Line 29: @@
 					<br>
-					Deacon suggested that, instead of viewing UK law as an obstacle that needs to be overcome in order for our biosensor to be used by the public, we should consider how the government could help facilitate its use. Politicians often refer to a concept known as ‘harm reduction’ when drafting public health policy, which is the idea that we should seek innovative solutions to limit the negative effects certain acts (for example, drug use) have on society.
+					After a series of skypes with the entire Synergene pannell, each team was allocated to a specific supervisor. Our team was assigned to Dr. Laurens Landeweerd, a philosophy assistant professor at Radboud University Nijmegen’s Institute for Science Innovation and Society and researcher at Delft University of Technology (section Biotechnology&Society).
 					<br>
 					<br>
 					<br>
-					After Deacon’s input, we began looking at harm reduction programs that could potentially incorporate our biosensor. The National Healthcare Service (NHS) - the social health care service in the UK - funds many initiatives, and so we spoke to Anna Ross to determine potential leads. Check out the video below to hear her thoughts:
+					Dr. Landeweerd suggested we should first consider dilemmas of a practical nature, which we may call ‘application scenarios’. Examples of these include situations where our biosensor provides inaccurate results, or faces legal/manufacturing difficulties. Click on the link below to read our report that details, and provides solutions to, several application scenarios:
 				</p>