How the White House made the world a little safer from biorisks

Hey readers,

It's Kelsey Piper here.

 

In the past, if you were a researcher who wanted to study a specific strand of DNA or RNA, you’d have to go through the laborious process of coaxing some bacteria to produce it for you in the lab. 

 

Not anymore: These days, you can send your DNA or RNA order off to a synthetic biology lab that can print those genetic sequences for you. It’s an incredible technology that pairs well with other exciting new biological technologies. The just-released next generation of Google’s AlphaFold AI makes it possible to predict how many DNA sequences will fold into proteins — synthetic biology will let us actually build the proteins we’ve identified as promising. 

 

It’s hard to overstate the potential of synthetic biology. Medical innovation is slow and grinding, but as it gets cheaper to manufacture sequences of interest, incredible new things become possible. Add in AI and you have the ability to make biology faster, more powerful, and more personalized.

 

But there’s one possibility that has many leading companies in the synthetic biology space nervous: that their technology’s awesome potential could be turned toward destructive ends. 

 

After all, the power to print any DNA or RNA sequence you want could in theory be used to reintroduce a dangerous extinct virus like smallpox to the world (though luckily for us, pox viruses are hard to assemble) or to manufacture an entirely novel pandemic-causing virus. It’s a classic dual-use technology: Synthetic DNA makes biological research much easier, but it would also make biological warfare much easier.

 

That’s why it’s so important that in an executive order last week, the Biden administration issued a new framework for synthetic biology that should make it safer and benefit the companies that are acting responsibly. The new policy didn’t get a lot of attention, but it has the potential to be a big deal — quietly reducing the risks of catastrophe while rewarding those companies that have approached their powerful new technology responsibly. 

 

Doing synthetic biology right 

 

Say North Korea, or a terrorist group, wants to dabble in biological warfare. Unfortunately, it would currently be possible for them to request a dangerous virus and get it shipped to them.

 

There’s a straightforward way to ensure this doesn’t happen: Companies that fulfill these requests can just check the orders they’re getting and make sure they’re not sending out anything on a short list of potential bioweapons. And while until now there has been very little regulation of synthetic biology companies, many of the leaders in the field were doing this voluntarily. Why go through the extra effort? Because they want to avoid a pandemic as much as the rest of us, and because they feared that a single malicious use would cause a generation of setbacks for a technology with the power to vastly transform our world for the better.

 

“If there’s an order for Ebola that’s being ordered by the CDC in Atlanta, that’s great,” James Diggans, director of data science and biosecurity for Twist Bioscience, told me last year. “But if we get an order for Ebola to be shipped to North Korea, we won’t do it.”

 

But not every DNA synthesis company checks where their orders are coming from or checks whether the sequence they’ve been asked to print is a dangerous one. You can save a little money by cutting corners, and some companies do. 

 

For that reason, as I’ve written, leading synthetic biology companies have been in the unusual position of patiently asking the federal government to add some regulations. There’s a bill under consideration in Congress, the Securing Gene Synthesis Act, but it hasn’t moved forward.

 

The White House executive order from last week shores up some of these gaps. It encourages (though doesn’t require — that’d take an act of Congress) companies to adopt know-your-customer (check who is making an order) and know-your-order (check what they’re ordering and if it’s a dangerous restricted sequence) policies. 

 

Crucially, it also directs everyone who orders synthetic DNA with federal research money to order from companies that follow these guidelines: “Federal research funding agencies will require recipients of federal R&D funds to procure synthetic nucleic acids only from providers that implement these best practices.”

 

That’s huge. The US federal government is by far the largest funder of biological research. If all of those research dollars will only go to compliant companies, firms in the space will have an enormous financial incentive to get compliant — fast. 

 

A meaningful first step 

 

Hopefully, Congress will continue working on this. Ideally, screening requirements would be mandatory, and Congress has also floated proposals to build a database of sequences of concern which DNA synthesis companies could consult. But while Congress figures out the best approach, this executive order should substantially shift the financial incentives surrounding screening all by itself. 

 

I want to emphasize again that synthetic biology is awesome, and no one — not the White House, not Congress, not the biosecurity experts who’ve talked with me about synthesis screening — wants to slow it down. But some sensible regulations will both save lives and reward the companies that have been voluntarily doing the right thing for years now.

 

It’s a win for which the administration — and the many people who’ve worked tirelessly to establish synthetic DNA screening frameworks before a catastrophe instead of in response to one — deserves some celebration.

 

—Kelsey Piper, senior writer

 
 

The real science behind the billionaire pursuit of immortality

A doctor in a white coat and an old man with a cane are separated by a dark silhouette of a younger man.

Cornelia Li for Vox

A longer, healthier life is one of the easiest products in the world to sell. According to a Deloitte report, the 50 biggest longevity companies raised more than $1 billion in venture capital funding as of 2020. The goal isn’t to live forever, though — the real success would be having more years when you can live well, writes reporter Jacob Sweet.

More on this topic from Vox:

  • The breathtaking lifesaving impact of vaccines, in one chart
  • The one huge obstacle standing in the way of progress on gene-editing medicine
  • Your phone can tell when you’re depressed
 

What a Zoom cashier 8,000 miles away can tell us about the future of work

In blue, black, and white graphics, a man in a suit and a robot with a humanistic head face away from each other.

Getty Images/iStockphoto

To put a human face on the way technology changes jobs, visit a fried chicken spot in New York City’s East Village. There, the cashier takes your order over Zoom from the Philippines. If the idea of AI taking over human jobs sounds too far-fetched and pessimistic, the unfortunate reality is that the use of tech to degrade work that humans do is not novel — it’s been happening for hundreds of years, argues senior reporter Whizy Kim.

 

More on this topic from Vox:

  • How AI could explode the economy
  • A utopian strand of economic thought is making a surprising comeback
  • Want a 32-hour workweek? Give workers more power.
 
WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT
A view of Hollywood, with the iconic white sign high up on a mountainside.

Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

I’ve long been interested in how the entertainment industry — especially scripted film and TV — covers social issues and in turn, influences public opinion. It’s hard to pull off without sounding dutiful or reductive, so I enjoyed a recent Volts podcast episode on the topic with Anna Jane Joyner of Good Energy, an organization that works with writers in Hollywood to incorporate environmental issues into entertainment. — Kenny Torrella, staff writer

 

I should really understand Bayesian statistics, given that it is one of the key tools to rationally understanding the world we live in. But baseball aside, stats have never been my strong suit, which is why I’m so glad I have Tom Chivers's new book Everything is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World. Chivers, whose first book was a highly readable exploration of the highly unusual rationalist movement, is the ideal guide to the Bayesian method and the man who invented it. I predict you'll enjoy it. — Bryan Walsh, editorial director

 

Doing undercover crimes for your dissertation is admittedly rad — but this is scary. PhD students from MIT conducted a “red-teaming” experiment to figure out how easy it would be to source synthetic DNA from the 1918 flu strain. They found that it was distressingly simple for them to get companies to provide the material they were looking for. I thought we had enough to worry about with H5N1. Maybe I was wrong. — Dylan Scott, senior correspondent and editor

 

Where are all my Miami fans at??? Last week, I was in the 305 for a few days on vacation. Whenever I’m traveling, my partner and I love to see all the local wildlife — communing with nature ahead of a luxurious meal is heaven to us. So this time around, we went to Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park and saw a pack of wild dolphins hunting down needlefish (and I got to swim at a quiet beach!). Definitely recommend. — Izzie Ramirez, deputy editor

 
FacebookTwitterYouTube

Access the web version of this newsletter here.

 

This email was sent to comercialyventas.aliperiodicos@blogger.com. Manage your email preferences or unsubscribe. If you value Vox’s unique explanatory journalism, support our work with a one-time or recurring contribution.

 

View our Privacy Notice and our Terms of Service.

 

Vox Media, 1201 Connecticut Ave. NW, Floor 12, Washington, DC 20036.
Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved.