Ethical issues in enzyme biotechnology
Discuss about the Fraud Triangle And Ethical Leadership Perspectives On Detecting.
We all begin as a cluster of living cells and that is basically, where biotechnology begins as well. The simplest definition of biotechnology is the use of cells to make our lives better by helping to combat diseases, reduce our environmental impact, develop renewable fuel, and grow more food. Cells are building blocks of all living organism. The human body is made up of trillion of cells. Cells are responsible for providing the structure of the body, carry out specific functions, take in nutrients from food, and maintain the hereditary material in the body.
Biotechnology has a significant role in improving human life. Biotechnology comprises of tissue culture, gene therapy, bioinformatics, cloning technologies, biological weapons, new technologies in DNA, stem cell technology, traditional plant-based drug formulations commercialization, genetic engineering, and stem cell technologies, all this application in biotechnology brings about the improvement of human life (Ariail & Crumbley, 2016). However, there has been the absurd and extensive use of the natural resources leading to deterioration of the natural and social environment. Biological ethics involve the study of the physiological, social, ethical, and other relevant issues that arise from biological sciences, the healthcare and biotechnology (Dubey 2014).
The field of biotechnology has expanded and functions in the surroundings where current norms and experiences are inadequate in guiding the people’s moral reasoning, this has brought about various ethical issues (Lappé, 2013). Bioethics have the various importance which are; People are protected based on proportionality, caution, respect of the dignity of the people and no discrimination, bioethics ensures the protection of peoples’ privacy and maintains confidentiality; bioethics has promoted fidelity. Bioethics has allowed transparency through giving access to information; it allows real, comprehensive, honest, and clear communication of information (D’Angelo, 2012). Bioethics have enhanced caution towards various adverse effects that can arise as a result of biotechnology, this is through the detailed analysis of risks that threatens the health of the people as well as their future generation allowing people to avoid the risky practices (Daar 2009).
The BIOCOG (Biotechnology Consultative Group) in Australia was found in 1999 to provide advice to the Commonwealth Biotechnology Ministerial Council and Australia’s Biotechnology on the creation of the National Biotechnology Strategy (Galston & Shurr, 2012). The group was made of 22 associates from business and research sectors, including nutritionists and ethicists (Henon 2006). The Biotechnology Consultative Group supports the vision of the government in the development of the National Biotechnology Strategy. The issues arising that require maximum attention comprises of provision of balanced information about issues in biotechnology to the public, addressing the serious gap in the management and early funding stage as well as development of competitive clusters of biotechnology, and enabling active regulation of application and research in biotechnology (Daar & Singer, 2009). The created National Biotechnology Strategy focuses on six significant features that arise from assessments and consultations: guaranteeing effective regulation, resources for Biotech, the Australian Biotech in the Global Market, Maintaining Coordination, and Momentum, Biotech in the community and Biotech in the Economy (Roos 2004).
The use of modern biotechnology in food production
The initial role of biotech in the production of food has expanded greatly through the application of genetic engineering. During food processing enzymes are derived from microorganisms to enhance various catalytic activities (Hasan 2006). However, the enzymes with the same essential catalytic activities may vary in functional properties, protein structure, and DNA sequence. For instance, the alpha-amylases from microorganisms that are different may vary in optimal conditions of practice, such as pH and temperature as well as substrate affinity (Hug 2008).
The enzymes that are significantly similar to safely consumable enzymes are known not to cause any safety concerns. For instance, in food crops, the coding gene for an enzyme that catalyzes resistance to herbicides can be removed from a bacterium or plant then exposed to site-directed mutagenesis to improve its resistance to the herbicides (Ariail & Crumbley, 2016). It is then placed back into the desired host plant to add to the plant enzyme’s biochemical activity that is very sensitive to the herbicides (Goodyear-Smith 2005). However, some of the enzymes cause the production of substances that are toxic (for instance, the enzymes that catalyze the conversion of cyanogenic glucosides to cyanide) and this has raised several safety questions (Van Tassel 2009).
The industrial biotech in EU processing industries involves, production of detergents, for instance, enzymes in automatic dishwashers and in laundry, paper and pulp production, for instance, pulp bleaching that is supported by enzymes, and textile finishing, for example, the de-sizing of cotton using enzymes (Liu 2017). This has been of a positive impact since it has lead into an increase in labor productivity by 10% to about 20%. however, there are matters of safety arising as it is feared that some industries overuse the enzymes for more production and this affects the people around as well as results to pollution of the environment. This has led to safety concerns, which have stimulated the creation of bio policies, whose main Agendas is to ensure sustainable use of biological materials (Lobedanz et al 2016).
The leading enzyme producer is the EU by 75%, the enzymes are the prerequisite of most biotechnological processes (Pollak 2011). However, in most of the biotechnological application in industries, the Asian countries such as China and the USA are overtaking the EU; this is raising ethical issues on the matter of ensuring equality with no discrimination (D’Angelo, 2012). Modern biotech boosts the effectiveness of the EU companies, especially in renewing their efficiency in breeding livestock or in enzyme production, as well as in the traditional market (Lobedanz et al., 2016). However, on the current market that is expanding the EU is usually not at the front of development for instance, in the cases of bioethanol, GM crops, and biopharmaceuticals; this raises bioethical concerns as the principle of non-discrimination is violated (Papatryfon et al 2008).
Modern biotechnology in industrial production, energy, and the environment
The first criminal prosecution in Australia for research misconduct (Research Fraud by Professor Bruce Murdoch and Doctor Caroline Barwood)
The UQ (University of Queensland) was informed the research fraud that was conducted by the (then) professor Bruce Murdoch. A survey started in 2013 basing on this matter, which later concluded that both Doctor Caroline Barwood and Professor Bruce Murdoch were answerable for committing an academic fraud (Kaiser 2014). As a result of this, both the Professor and the Doctor resigned from the UQ and the title of Murdoch as Professor was withdrawn by the university. The initial misconduct was propagated by Doctor Murdoch in form of an article that is published discussing the results of the research he claimed to have conducted together with Doctor Barwood (Galston & Shurr, 2012). The research that was reported had never been conducted and the published article had been fabricated. In addition, as a co-author of the published report, Dr. Barwood never reported the misconduct; instead, they used the fictitious report to gain funding from various sources (National Academies of Science 2018) (Lobedanz et al., 2016). Due to the initial inquiries conducted, the UQ took actions, which involved refunding the research money awarded based on the fabricated research and guaranteeing refutation and correction of the published fabricated research articles (D’Angelo 2012).
The case study presented indicates the breaching of the Code of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (commitment of a research fraud). Some of the breaches that were conducted by the Professor and the Doctor are: Result fabrication, Professor Murdoch, and Doctor Barwood published an article of a report containing results that had been fabricated; it is shown that the two never conducted a research to come up with reliable findings of their own (Ariail 2016). Plagiarism is another breach of the code, the Professor and the Doctor never carried out a research project to come up with there on research results instead they copied the results from various sources to make their report look valid. Misleading acknowledgment of authorship Dr. Barwood on realizing she had been accredited as the co-author of the fabricated research article she failed to report the fraud conducted instead they went on to use the report to gain funding. Misrepresentation and falsification, Professor Murdoch who initially started the research fraud together with his co-author Dr. Barwood used the fabricated report to look for funding from various sources. Professor Murdoch and Dr. Barwood conducted a fabricated research without the ethical agreement, as it is needed the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research this was a breach of the Code (Pollard 2006).
Industrial biotechnology in the commercialization of products
Conclusion
Bioethics involves the study of the physiological, social, ethical, and other relevant issues that arise from biological sciences, the healthcare, and biotechnology. The field of enzymatic biotechnology is greatly advancing and apart from the positive impacts, it has negative impacts on the people and the environment. The ethical issues of enzymatic biotechnology are of great significance as they enhance fidelity, transparency, and caution towards the use of enzyme biotech that might result in various adverse effects (Galston 2012).
Ariail, D.L. and Crumbley, D.L., 2016. Fraud Triangle and Ethical Leadership Perspectives on Detecting and Preventing Academic Research Misconduct. Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, 8(3).
Daar, A.S. and Singer, P.A., 2009. Bioethics and biotechnology. Global Perspectives in Health-Volume II, 3, p.170.
D’Angelo, J., 2012. Ethics in science: ethical misconduct in scientific research. CRC Press.
Dubey, R. C. Advanced biotechnology. S. Chand Publishing, 2014.
Galston, A.W. and Shurr, E.G. eds., 2012. New Dimensions in Bioethics: Science, Ethics and the Formulation of Public Policy. Springer Science & Business Media.
Goodyear-Smith, F., 2005. Safety concerns of genetically modified foods. Reviews in Food Nutrition Toxicity, 3, pp.197-219.
Hasan, F., Shah, A.A. and Hameed, A., 2006. Industrial applications of microbial lipases. Enzyme and Microbial technology, 39(2), pp.235-251.
Henon, C., 2006. Chapitre 8. Australian aboriginal knowledge, protection of natural resources, rights, biosafety. Journal International de Bioéthique, 17(4), pp.131-160.
Hug, K., 2008. Genetically modified organisms: do the benefits outweigh the risks?. Medicina, 44(2), pp.87-99.
Kaiser, M., 2014. The integrity of science–Lost in translation?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology, 28(2), pp.339-347.
Lappé, M. and Bailey, B. eds., 2013. Engineering the farm: the social and ethical aspects of agricultural biotechnology. Island Press.
Liu, X. and Kokare, C., 2017. Microbial Enzymes of Use in Industry. In Biotechnology of Microbial Enzymes (pp. 267-298).
Lobedanz, S., Damhus, T., Borchert, T.V., Hansen, T.T., Lund, H., Lai, W., Lin, M., Leclerc, M. and Kirk, O., 2016. Enzymes in Industrial Biotechnology. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018. Fostering integrity in research. National Academies Press.
Papatryfon, I., Zika, E., Wolf, O., Gómez-Barbero, M., Stein, A.J. and Bock, A.K., 2008. Consequences, opportunities and challenges of modern biotechnology for Europe. Joint Research Centre–Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
Pollard, B.J., 2006. Research audit and publication. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology, 20(4), pp.653-668.
Pollak, P., 2011. Fine chemicals: the industry and the business. John Wiley & Sons.
Roos, G. and Gupta, O., 2004. NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEMS: Experiences from Finland, Sweden and Australia Compared.
Van Tassel, K.A., 2009. Genetically modified plants used for food, risk assessment and uncertainty principles: Does the transition from ignorance to indeterminacy trigger the need for post-market surveillance. BUJ Sci. & Tech. L., 15, p.220.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
