"
Dr. Hennie J. J. van Vuuren
From 2011.igem.org
Interview with Dr. Hennie J. J. van Vuuren
Professor and Eagles Chair in Food Biotechnology, Wine Research Centre Director, Associate Member, Michael Smith Laboratories (Dr. van Vuuren's Bio)
He has been involved long before Monsanto first released their plants. He gets severe headaches when drinking wine. From further investigation, these headaches arise from the bio-amines present in wine and this as well as certain carcinogens found in “natural” wine can be removed by engineering yeast to express endogenous genes differently or express foreign enzymes to degrade these harmful products.
Specifically for yeast, yes, if they have been well studied and if they don’t compete with other organisms in nature and don’t have negative affects on other organisms then it is fine. Yeast are not toxic to humans but it is important to consider what other impact it could have on the environment.
2. What standards would you recommend for their release?
It took 15 years of research before my synthetic yeast was commercialized. There needs to be extensive write-ups to be clear what was created and how it works.
It needs to be stated clearly what the problem is, what approach will be taken, and what tests will be performed to ensure quality control. In my case, the transcriptome, proteome and metabolomics of the synthetic yeast were thoroughly investigated.
It is essential to know how the synthetic organism will interact with the environment and its organisms. For example, yeast is able to live in anaerobic and acidic environments, making it possible for it to be passed along the food chain.
It is also important to know what specific requirements the synthetic organism has for survival. For instance, yeast usually cannot survive the cold winter and will need to be re-dispersed every spring.
3. What challenges are there in terms of attaining public acceptance?
there is always a huge challenge. Some people are against it in principle. Changing life. Can be solved by writing about it and clarifying. It is still controversial but it could be really beneficial to consumers and the environment and then people will accept it.
Has had interactions with anti GMO lobbyists but if you can be open and communicate with the public what you have done and why you have done it. Once they can see that they can benefit, that it is well studied and tested, there is sometimes a change in mindset and they become more welcoming of the synthetic product.
4. What future directions do you see for synthetic biology?
We have the technology. There is a huge future if the consumers can benefit from it. Consumers are easy to please. Especially if it is health wise.
There are so much benefit that consumers can have if it is well studied and controlled.
Emphasis on open communication. For instance, if GMO products should be labeled, then “natural” products that contain harmful substances should also be labeled.
5. Do you think we should be rewriting the code of life?
It isn’t about rewriting the code of life. It is natural for the yeast cells to mutate. Bringing in foreign DNA is in a sense rewriting the code of life. It is a philosophical question. It is a moral and ethical issue.
There needs to be a constant check up.
As Scientists, be open and provide clarification when needed.
