During these decades, a tradition of merging the structural, biochemical and informational approaches to the central problems of classical genetics became more apparent. Two main underlying concepts of this tradition were that genes consisted of DNA and that DNA encoded information that determined the processes of replication and protein synthesis. Further research on the Watson-Crick model yielded theoretical advances that were reflected in new capacities to manipulate DNA. Experimental design[ edit ] This technology entails the joining of DNA from different species and the subsequent insertion of the hybrid DNA into a host cell. One of the first individuals to develop recombinant DNA technology was a biochemist at Stanford by the name of Paul Berg. He then cleaved the double helix of another virus; an antibacterial agent known as bacteriophage lambda.
|Published (Last):||5 July 2019|
|PDF File Size:||13.22 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.17 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
During these decades, a tradition of merging the structural, biochemical and informational approaches to the central problems of classical genetics became more apparent. Two main underlying concepts of this tradition were that genes consisted of DNA and that DNA encoded information that determined the processes of replication and protein synthesis.
Further research on the Watson-Crick model yielded theoretical advances that were reflected in new capacities to manipulate DNA. Experimental design[ edit ] This technology entails the joining of DNA from different species and the subsequent insertion of the hybrid DNA into a host cell.
One of the first individuals to develop recombinant DNA technology was a biochemist at Stanford by the name of Paul Berg. He then cleaved the double helix of another virus; an antibacterial agent known as bacteriophage lambda.
The final step involved placing the mutant genetic material into a laboratory strain of the E. This last step, however, was not completed in the original experiment. The SV40 was known to cause cancer tumors to develop in mice. Additionally, the E. For these reasons, the other investigators feared that the final step would create cloned SV40 DNA that might escape into the environment and infect laboratory workers.
These workers could then become cancer victims. In this letter, they requested that he appoint an ad hoc committee to study the bio-safety ramifications of this new technology. The main goal of the conference was to address the biohazards presented by recombinant DNA technology. During the conference, the principles guiding the recommendations for how to conduct experiments using this technology safely were established.
The first principle for dealing with potential risks was that containment should be made an essential consideration in the experimental design. A second principle was that the effectiveness of the containment should match the estimated risk as closely as possible. Such biological barriers included fastidious bacterial hosts that were unable to survive in natural environments. Other barriers were nontransmissible and equally fastidious vectors plasmids, bacteriophages, or other viruses that were able to grow in only specified hosts.
One such safety factor was physical containment, exemplified by the use of hoods or where applicable, limited access or negative pressure laboratories. Another factor was the strict adherence to good microbiological practices, which would limit the escape of organisms from the experimental situation.
Additionally, the education and training of all personnel involved in the experiments would be essential to effective containment measures. These recommendations were based on the different levels of risk associated with the experiment, which would require different levels of containment.
These levels were minimal, low, moderate and high risk. The minimal risk level of containment was intended for experiments in which the biohazards could be accurately assessed and were expected to be minimal. Low risk containment was appropriate for experiments that generated novel biotypes but where the available information indicated that the recombinant DNA could not either alter appreciably the ecological behavior of the recipient species, increase significantly its pathogenicity or prevent effective treatments of any resulting infections.
The moderate risk level of containment was intended for experiments in which there was a probability of generating an agent with a significant potential for pathogenicity or ecological disruption. High-risk containment was intended for experiments in which the potential for ecological disruption or pathogenicity of the modified organism could be severe and thereby pose a serious biohazard to laboratory personnel or to the public.
These levels of containments, along with the previously mentioned safety measures, formed the basis for the guidelines used by investigators in future experiments that involved the construction and propagation of recombinant DNA molecules using DNA from prokaryotes , bacteriophages and other plasmids , animal viruses and eukaryotes. If the experiment increased the pathogenicity of the recipient species or result in new metabolic pathways in species, then moderate or high-risk containment facilities were to be used.
In experiments where the range of resistance of established human pathogens to therapeutically useful antibiotics or disinfectants was extended, the experiments were to be undertaken only in moderate or high-risk containment facilities. As safer vector-host systems became available, such experiments could be performed in low risk facilities. In experiments designed to introduce or propagate DNA from non-viral or other low risk agents in animal cells, only low risk animal DNA could be used as vectors and the manipulations were to be confined to moderate risk containment facilities.
This was because they potentially contained cryptic viral genomes that were potentially pathogenic to humans. However, unless the organism made a dangerous product, recombinant DNAs from cold-blooded vertebrates and all other lower eukaryotes could be constructed and propagated with the safest vector-host system available in low risk containment facilities.
Additionally, purified DNA from any source that performed known functions and was judged to be non-toxic could be cloned with available vectors in low risk containment facilities. One such experiment was the cloning of recombinant DNAs derived from highly pathogenic organisms. In addition, neither the cloning of DNA containing toxin genes, nor large scale experiments using recombinant DNAs that were able to make products that were potentially harmful to humans, animals or plants were allowed under the guidelines.
These experiments were banned because the potential biohazards could not be contained by the then current safety precautions. The scandal resulted from a bungled break-in at the Watergate hotel, which served as the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Two years after the burglary, taped evidence was discovered that indicated that President Nixon had discussed a cover-up a week after it.
Three days following the release of the tape, Nixon resigned from his presidential office. Carmen that this motivated the scientists at the Asilomar Conference to bring science into the public eye to ensure that they would not be accused of a cover-up. Berg and Dr. Singer, by being forthright, scientists avoided restrictive legislation due to the development of a consensus on how they were to conduct their research.
Because of the practical applications of the technology, funding for research using it started coming more from the private sector and less from the public sector. In addition, many molecular biologists who once confined themselves to academia, developed ties with private industry as equity owners, corporate executives and consultants.
This report emphasized that the hazards of recombinant DNA to the general community were small to the point that they were of no practical consequence to the general public. According to Paul Berg and Maxine Singer in , the conference marked the beginning of an exceptional era for both science and the public discussion of science policy. The guidelines devised by the conference enabled scientists to conduct experiments with recombinant DNA technology, which by dominated biological research.
This research, in turn, increased knowledge about fundamental life processes, such as the cell cycle. Additionally, the conference along with public debates on recombinant DNA, increased public interest in biomedical research and molecular genetics.
For this reason, by , genetics and its vocabulary had become a part of the daily press and television news. This, in turn, stimulated knowledgeable public discussion about some of the social, political and environmental issues that emerged from genetic medicine and the use of genetically modified plants in agriculture. Another significant outcome of the conference was the precedent it set about how to respond to changes in scientific knowledge.
According to the conference, the proper response to new scientific knowledge was to develop guidelines that governed how to regulate it.
Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA
Dazil From until several non-profit corporations managed the conference grounds in cooperation with California State Parks. During the conference, the principles guiding the recommendations for how to cnoferencia experiments using this technology safely were established. Genetic engineering represents a safe approach for. Berg considered the relationship between phage and bacteria to be closely analogous to that between SV40 and eukaryotic cells, and he wondered if the virus might work more efficiently as a vector for a bacterial gene. A nearly complete format for the three-and-a-half-day conference was produced by the time the meeting asiloamr. A press conference was held the following day.
Conferencia De Asilomar En 1975 ensayos y trabajos de investigación