Difference between revisions of "Team:Bordeaux/Practices"
Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
</ul></p> | </ul></p> | ||
− | <p align="justify">The organisms which come from these approaches can be used in both <b>industrial applications</b> (for example to produce drugs, biofuels, biomass or biopesticides) and in <b>basic research</b> as tools like biosensors (<a href"https://2009.igem.org/Team:Cambridge"target="_blank"><b>E. chromi</b></a> - Team Cambridge | + | <p align="justify">The organisms which come from these approaches can be used in both <b>industrial applications</b> (for example to produce drugs, biofuels, biomass or biopesticides) and in <b>basic research</b> as tools like biosensors (<a href"https://2009.igem.org/Team:Cambridge"target="_blank"><b>E. chromi</b></a> - Team Cambridge, 2009) or against pollution (<a href"https://2013.igem.org/Team:TU-Munic"target="_blank"><b>Physco Filter</b></a> - Team TU-Munich, 2013). |
<br>With these new tools emerging from synthetic biology, many possible fields conducting to different experiments in science permit the intellectual and technical expansion. <b>Bioethics</b> is necessary to prevent researcher about its <b>ethical limits</b>.</p> | <br>With these new tools emerging from synthetic biology, many possible fields conducting to different experiments in science permit the intellectual and technical expansion. <b>Bioethics</b> is necessary to prevent researcher about its <b>ethical limits</b>.</p> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
</ul> </p> | </ul> </p> | ||
− | <p align="justify">Specifically for synthetic biology, a European project called SYNBIOSAFE approved by the European Commission has focused on ethics and safety of synthetic biology. In 2012, it published an <a href="http://www.biofaction.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/igem-biosafety-2013.pdf" target="_blank">article</a> concerning the bioethical and biosafety attentions in iGEM competitions.These two types of types of frameworks help the researcher to answer to many ethical questions arose on synthetic biology in the clearest way possible. | + | <p align="justify">Specifically for synthetic biology, a European project called <b>SYNBIOSAFE</b> approved by the European Commission has focused on ethics and safety of synthetic biology. In 2012, it published an <a href="http://www.biofaction.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/igem-biosafety-2013.pdf" target="_blank">article</a> concerning the bioethical and biosafety attentions in iGEM competitions.These two types of types of frameworks help the researcher to answer to many ethical questions arose on synthetic biology in the clearest way possible. |
− | <br>Therefore, not only law may limit synthetic biology. Aspects concerning Politics, Economy, and Philosophy could influence the bioethics questions.</p> | + | <br>Therefore, not only law may limit synthetic biology. Aspects concerning <b>Politics, Economy, and Philosophy</b> could influence the bioethics questions.</p> |
</div> | </div> | ||
Line 125: | Line 125: | ||
<h5 align="center" >How is the intellectual property defined in synthetic biology?</h5> | <h5 align="center" >How is the intellectual property defined in synthetic biology?</h5> | ||
− | <p align="justify">In sciences, the question of intellectual property is recurrent. Concerning synthetic biology, all of the objects used can be patented. Among these are genes, plasmids, biobricks, genetic circuit broads, software modeling of mechanisms etc. Thinking about patentability of live being is very important in synthesis biology because we use living organisms. Apposing a patent allows appropriating a technical invention, as a produce or a process. This statute permits to protect the invention, it’s also called the “invention patent”. To elude an amalgam between creation and scientific discovery, we’ll try to define the difference between these two values. | + | <p align="justify">In sciences, the <b>question of intellectual property</b> is recurrent. Concerning synthetic biology, all of the objects used <b>can be patented</b>. Among these are genes, plasmids, biobricks, genetic circuit broads, software modeling of mechanisms etc. Thinking about <b>patentability of live being</b> is very important in synthesis biology because we use living organisms. Apposing a patent allows appropriating a technical invention, as a produce or a process. This statute permits to protect the invention, it’s also called the <b>“invention patent”</b>. To elude an amalgam between creation and scientific discovery, we’ll try to define the difference between these two values. |
<br> | <br> | ||
− | <br>We can define a discovery as a revelation of what was previously unknown, but already being. Indeed, the scientific discovery is supported by study publications which are in free access for who wants it. So, we can consider it is a part of the common knowledge, ownerless. However, the creation is a process or a product which brings a solution for a particular problem. So it is a new element, previously a lacking element. An invention is supported by a patent. In our case, in synthetic biology, it can be a whole organism, a gene or a DNA sequence. The National Consultative Ethics Committee (CCNE) try to delimitate those processes, it makes impossible to take ownership of organisms already being, with informations which are just revealed and makes sure that a discovery won’t become an invention. Also, the patentability of an element won’t be possible when it was extracted of its natural environment to live in a synthetic environment, or an element which was reproduced in a synthetic environment, but already naturally being. | + | <br>We can define a <b>discovery</b> as a revelation of <b>what was previously unknown</b>, but <b>already being</b>. Indeed, the scientific discovery is supported by study publications which are in free access for who wants it. So, we can consider it is a part of the <b>common knowledge</b>, ownerless. However, the <b>creation</b> is a process or a product which brings a solution for a particular problem. So it is a <b>new element</b>, previously a lacking element. An invention is supported by a patent. In our case, in synthetic biology, it can be <b>a whole organism</b>, <b>a gene</b> or <b>a DNA sequence</b>. The National Consultative Ethics Committee (CCNE) try to delimitate those processes, it makes impossible to take ownership of organisms already being, with informations which are just revealed and makes sure that <b>a discovery won’t become an invention</b>. Also, the patentability of an element won’t be possible when it was extracted of its natural environment to live in a synthetic environment, or an element which was reproduced in a synthetic environment, but already naturally being. |
− | + | ||
− | <br>Here, it is a polemical subject because in synthetic biology, we are making “organic inventions”. So, there is a question: “Is it acceptable to be a living being’s owner?” “What about an interior component of it?” In this last case, whose belong the interest element? At the individue? Or at that one who modified it?</i></p> | + | <br>Here, it is a <b>polemical subject</b> because in synthetic biology, we are <b>making “organic inventions”</b>. So, there is a question: “Is it acceptable to be a living being’s owner?” “What about an interior component of it?” In this last case, whose belong the interest element? At the individue? Or at that one who modified it?</i></p> |
<br> | <br> | ||
Revision as of 18:55, 11 August 2015