From: <www.etcgroup.org>

NEWS RELEASE

Today, a coalition of thirty-five international organizations
including scientists, environmentalists, trade unionists, biowarfare
experts and social justice advocates called for inclusive public
debate, regulation and oversight of the rapidly advancing field of
synthetic biology - the construction of unique and novel artificial
life forms to perform specific tasks. Synthetic biologists are
meeting this weekend in Berkeley, California where they plan to
announce a voluntary code of self-regulation for their work (1). The
organizations signing the Open Letter are calling on synthetic
biologists to abandon their proposals for self-governance and to
engage in an inclusive process of global societal debate on the
implications of their work (see attached Open Letter).

"The researchers meeting in Berkeley acknowledge the dangers of
synthetic biology in the hands of 'evildoers,' but they naively
overlook the possibility - or probability - that members of their own
community won't be able to control or predict the behavior of
synthetic biology or its societal consequences," said Jim Thomas of
ETC Group.

"Scientists creating new life forms cannot be allowed to act as judge
and jury," explains Dr. Sue Mayer, Director of GeneWatch UK. "The
possible social, environmental and bio-weapons implications are all
too serious to be left to well-meaning but self-interested
scientists. Proper public debate, regulation and policing is needed."

In the last few years, synthetic biologists, by re-writing the
genetic code of DNA, have demonstrated the ability to build new
viruses and are now developing artificial life forms. In October last
year, synthetic biologists at the US Center for Disease Control re-
created the 1918 Spanish flu virus that killed between 50-100 million
people (3) and last month scientists at the University of Wisconsin-
Madison created a new version of E. coli bacteria (4). Meanwhile,
genomics mogul Craig Venter, whose former company, Celera, led the
commercial race to sequence the human genome, now heads a new
company, Synthetic Genomics (5), that aims to commercialize
artificial microbes for use in energy, agriculture and climate change
remediation. It is one of around 40 synthetic biology companies
undertaking gene synthesis and/or building artificial DNA.

"Biotech has already ignited worldwide protests, but synthetic
biology is like genetic engineering on steroids," says Dr. Doreen
Stabinsky of Greenpeace International. "Tinkering with living
organisms that could be released in the environment poses a grave
biosafety threat to people and the planet," adds Stabinsky.

In October 2004, an editorial in the journal Nature warned, "If
biologists are indeed on the threshold of synthesizing new life
forms, the scope for abuse or inadvertent disaster could be huge."
The editorial suggested that there may be a need for an "Asilomar-
type" conference on synthetic biology - a reference to an historic
meeting in 1975 where scientists met to discuss biosafety risks
associated with genetic engineering and opted for self-governance
which ultimately pre-empted and avoided government regulation.
Following the Asilomar model the "Synthetic Biology Community"
intends to use their second conference (Synthetic Biology 2.0, 20-22
May 2006) to adopt a code of self-governance for handling the
biosafety risks.

According to the Open Letter, the effect of the Asilomar declaration
was to delay the development of appropriate government regulation and
to forestall discussion on how to address the wider socio-economic
impacts. Asilomar proved to be the wrong approach then, and Synthetic
Biology 2.0 is the wrong approach now.

"We scientists must come to terms with the fact that science can no
longer claim to be living in an abstract realm disconnected from the
rest of society," said Alexis Vlandas of International Engineers and
Scientists for Global Responsibility (INES).

The signatories to the Open Letter urge the synthetic biologists
meeting in Berkeley to withdraw their declaration of self-governance
and join in seeking a wider, inclusive dialogue.