Biotech Time-Bomb is a probing analysis of the orgins, transformations, and prospects of the Western mentality behind genetic engineering and similar strategies for manipulating the basic elements of life. It is the first media ecology critique of the control paradigm now dominant in developed socities, and a clarion call for a cross-cultural dialogue. Beyond demonstrating how the side-effects of new technologies usually turn out to be their main effects, the book also highlights alternative perspectives from other cultures and urges (...) renewed attention to the inexhaustible resourcefulness of life itself. (shrink)

It has become part of the accepted wisdom to say that the twentieth century was the century of physics and the twenty-first century will be the century of biology. Two facts about the coming century are agreed on by almost everyone. Biology is now bigger than physics, as measured by the size of budgets, by the size of the workforce, or by the output of major discoveries; and biology is likely to remain the biggest part of science through the twenty-first (...) century. Biology is also more important than physics, as measured by its economic consequences, by its ethical implications, or by its effects on human welfare. (shrink)

Social policy questions in the U.S. are often framed in terms of individual rights, valorizing individual freedom and self‐determination. But this focus obscures the social and economic bases of health and disease. U.S. bioethics, as its counterparts in Africa and Asia have done, needs to restructure its philosophical framework and expand its moral criteria to consider how to define a global ethics.

Regulatory agencies aim to protect the public by moderating risks associated with innovation, but a good regulatory regime should also promote justified public trust. After introducing the USDA 2020 SECURE Rule for regulation of biotech innovation as a case study, this essay develops a theory of justified public trust in regulation. On the theory advanced here, to be trustworthy, a regulatory regime must (1) fairly and effectively manage risk, must be (2) “science based” in the relevant sense, and must (...) in addition be (3) truthful, (4) transparent, and (5) responsive to public input. Evaluated with these norms, the USDA SECURE Rule is shown to be deeply flawed, since it fails appropriately to manage risk, and similarly fails to satisfy other normative requirements for justified trust. The argument identifies ways in which the SECURE Rule itself might be improved, but more broadly provides a normative framework for the evaluation of trustworthy regulatory policy-making. (shrink)

A survey of high school student expectations on biotechnology was made, including the information, where it came from, how information resources influence their scientific thoughts. GM crops were used as the theme of biotechnology, because the technology is concerned with food which all people have a relationship with. From the 977 responses obtained from 8 high schools it was found most high schools' students expected benefits and risks from biotechnology. A wide variety of fruits and vegetables improvements were given when (...) students were asked to think about how they would improve their favourite fruit and vegetable. The information given by mass media tended to increase the feeling that science was risky. (shrink)

In this article we explore the emergence of a cluster of social movement organisations that have critically taken issue with nanotechnology in Germany, the UK and internationally. By applying concepts borrowed from Social Movement Research we demonstrate that this cluster is a ‘spin-off’ from the preceding movement against agrofood biotechnology, however, never succeeds in mobilizing a comparable ‘antinanotechnology movement’. We argue that the turn toward participatory and deliberative practices that is characteristic of nanotechnology policy and, to a major extent, is (...) based on the perceived threat of a ‘public backlash’ against nanotechnology, while being of little political impact, reinforces the activity of these critical organisations through the provision of political opportunities. We further argue that the stagnation of these organisations can be explained by low policy impact and low public responsiveness respectively and conclude that their trajectories hinge to a major extent on policy impact and the responsiveness of the mass-public. We end by making a concluding remark about the limits to the project of democratizing social contention through public engagement. (shrink)

Resumen Hace 78 años, en “Un Mundo Feliz”, el escritor Aldous Huxley, en un prodigioso tono satírico, se anticipó con asombrosa precisión a los grandes temas de la agenda científica y política del Siglo XXI: la reproducción controlada, el choque de civilizaciones y la clonación humana, entre otros. Hace unos días, a mediados de mayo de 2010, el J. Craig Venter Institute anunció que había producido la primera célula sin historia genética creada en un laboratorio a partir de un genoma (...) sintetizado químicamente. Hoy, describiendo el estado “posthumano” de la historia, Francis Fukuyama afirma: “Huxley tenía razón”. Palabras clave: bioética; ingeniería genética; democracia; totalitarismo; biotécnica; eugenesia ;utopías; distopias. Huxley’s Prophecy and the Biotech Century: Post-human society is reaching usSeventy-eight years ago, in “A Happy World”, the writer Aldous Huxley, in a prodigious satiric tone, anticipated with astonishing accurateness the big topics of the XXI Century’s scientific and political agenda: controlled reproduction, civilization clash and human cloning, among others. Some days ago, in mid-May 2010, the J. Craig Venter Institute announced that it had produced the first genetic history free cell created in a laboratory from a chemically synthesized genome. Today, in describing the “post-human” state of history, Francis Fukuyama asserts: “Huxley was right”. Keywords: Bioethics;Genetic Engineering; Democracy; Totalitarianism; Biotechnology;Eugenics ; Utopias; Dystopias. (shrink)

This article contributes to existing feminist technoscience analyses by proposing a new tool for examining how norms governing viable and unviable bodies are discursively constructed in an increasingly technologized world. This tool is the result of synthesizing two existing concepts: white noise from the field of media theory/information studies, and the abject from psychosemiotics/gender studies. Synthesizing these two concepts produces an enriched term for detecting interrelations between discursive disturbances and disturbances in bodily norms. In this article, the synthesized concept is (...) used as a tool to analyse material concerning the assignment of International Nonproprietary Names to biotechnological drugs. Biotech offers itself as a prime testing ground for this new tool, replete as it is with bodily anxieties, powerful discourses and innovative technologies. This article compares three versions of an INN guidance document showing how anxieties about bodily norms are reflected in, and managed through, these documents. (shrink)

In understanding the implicative resonance of biotech applications research and development, it is necessary to apply the intricate consonance of bioethics studies like behaviourome studies in the form of mental mapping in diverse groups of society for trying to resolve moral issues such as IPR or biosafety. Social perception analysis being the subjective domain of bioethics and related biotechnological issues are the functional epitome in ensuring benevolent biotechnological entrepreneurship development. In this pursuit studies of social genomics can ascertain the (...) positive implications of functional genomics being one of the most important fragments of science of biotechnology. The development of guidelines should be culturally sensitive in the way ethical, social and legal aspects are considered. Having a map of human ideas will enable us to reflect more diversity of ideas into policy frameworks. (shrink)

This paper begins by describing recent controversies over cross-contamination of crops in the United States and European Union. The EU and US are both applying the principle of freedom of cropping to resolve these conflicts, which is based on an individualistic philosophy. However, despite the EU and the US starting with the principle of freedom of cropping they have very dissimilar regulatory regimes for coexistence. These contradictory policies based upon the same principle are creating different sets of winners and losers. (...) In the US the organic industry claims the system of coexistence is unfair and in the EU the biotech industry claims the system is unfair. It seems that states, despites claims to neutrality and freedom of choice, are prejudicing one system of agriculture over another in resolutions to the conflict over cross contamination. In this paper I will argue that if states cannot remain neutral in coexistence policies, there are conditional reasons for favoring the organic industry over the biotech industry in coexistence policies based in communitarian moral philosophy. (shrink)

Bioart emerges as a response to worrying changes in living forms produced by genetic engineering. Indeed, bioartists focus their attention on artistic exploration of biotechnologies and related ethical issues. Their main goal was to inform the public about dangerous genetic engineering techniques, like cloning, inter- and intraspecies experiments, reproductive technologies, genotype and phenotype reprogramming, hybridization techniques, and many others. The paradox lies in the fact that bioartists, in collaboration with scientists, use the same abovementioned techniques and create in laboratory unique (...) living beings with original aesthetic aspects. The use of living organisms for creative or recreational purposes inevitably causes serious cultural and bioethical debates. In this context emerges the concept of contingency linked with living forms, biotech art, and aesthetic experience. (shrink)

When Francis Bacon declared his intent to torment and interfere with nature, he probably did not envision sickly experimental hogs with human genes. But the Baconian desire to understand nature and place “her” at our command has entrenched itself in our collective psyche, and the bioengineering epoch has enabled us to impose our desires in ways Bacon could not have imagined. In so doing, have we stepped over the bounds of decency?

Abstract.The legend of the golem, the creation of life through mystical and magical means, is the most famous postbiblical Jewish legend. After noting recent references to the golem legend in fiction, film, art, and scientific literature, I outline three stages of the development of the legend, including its relationship to the story of Frankenstein. I apply teachings about the golem in classical Jewish religious literature to implications of the legend for ethical issues relating to bioengineering, reproductive biotechnology, robotics, artificial intelligence, (...) artificial life, and corporate ethics. The golem legend emerges as a source of prudent guidance through the minefield of ethical and spiritual problems emerging from current and expected developments in biotechnology. (shrink)

I argue in this paper that animal biotechnology constitutes a dangerous ontological collapse between animals and the technical-economic apparatus. By ontological collapse, I mean the elimination of fundamental ontological tensions between embodied subjects and the principles of scientific, technological, and economic rationalization. Biotechnology imposes this collapse in various ways: by genetically “reprogramming” animals to serve as uniform commodities, by abstracting them into data and code, and, in some cases, by literally manipulating their movements with computer technologies. These and other forms (...) of ontological violence not only lead to profound physical suffering for the animals involved, but also distort the phenomenological basis of their existence, especially their perceptual experience and expression of subjective time and space. In subordinating nonhuman animals to the logic of “technological rationality” or “technique,” to borrow Herbert Marcuse and Jacques Ellul’s respective terms, biotechnology perpetuates the productive extermination of animals. Biotech animals are exterminated in the sense of being “drive[n] beyond the boundaries” of meaningful existence and “destroyed completely” or “completely wiped out” as subjects. But they are also exterminated in the sense of being “overproduced” and “overgenerated,” both quantitatively and qualitatively. I go on to argue that the collapse of the ontological is accompanied by a collapse of the ethical. This ethical collapse is characterized by the internalization of the logic of technique and the corresponding failure both within technoscientific culture itself and within some scholarly discourses about biotechnology to evaluate from a genuinely critical vantage point the fundamental ethical issues that animal biotechnology raises. The aim of this paper is to offer an alternative analysis of the ontological and ethical implications of biotechnology from the standpoint of Marcuse and Ellul’s critical theory of technology. To explore other ramifications of animal biotechnology, I draw on Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s insights into ideologies of extermination and Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of embodiment. (shrink)

Patents on biotech products have a scope that goes well beyond what is covered by the most widely applied ethical justifications of intellectual property. Neither natural rights theory from Locke, nor public interest theory of IP rights justifies the wide scope of legal protection. The article takes human genes as an example, focusing on the component that is not invented but persists as unaltered gene information even in the synthetically produced complementary DNA, the cDNA. It is argued that patent (...) on cDNA holds this information captive, or illegitimately appropriates it in limiting other researchers and inventors’ opportunity to explore new functions and uses based on this non-invented information. A tighter connection between legal IP protection and the use description stated in the patent claim is suggested. By binding protection to the product’s foreseeable functions and use, instead of the product itself and all future uses of it, legitimacy of biotech product patents is restored. (shrink)

This article examines the privacy of personal medical information in the health research context. Arguing that biomedical research in Canada has been caught up in the government's broader neoliberal policy agenda that has positioned biotechnology as a strategic driver of economic growth, the author discusses the tension between informational privacy and the need for medical information for research purposes. Consideration is given to the debate about whether privacy for medical information serves or hinders the “public good” in respect of medical (...) research and to discussions of informed consent as an element of “fair information practices” designed to safeguard the privacy of personal information, including attempts to subvert requirements for informed consent in the medical research context. (shrink)

This paper begins by describing recent controversies over cross-contamination of crops in the United States and European Union. The EU and US are both applying the principle of freedom of cropping to resolve these conflicts, which is based on an individualistic philosophy. However, despite the EU and the US starting with the principle of freedom of cropping they have very dissimilar regulatory regimes for coexistence. These contradictory policies based upon the same principle are creating different sets of winners and losers. (...) In the US the organic industry claims the system of coexistence is unfair and in the EU the biotech industry claims the system is unfair. It seems that states, despites claims to neutrality and freedom of choice, are prejudicing one system of agriculture over another in resolutions to the conflict over cross contamination. In this paper I will argue that if states cannot remain neutral in coexistence policies, there are conditional reasons for favoring the organic industry over the biotech industry in coexistence policies based in communitarian moral philosophy. (shrink)

I worked for many years constructing my version of the global case but, as I continued to try to strengthen it, I slowly began to lose confidence. My unease began with several personal experiences. One of our children had a common but annoying physical ailment, for which our pediatrician prescribed a very expensive nasal spray. When I inquired about its cost, the pharmacist informed me that it was a new, genetically engineered, product. The spray worked, and Karen and I never (...) batted an eye. (shrink)

Addressing groups of industrial or academic experts goes with my job as editor in chief of Scientific American, and I enjoy it, but I confess that it inevitably feels peculiar. The audience consists of people who, almost by definition, have expertise or experience in the subjects of discussion. Why should anyone listen to me? I am a journalist—what do I know? a.

This article deals with the biotechnology revolution in agriculture and analyzes it in terms of Bernard Stiegler’s theory of techno-evolution and his thesis that technologies have an intrinsically pharmacological nature, meaning that they can be both supportive and destructive for sociotechnical practices based on them. Technological innovations always first disrupt existing sociotechnical practices, but are subsequently always appropriated by the social system to be turned into a new technical system upon which new sociotechnical practices are based. As constituted and conditioned (...) by a technical system, human cultures are necessarily systems of care. Humans take care of themselves and the world through technologies. Agriculture is a very old system of care, stable for more than 10,000 years, but at the moment it is experiencing a profound rupture thanks to the invention of genetic engineering technologies, that promise to revolutionize it. However, their current deployment under capitalist conditions everywhere leads to processes of proletarianization, due to the fact that they enable the expropriation of farmers of the means of production, depriving them of the possibility of appropriating these new technologies and frustrating the invention of a new agricultural system of care. This has lead to a widespread rejection of the new technologies, which is a grave error though, as these technologies can become the basis of a new system of care. But only under the condition that they are wrought from corporate control and redeployed instead to initiate a process of deproletarianization. It is argued that current initiatives in open source and commons-based biotech are probably the most promising harbingers of such a process of deproletarianization. (shrink)

In researching the biomedically-engineered drug Neulasta (filgrastim), a breast cancer patient becomes aware of the extent to which knowledge about the development and marketing of drugs influences her decisions with regard to treatment. Time spent on understanding the commercial interests of insurers and pharmaceutical companies initially thwarts but ultimately aids the healing process. This first-person narrative calls for physicians to recognize that the alignment of commercial interests transgresses the patient’s humanity.

Today, societal decisions in areas of complexity are often dominated by one of three alternative ways: (a) by scientists, nowadays often in combination with commercial interest; (b) by politicians alone; and (c) by simply “laissez-faire,” or “the tyranny of small steps.” None of these three ways of decision making is fully democratic because they do not create enough awareness among the politicians and the general public. One reason is that the decision making basis becomes too narrowly framed and fragmented. Biotechnology (...) will continue to feed society with new democratic challenges for many years, perhaps decades, to come. The initially promising ideas of participative and deliberative democracy do not seem to solve the awareness problem. Instead, the authors propose an approach with more structured efforts for awareness building with transparency and participation taking place within the framework of representative democracy. (shrink)

Biotechnology companies have been forced to take account of the social and ethical pressures which increasingly surround their activities. A research project was undertaken with the aims of identifying the practices and procedures which companies put in place as a response to these pressures, and of advising the European Commission on ways by which interaction between these companies and their stakeholders might be improved. Two questionnaires were administered, and although the response rate was not high a reasonably balanced sample was (...) achieved. The results indicated that although there was a high degree of ethical awareness and a willingness to pursue an ‘integrity approach’ to decision‐making as opposed to a ‘compliance approach’, companies on the whole lacked the institutional tools which would enable them to operationalise an integrity approach to corporate decision‐making. (shrink)

There was a time, in the late 1970s and 1980s, when great feats were expected of recombinant DNA biotechnology, some verging on the miraculous. According to both business enthusiasts and sober analysts like the U.S. Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, the new techniques of gene splicing would not only lift the drug industry out of its deep scientific and economic rut (characterized by long-declining introduction rates of genuinely novel medicines), but rejuvenate the American manufacturing sector (Chase 1979; Chemical Week 1987; (...) OTA 1984). Once freed by policy interventions to promote academic-industry collaboration, such as the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act, lifesaving drugs locked up in ivory towers would .. (shrink)

The paper discusses some of the implications of regulatory innovation in the area of advanced biological therapies and personalised medicine. Benefits, risks and trade-offs are highlighted.