Recombinant DNA: A Circumspection

 Recombinant DNA technology not only revolutionized scientific research but also triggered the birth of the private sector biotechnology industries. It involves combining genetic material from different organisms to obtain desirable phenotypes. This technology has opened numerous avenues in medicine, basic research and industry. It also gave rose to as many concerns.

Organisms thus modified could interact with non-modified, wild populations and bring about unpredictable changes risking environment and public health. The Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA held in 1975 brought scientists, lawyers and physicians together to establish guidelines and restrictions to be imposed on rDNA. It enlisted precautions regarding containment, good handling practices and restrictions on experimenting with infectious organisms to prevent any major accident.¹

The science of rDNA continues to be applied in different contexts.

 rDNA Today:

At the time of the Asilomar conference, there was no practical application of rDNA. Today, rDNA is used in the production of high yield, high nutrition GM crops, in production of vaccines, hormones and medicines, bioremediation, environment friendly energy sources and gene therapy.^2,3 All of these applications of rDNA have been controversial with safety concerns bringing the discussion into public domain.

The case of He Jiankui a researcher in Shenzhen, China using CRISPR on human embryos to provide immunity against HIV awakens us to the many undesirable results of such experiments.⁴ This necessitates us to reconsider the potential hazards in the 21^st century and how it can be avoided. A revision of guidelines and precautions seems to be necessary. The following discussion aims to do the needful.

Medicine and gene therapy:

Drugs developed through rDNA should pass through several layers of scrutiny and testing before being prescribed. Testing the drugs on non-target systems can further help identify potential side effects.

Gene therapy must be strictly regulated as intergenic interactions are not well understood. The effect of any modification elsewhere in the body cannot be predicted. It should be particularly avoided at the embryonic stage. Germ line modifications can be inherited and might make containment difficult. It could introduce new diseases into the population, spring a demand for “designer babies” and could be used by anti-social elements in numerous ways.

Genetically Modified (GM) crops:

GM crops and foods need to undergo thorough evaluation before being brought into market. Genetic modification on one locus may bring changes in non target locus. These changes may include increased production of compounds which may be toxic to the consumer.

A very well known example of introduction of GM crops leading to ecological complications is that of the effect of loss of a weed called milkweed on numbers of Monarch butterflies. Producing GM pesticide resistant crops allowed farmers to use huge amounts of pesticide on weeds leading to a drastic decline in milkweed numbers which is the primary food source for Monarch butterflies.⁵ It is an example of how caution should always be exercised when bringing in changes in the environment. Such GM crops are responsible for the increase in use of herbicide by 527 million pounds in the U.S. over 16 years of their commercial use. This has stimulated the production of herbicide-resistant weeds and increased water pollution by runoff herbicides.

Thorough Environmental Impact Assessment is necessary before introducing GM crops into the environment. Research needs to be redirected in finding better solutions to food production than making pesticide resistant crops.

Containment:

Conventional farmers are exposed to the risk of their crops being contaminated by transgenic pollen drifting from the GM fields. Such spill over has happened in the US with Monsanto’s crops and a farmer was accused of growing GM crops without permits. This is a depiction of how GM crops have social effects apart from economic, health and environmental effects.⁷

Such containment issues exist in case of all GM organisms- from plants and bacteria to humans. Utmost prudence needs to be exercised when permitting rDNA experiments on any organism. Only after the research group or institution has demonstrated their ability to contain such organisms and have clarified their intent of use and extent of modifications should rDNA experiments be permitted.

Repercussions for not adhering to norms must be dire to discourage malpractices. This includes consequences for the research group, institute as well as the country. Misuse of rDNA technology has global implications and hence countries must closely monitor such research.

In conclusion, strict norms and constant regulation can avert and mitigate any disasters resulting from the use of rDNA technology.

 

References:

1.     Paul Berg, et al. (1975). Summary Statement of the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules*. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., USA. (June) 72(6)1981-1984.

2.     Suliman Khan, Muhammad Wajid Ullah, Rabeea Siddique, et al., “Role of Recombinant DNA Technology to Improve Life,” International Journal of Genomics, vol. 2016, Article ID 2405954, 14 pages, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2405954.

3.     Charles R. Cantor. (2000). Biotechnology in the 21st century. TIBTECH (January) 18.

4.     https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/nov/26/worlds-first-gene-edited-babies-created-in-china-claims-scientist

5.     https://actions.sumofus.org/a/monsanto-is-killing-the-monarchs

6.     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biocontainment_of_genetically_modified_organisms