Huaming (Henry) Yang – Аcademician of chinese academy of sciences, chairman of the Вeijing genomics institute, Сhina
Bioethics and Genomics
I would like to express my gratitude for organizers for giving me the opportunity to see all friends. We know each other for many years and this forum will give us the opportunity to get new friends. We are in the same family, we facing the same problems. We work on the same problems and I work in one special area concerning each of us – genomics. Several years ago we published the first draft version of human genomic consequences. This was very important event in natural sciences for ourselves, and for our lives as well. Some people told that it is impossible to make the genomic consequences of mankind and you know we wait for 3 centuries to get it. But you know, we did it, we did it together, it was really difficult job. And it has taken for 13 years and we used samples of 3.000 peoples and the costs were 3 billion USA dollars to sequence single man genome.
Now the situation is quite different. Even in my center we able to sequence the genomes of about 100 peoples a day. Sequence technology has three stages. The first is for HGP is the optimetric human sequence trial. With that we could sequence the 2% of human genome. The second is the parasequences. This is the real breakthrough. Then we come to the third stage where we could sequence the quarter of human population. This paper once published had a great impact for all biologists. After this paper the number of researching for genome has got significantly. And for developing countries this impact is more important. You could imagine that the knowing of genome sequences could make us possible to use genomes of rice. And this paper is for most popular database for genomics.
It was scientifically been proved that diversity of genome is much higher, that we were thinking before. That data showed us that genomic technology is much powerful that it was before. And with help of new software we could understand better the genomic diversity. And in our works we found that human genome consists of two parts, one is common for everybody. The second as published has individual specifics. That part of genome has 0.4-6% of whole genome. And I know that your genome is different of our one for different susceptibility for diseases and for different respond for medicines. This is the part of whole work published in first international 1000 genome project. It was the first international effort as the international consortium. I could tell that even 1000 genome projects and international consortium are still not internationally representative. I can also call for participation in this project by Russia, Ukraine and your country. We also published the paper for coding and coding the sequences, we called them exoms, and we thing that they both would scientifically and economically be cost-effective. I give you an example. It is like a difference between two Chinese people one from Shankhay and another from other city. It is like a difference between two examples of hair in same person. More important that we worked on bacteria of our gut and we found 150 000 species of bacteria and we found more than 3 million genes that would form the big part of our genome as a whole. And finally their differences would make some effect of our health. And recently we published the works on genome in Germany and in the paper we told about the 10000 genome projects. This slide showed the paper on microbiological projects. We were collecting the bacteria examples from whole continent. We conducted of thousands analysis with our colleagues in UK. And with exoms we could make the thousands of genome projects thus we could identify the genes contribute for diseases and relevant genes as well. We are going to work of thousands genome projects in UK, Denmark, this means that we could scope the many diseases. In China we are going to sequence one million of genome – that is for humans.
We also work on animals’ genomes and sequencing. The examples are as Arabic Camel, penguins, bears and etc. it is really great job, some of the projects already been done, some of them are still going on. In France we just published the data on cucumber genomes, very important vegetable for us, even more important than for any other nation. And we understood much more of it and why it is so delicious. And this data shown on the slide demonstrates the real big deal of genome and would like to congratulate the Russian colleagues for that substantial work on genomes. We need genes and sequences because they are the important part of our life. The technology is really important here, because as we understand the genomic we could use in our technologies, for example stem cells. As in the beginning it was only Dolly, right now we are able to cloning the millions of Dollies. We now could combine the animal cloning and growing of tissues that a question for nearest future. And now we have IPS – that cells could carry all information that we cannot imagine. The technology could make soon the organs with stem-cells help. That is the era of biotechnology. So it means that we could have genes, we could have stem cells, we could have organs, we could have individuals. It is declaration of mankind to carry the genetic information and perform the program. And I promised on last Ecoconsortium to have in next 3-5 years the genome with certain size. It means that we could be able to design the genome the real cell would say that genome is foundation is the basis for other biotechnological achievements.
We learn how to work with each other, learn each other. And we raise our responsibility. Here is the example. We hardly work in Germany. We do analysis for every day and then published the results. We do all under human genome project spirit. And I would say that genomics cannot be alone, it can be only with collaboration. And we are all here for call for international collaboration again. And I would like to share with the collaboration.
Thank you very much for attention!
Mark Van Montagu – Рresident of the European Federation of Biotechnology (EFB) and of the Public Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI), Belgium
Importance of GM crops for food security, industrial purposes and environment
I want to talk on gen engineering. I want to stress on the thing that plants are not only food; the foods are also the food industry. I would like to tell about the perspectives and what is going on in that industry. I want about the report came out from UK from chief scientist on foods and farming, which stresses that enormous efforts should to be done all over the world to help progressing agriculture as a basic science that we need to formatting the noble plants. So the agriculture biotechnology need to strengthen the protection of food and feed, but also developing further of sustainable way of registry. All the poverty needs to improve by better industrialization. And the industry needs to lessen the polluting and if we look to the damages done already we should think on remedies. And physical and chemical methods need to get slower biological methods need to take to protect remediation and protect the foods. The whole story started in Belgium where there been found that there are bacteria and plant cells that they can use as nitrogen. Then we found out how to sequence this cells and it was the beginning in 80-es of plant engineering. At that time we understood the molecular biology of plants. But at that time we still had bacterial genes, not plant genes to make cotton that uses insecticides, so if the billion or hundreds millions people food and secure, and this is a drama, because population is increasing and then consumption is increasing, because people need more plants, we want the better income, the more industry we need, because we need more food, our use of protection is using a lot of water. We need to adapt the geography, sometimes we have the stable climate. So there are the challenges we facing. So we need to see the whole situation and what is going on with increasing population. We are now seven billions. No one stresses it everybody tells that – yes, we are growing. There are publications – economy need more people, that is why we started earlier, because when we will be ten billions, the task would be different, we would need more at that time.
Plants are essential for life, they are not only for esthetics, on all stages of life we need plants, so we should to preserve plants, we have to preserve forests, we have to see how we get handle with that. And we see it that we need an industry for agriculture, as we need it for oil pumping and at the same time destroy the forest in many countries, as it happened in Malaysia, as it happened in Indonesia, where all the forests been destroyed. So we need the better agriculture technics, we need the agriculture as the basic science just right there. We have to talk to pharmaceuticals and others how to work and not to damage the plants, how to destroy the bacteria and etc. we have to learn in all the schools for agriculture the innovative biotechnologies and to bring them with agriculture as science and use the good technologies. Because that is all to make the plants but we need to do it together. We have now the systems biology and we learn the beautiful trees from all biochemical parts there. We have to have the fundamental science goes to agriculture applications, we have to design the new productivity. We have to do the best front-line research and at the same time we have to have the institutions to apply it to life for benefits of people. And we have to form the public, because the public wants to participate, they do not want to seat and look what authorities do. They want to know what the science is, and what scientist learned, how they work, what the science is and how we are doing. They want to know the new sciences – metageniomics, Yang told us about genomics. The connection of micro and microorganisms, it is explosion of information. It is interesting how the genes are expressed and so on, all this information needs to be transformed to use by society. And finally we should to protect the environment and get the sustainable industry. And all this are crucial, the information is important, but then we need to transform it to people. It is not the question to universities or institutions; it is question to politicians to solve the issues. The private sector involved in protection needs investments to provide good protection. And all this needs to be brought the market, because protection needs to be strong, it is not only the question of disinformation from politicians or somebody else. All you know the story of GMOs how the scientists were delaying for this 20-30 years ago. So that is the question to urgent measures, so information needs to reach society. That is the kind of discussions we have to do. That is why we need to find the best approach by which scientists could make the best products and the best products can reach the society. So the biotechnology in agriculture needs to be fast growing to make the products could integrate ecological systems and etc. We have to do molecular farming, protect the environment. We need sustainable agriculture. World is waiting for that. For food we see that all the prices rise. It is impossible to force on speculations of food prices much, but we need to provide the right supply. And here we need to have sustainable agriculture, we should not have too much chemicals in our environment, the animal wastes have to be digested in nature. We need to avoid overfishing. We are to agree that majority of world population live in the city. So we need a good developing of agriculture and good supply for urban system. We have now 0.25 ha for person of our plants, we are going to have 0.15 at that time we do not have technology which would work best on that. We always get postponed. We have to have actions. We need to know that we have diseases. For potatoes in Europe that are blind resistant, fungal resistant, this proses took 35 years and it was for two genes, now we have 70 genes from molecular biology. We have prepared these fields and pressure groups have destroyed them and stolen the down the GMO. It is all absurd. You see it here. They completely destroyed these lines early in this year in the middle of May, and these fields were attacked and were not completely destroyed. Police protected it, politics support, but society has to support it also. Like all told that we want biofood and GMO is not bio-. We need to explain them that GMO is not bad. And this book presented by chief scientist from California explains what is GMO, biofoods and etc. and finally tells that GMO is the totally biological technology. Because industry is there, industry wants plants. Industry needs new products made by biotechnology. This is also point for discussion. And now we already started to use the products to use the plants. And we will use the products without like biomass, not to burn them or destroy. And for fuel production we already started to use wastes. That is what going on now and we have to make the progress. And now in Europe in Nederland, Denmark, others started to use biogenetic plants by fermentative processes instead of normal plants. It was published just last year, that if we install fermentative fabrics all over the Europe we could supply for 65% of gasoline. It means new millions jobs and at least one billion euro economical gain, rather than current using of 40 billion of euro for gasoline. They were asking for European Commission for installing these productions, but the Commission is still thinking – no, we need to look how it is cost-effective and so on. You know, all that system has been already installed in USA, China, India and etc. and the world future is biotechnology, we already have biodiversity settled down and we can make it work for biotechnology.
And another point for discussion today is that people most of the times are confused by information and even sometimes they get disinformation. And again about the arguments against GM plants, all of them are false. We need to discuss it. There is lot of writings on Frankenstein foods, but there are no data on adverse effects of it. For the environment there is a long list of beneficial effects. There are many writings on that it is dangerous, but scientifically it was not proved to be dangerous. It is like to dream about monster of Lokhness, but never really could see it. They tell that there are many products that have been used for many years and then they were announced as dangerous – yes, you are right, but this is applicable for products, but GM is a technology. This technology is safe unlikely to cell phones where there are no proved signs of safety. And as we know from the nature, all genes are changing, because that is the evolution. When we are sequencing the genes we could see that how some of chromosomes could replace with other chromosomes or amplifying, and finally the plants are changing and surviving the stress. And that happens in nature all the times. We have to explain. That we do rapidly what happens in nature by evolution slowly for many years. Now we are seven billion and we need to feed everybody and not let anyone to starve. And we are to explain, that such a organizations line Green Peace are not helping to the people, in spite of telling that we saving the planet. In Austria they reached the government level even prime-minister, who already hate the GM and the government itself is also rejecting GM. Green Peace is active now in China. Its politics, we see demonstrations in several cities, sometimes just married told that we do not have babies because, its caused by GM. It is completely irresponsible to say that manner. It is responsibility for us to explain, the bananas are dying because of the disease, because they are not kept properly. All this happens because of not good safety technics food preparation in some even developed countries. We spend now many millions euros for legislation documentations, but actually developing the market for GM pro would take only 2-2.5 millions. Eventually no small enterprise could bring the GM pro to the market. So at the end I want to tell that XXI century would be the century of GM technology, because this is technology for future, we could discuss it with and with others how to apply it to our life and that means that GM technology is good technics and need to get the relevant respect.
Steven Burrill – Сhairman of the Board of Directors of the «Farmaset» company, Professor of the California University, US
Biotech 2011. Looking back to see ahead
As other speakers are indicated, we are living on the world of massive change and if I ask you to tell me the most urgent five problems for the world today probably on the top of the list would be the climate changes, that may sustain the planet, second would be the clean water, third would be energy security and energy sufficiency, four would be food security, as professor Montagu told us, and finally health care. If we look at this whole problem for the world, so the solutions for these issues would be biotechnology. So we have the technology at the moment of time. Thousands years back to the history, accumulative the history of world, we understood the nature, how we human beings are live, how animals are living and composed, and also other sophisticated things happened of course. And all that things are important for us as and to the world. Well, I have to start with the quiz for all of you. When Crick and Larson discovered the structure of DNA – 1953, after 50 years we detected the chemical structure of DNA. Later on like twenty years after we started to make a business of biotechnology we were creating a couple of companies in the late sixties and early seventies in centers of academic excellence. We were doing all relevant things and processes for that. And for 50 years we do biotechnology business. So historically for fifty years from Larson and Crick we started the business and in late 90-s we already received the first products of biotechnology. Interestingly I brought the book that is like a bible for biotechnology, published every year last version 25 and every year this book makes a history review you can use it on a website to get all information. There are also the publications on daily and weekly basis, you can find all of them on website. But I think it is important for a moment to have a look back from the sciences that we are living and look to the world around us. First and it was also indicated by previous lector – is the fast growing of population. Russia as a country has 140 million people and we look to the China the one city is creating with population of one million every two weeks. The consequences of population growing are absolutely standing over all of us. So have to look to the world form the context of biotechnology. This is the world of rapid population growing and rapid aging. If we look at the map in China we over 300 million people over 65 years old. That is one USA of old people and old people are enormous consumers of public resources.
Secondly we have rapid advancing of the technologies. In order to remind you how rapidly technology is changing and conflict of technology would drive all processes in this world. As other speakers indicated before we are living in the world with tremendous amount of information. Like PGI, and other consequences, but the digital consequences also made their own impact on our world. As the result of complexity of our life today we have disasters, oil spoils, requiring clean-up procedures, we have emergencies of new diseases, we do not know how to deal with them, AIDS and etc. others are indicated that we have a problems with food security and energy security. I am going to talk a minute about health care dilemma, a few things of what could make death optional we could plug on many products of biotechnology, that is not economically feasible. Whether we like it or not we would rationale health care and world around would keep on rationale on health care. We also have a big industry, big oil and gas industry, pharmaceutical industry, and we are on deep dependent on industry on one hand and signs of community on another. But what important to recognize after fuel enables biotechnology little forward is the capital. We cannot do anything about technology without capital, because we are going to do benefits today or to have it certain years from now on based on the capital that we saved today, whether it is private or governmental capital or public capital, all products we do with biotechnology based on the capital government or society saved for us and supports to understand that relationship. So, let me summarize my introduction like it is the hope, dreams and passions, many of us keep decades and decades, makes all this happens and that passions not going away. We do have an enormous opportunity in front of us.
There is also one important thing – contacts, everything flat like on a map with countries, bordering with lines naming the countries with armies and governments. But diseases do not work that way. Agriculture does not work that way. So we need to understand, that we live in borderless part of space. Secondly we live in world today with rapidly growing societies of middle classes – societies started from relatives – small societies and go to larger population societies, where we are consumers – the first people have – health care. They believe to benefit from health care is the right not a privilege. So it needs to be in the world health care for all consumers. Thirdly it needs to be recognized, dilemma for economic in USA in the last hundred years – it is non-dominant economic going forward. Brazil, Canada, China would be the driving for the next 100 years. And the new economic in countries like Indonesia, Egypt, Turkey, who are also very powerful economies. We need to recognize economic engine of the world, USA are not economic engine for the world no more. And finally a would mention, I travel all over the world every day and see like here and east, west, north and south from here, that all governments today try to rebuild their economies with biotechnology. And we have extraordinary opportunity today with societies in one hand and governmental support on the other to make changes what we do
People are living longer just one hundred years ago. In 1900 the average age for death was 35, just hundred years later the average age for death is 65. We have got enormous growth of technology and we have done all of this with the things that could kill prematurely. And that is the good news, because the things that are killing us, do not kill us anymore. And the bas thing is that 8% of our care is for chronic care. That means that all of our money helps us to keep alive, it is efficient way to resource use. Not only keeping treated people chronically and keeps people alive, because of that we enormous rate of growth. My parents died number years ago, they were in middle age -80th were the youngest peoples for that age. Scientifically, we know a lot of nature for aging. One of the famous scientists for aging worked on small warms with the same genome that we all have. These warms live for 14 days. He achieved to prolong their life for 144 days – 10 times longer. The reason is in small switch in gene, causing ageing. Just imagine what this warm with homologous genome to us could make for us. And we understand that we have the same switches in our chromosomes, that affecting longer life of people. So, health care is changing from a world dealing with acute care to the world dealing with mostly chronic care. From the world where patients had many diseases and die to the software system, where we could control the quality of aging. From the world with the hospitals as the main institution for health for the world of digital health.
Let me show something interesting. This is my i-phone. Look, there are seven billion people in the world who have cell phone. Look to the applications of i-phone. This is my ECG alive. The transformation of the technology to the health care. We could transform this into the microscope, we can transform this into any instrument you like in it. So we changed the world of drugs into the world of technologies. And we also transformed from the world of costs to the world of value of technics, i.e. what the value this technic could provide to the patient. The costs of health care are around 20% of GDP, so it is twice more than any health care system of any country, but the general costs of health care in the world are going up very-very dramatically. You know there are a big difference between health care costs, like in USA, where it is problem, because the cost is big, but this is an opportunity to countries like a Russia to spend a little to health care per capita. You understand that we lived in the world with care for disease happened, and now we are moving to the world with predictability and prognosis, it is like what you are going to have in your life and what the measures you need to do to prevent them. Biotechnology would change that world to the world of prediction and preemption.
We could define outcomes and benefits. Changes in delivery of service around the world access the care and also the cost of the care. Talking about the humanitarian level of societies around the world we would have to choose how we ration the health care, because we can spend the limited sources in individuals’ life. So the societies in the world need to choose from the economical sustainability from one level and rational using of resources from another. Now, how it was indicated, for decades spend for designing the human genomics. And what has been indicated particularly in the speeches of my colleagues. EGA in our world when we emerging the life, when we detecting what the proteins we need for our life, now we are living in the software technics detecting how all the parts work together. We live in a world where we are generating the extraordinary amount of information. We need to define the world around us based on the costs per sequences. As we use a 100 US dollars per sequence for all the people in this room to get the genomes and then we could spend the little money for sequencing of people’s genomes, the interesting thing in the cost producing in the bit of information is transforming from the computers of the size of this building to the small devices with plenty information capacity this took the twenty years. That is top of information and we did the transformation from the big computers to the small devices with decreasing of the cost of information per bit because of biotechnology. So we live in a world where information is the fastest growing resource of the world. And I could make an example how information is changed through the time, like 150 years ago we only knew the term of white blood cell disease, then the 100 years ago we defined the leukemia and lymphoma, right now we have already the hundreds of diseases detected by molecular biology. We now live in the world when we stepped over the time of detecting the diseases clinically to the time when we define the disease by molecular analysis and thus could even contribute for pre-emergency with its help. So let me remind you that we live in the world of biotechnology not alone with molecular biology, where already the biological systems are managing and mainly the synthetic biology started to contribute to our life. Also we live in the world of increasing using of electronic information carriers with telemetry possibility. So we lived in the world of treating the sick, when we interfered episodically during the disease cases and now we already live in the world of contributions for lifelong strategies, i.e. we are predictable now to what is going to happen.
So the world of cell phones would change our life not only for using information but also would change the managing issues of health care as the example I could wear the T-shirt with plenty of plugged devices and pallets and could be everywhere in the world and be connected to the health care system. Totally the health care is predefined by the world of technology. As the doctor Mоntаgu indicated that now is the world of agriculture and biofuel industry and industry creating the new type of industry. And we understand from the biology lab, works with cells that everything would be different 10 years from now. And thus the decision we make on biotechnology would be sustained and make the effect for our life in future.
Thank you very much!
Ренат Акчурин – Академик Российской Академии медицинских наук, доктор медицинских наук, профессор
Биотехнология и этические проблемы старения. Старость, отношения общества к проблеме «здорового» старения, готовность общества к удорожанию методов сохранения качества оставшейся жизни
Господин Амирасланов, господин председатель, господа присутствующие!
Судя по предыдущим докладам, я думаю, что скоро все наши данные будут в одном микрочипе и, не будет необходимости в сложных процедурах и обработки информации.
С ростом биотехнологий наше поколение неуклонно стареет, как это подчеркнули все докладчики. И мы с вами имеем дело с пациентами, которым далеко за 70 лет. В этом плане биотехнология, создание биологических материалов внедрились также и в хирургию.
При этом возникает целый ряд этических проблем, которые возникают когда нам необходимо улучшить качество жизни стареющего человека. Отсюда возникают такие термины, как «destination therapy» – т.е. терапия последних лет, терапия, благодаря которой вы сохраняете активность человека хотя бы в рамках семьи. А что может быть лучше того, что вы видите, как ваши старики передают вашим детям все то, что они накопили в течение всей своей жизни. Этому есть прекрасные примеры в Азербайджане, да и, наверно, и во всем мире.
Теперь несколько слов о сердечно-сосудистой хирургии, я думаю, они не испортят вам настроение перед перерывом на кофе. Сегодня в отделении кардиохирургии Кардиоцентра мы имеем дело с пациентами старше 70-80 лет. Здесь выполняются целый перечень операций и, конечно, эти операции наносят определенную травму на пациента. Мы всегда пытаемся найти пути минимизации этих манипуляций различными методами. Обратите внимание, как часто встречаются клапанные поражения в различных популяциях. При этом, хочу отметить, что пациент выглядит абсолютно здоровым и, вдруг, в 70 лет, начинает заболевать дегенеративными заболеваниями аортального клапана. Быстро нарастает стеноз аортального клапана, нарастает инвалидность. И вы сталкиваетесь с дилеммой – или оперировать с высоким риском, или оставить все как есть, тогда бы будете свидетелем гибели родного человека в преклонном возрасте. Другая важная проблема – аневризмы аорты, когда мы с вами, боясь развития и прогресса атеросклероза, считая тромбоз главной проблемой назначаем больному гепарин, дезагреганты. И вдруг, на фоне приема дезагрегантов, разрывается какая-то бляшка и возникает сильное и опасное кровотечение. Тоже серьезная ситуация – тоже надо что-то делать. Операции очень высокого риска, сопровождаются большими разрезами от лопатки до лобка, и помимо риска, наносят пациенту серьезную травму.
В последние годы благодаря биотехнологическому развитию, изучаются различные биотехнологические материалы для имплантации клапанов. Развивается так называемая гибридная хирургия, но пока эти технологии ограничиваются применением при тяжелых критических стенозах аортальных клапанов, сложных расслоениях.
В 2008-м году было имплантировано 2000 клапанов по поводу стеноза аортального клапана, а в этом году уже планируется имплантировать 17 000 клапанов через маленький разрез в области бедра, через который и вводится аортальный клапан, скрученный в маленький объём. Далее хирург-оператор проходит по сосудистому руслу, достигает аортального клапана без всяких стернотомий и искусственного кровообращения. Это проходит без всех сопутствующих осложнений, связанных с большой травмой. Затем на месте аортального клапана раздувается баллон, он разрывает створки старого аортального клапана и, тут же, на это место встает новый аортальный клапан. Операция занимает примерно 1.5 часа. На следующий день эта пожилой человек уже сами заправляют свою постель. Это очень хороший и показательный пример успехов современной гибридной хирургии.
Таким образом, гибридная хирургия, это совокупность всех методов, которые позволяют минимизировать последствия хирургической операции. Сегодня гибридная операционная выглядит довольно сложно, потому в ней собираются одновременно достаточно много специалистов. Время одного хирурга прошло. Сейчас хирург работает в кампании с несколькими специалистами, это перфузиолог, анестезиолог, кардиолог, которые тут же, на месте, решают определенные проблемы. Работа также ведется с инвазивным специалистом, рентгенологом, если есть травма, приглашается компьютерный специалист, который помогает провести компьютерную диагностику, если необходимо, то этот процесс проходит непосредственно в операционной. Простой искусственный аортальный клапан, без всяких проблем расправляется и становится нормальным по размеру аортальным клапаном, диаметром от 19 мм до 29 мм, т.е. закрывает весь просвет корня аорты.
Есть целый набор клапанов по размеру. А сворачивается он в 8 миллиметровую трубочку. Биологической частью клапана является перикард коня, лошади, так как этот материал наиболее устойчив к разгибаниям и сгибаниям и, достаточно устойчив в условиях гемодинамики.
Можно ли таких больных оперировать обычным путем? Конечно это очень рискованно, а порой и невозможно. Долгие годы избыточный вес, сахарный диабет, масса сопутствующих заболеваний, которые утяжеляют риск операции, эти риски непреодолимы, несмотря на все достижения современной медицины и биологии. Но, благодаря малой инвазивной хирургии, таких больных удается спасти, они на следующий день сами приходят на перевязку. При хирургическом лечении аневризм вся медицинская общественность знает осложнения – это малые и большие кровотечения, параплегии и парезы, ишемии, длительность нахождения в реанимации, иногда до месяца.
Мой учитель, DeBacey, провел в реанимации 4 месяца после разрыва аневризмы. Т.е. длительность госпитализации сопровождается гигантскими затратами, несопоставимыми ни с какими биотехнологическими достижениями. Но, тем не менее, уже сегодня есть методы, которые позволяют минимизировать затраты – это стенты, всем хорошо известные как гордокс. Так вот эти стенты позволяют выключить образовавшуюся аневризму.
Как известно, при лечении аневризм традиционным способом проводится огромный разрез, происходит остановка кровообращения, большая потеря крови и т.д. Уже накоплен опыт по 80 больным. Но что нас ожидает в будущем по биотехнологиям, неизвестно и вряд ли мы увидим клонирование аортального клапана. Конечно, говоря об этом, надо отметить, что любое клонирование должно рассматриваться в контексте целостного организма. Для нас идея, например, клонирования почки раздельно от организма, выглядит слишком фантастично. Потому, как практический врач, на собственном опыте знаю, что нельзя найти двух одинаковых пациентов, и каждый пациент отличается от другого ровно настолько, насколько отличается Северный Полюс от Южного. Т.е., мы испытываем такой подход, что болезнь очень стара, с ней ничего не происходит нового, меняемся мы с новыми технологиями и новыми доступами.
Спасибо за внимание!
Рихард Виллемс – Президент Академии Наук Эстонии
История генетической и медицинской этики
Дорогие друзья! Очень приятно выступать в Азербайджанском медицинском университете.
О проблемах биоэтики уже говорили предшествующие ученые, и говорили очень убедительно. Поэтому мне хотелось бы поговорить об истории модной, генетической и медицинской этики, вспомнить некоторые ключевые исторические даты. Переключиться на некоторые моменты, которые тесно связаны с биоэтикой. Я хотел бы сказать о том, что известный ученый Джон Пол стал в последнее время ярым сторонником генетически модифицированных организмов в сельском хозяйстве. Он понял, что это правильно, что надо обеспечить один миллиард голодающих или два миллиарда полу-голодающих людей.
Мы в медицинском мире постоянно видим дилемму и постоянно становимся свидетелями того, что постоянные расчеты, калькуляции не совпадают с тем, что мы планируем. Хочу подробнее остановиться на сфере, в которой работаю, это популяционная генетика. Эта область стала в последние пять лет особенно интересной, потому людям было всегда интересно, откуда они, как они сюда попали, кто их родственники и т.д. Совсем недавно, 6 октября, вышла статья в «Nature». Был составлен график – у людей спрашивали, почему вы дали свою ДНК для изучения. Отнюдь не на первом месте ответ о том, что я хотел бы знать о своем здоровье. На первом месте было любопытство. Как видите, человечество не было бы человечеством, если бы не было любопытства. Мы много говорим о том, что идет постоянное развитие экономики все выше и выше.
В развитых странах уровень потребления все время растет. Уже об этом были прекрасные выступления здесь. Говорилось о том, что нас семь миллиардов, будет девять миллиардов. Надо менять что-то уже сейчас, потому что, имеющиеся технологии сейчас позволяют стабильно поддерживать всего 2-3 миллиарда населения. Хорошо известно, что восстановление зеленых массивов идет медленнее, чем их потребление. С генномодифицированными организмами есть проблемы скорее всего в сфере образованности и необразованности. Посмотрите, что случилось с аграрной политикой в европейской политике и, между прочим, и в США. Сейчас 41% от европейского бюджета идет на поддержку европейского сельского хозяйства. Сейчас пытаются решить проблемы с сельским хозяйством во Франции, Италии, Греции и т.д. Если смотреть на проблему в человеческом плане, т.е. в отношении человеческой геномики, там есть очень много связанного с этическими аспектами. Хотел бы закончить тем, что, в вопросах биоэтики есть столько сложного, и надо попробовать сделать многое, играя, в хорошем смысле, на то, чтобы любопытство было и продолжало двигать и управлять прогрессом и эволюцией Homo Sapiens.
Константин Скрябин – Директор центра «Биоинженерия» Российской Академии наук, академикРоссийской Академии наук
Биоэтика – один из приоритетов современной биотехнологии
При использовании высоких биотехнологий (биометрия, «цифровая» биология, геномика, нанотехнологии, вживленные «чипы»), в ходе становления и развития персональной медицины, необходима разработка согласованных рекомендаций по соблюдению этических принципов и прав человека.
Целесообразно привлечение внимания общества к рассмотрению этических аспектов экологической безопасности. Актуально рассмотрение вопросов соблюдение конфиденциальности персональных данных при составлении, использовании и хранении генетических паспортов, формировании биобанков.
Рэм Петров – Академик Российской Академии наук и Российской Академии медицинских наук
В начале 90-х годов в ЮНЕСКО был создан Международный Комитет по биоэтике (МКБ). С этого времени проведена огромная работа в этой новой области. Подготовлены и опубликованы от имени ООН Декларации «Геном человека и права человека», «Биоэтика и права человека», а также ряд других документов ЮНЕСКО. В большинстве стран мира создана сеть национальных комитетов по биоэтике, кафедр и других развивающих биоэтику учреждений. Биоэтика переросла в социально значимый институт этики науки. Вместе с тем, все годы основные вопросы и цели МКБ и национальных комитетов по биоэтике посвящались медицинским проблемам, включая фармакологические аспекты, пересадку органов и тканей, стволовые клетки, клонирование человека, проблемы генномодифицированных продуктов питания и пр.
При этом в стороне от биоэтики остаются экологические проблемы, обеднение биосферы Земли, исчезновение биологических видов и другие проблемы экологической биоэтики. Предполагаемое использование во многих странах в ближайшем будущем новых энергетических источников (биотопливо), может усугубить экологические катастрофы.
На последнем заседании Межправительственного комитета по биоэтике ЮНЕСКО, которое состоялось 5-6 сентября2011 г., по предложению академика Р.В.Петрова в качестве отдельного пункта в решение включена проблема экологической безопасности в сферу интересов Комитета по биоэтике ЮНЕСКО.
Vidadi Yusibov – Executive Director of Fraunhofer USA Center for Molecular Biotechnology
Biotechnology: Industrial and health applications
Significant unmet needs exist in many sectors of the economy, including agriculture, industrial chemistry and public health. Among new technologies developed over the last four decades, biotechnology has had the most significant impact, influencing every sector of the economy. Food security in developing countries continues to be a growing concern and it is exacerbated by population growth. Traditional approaches can no longer address these concerns in a sustainable manner. Modern biotechnology, on the other hand, provides tools that can address these challenges in various sub-sectors of agriculture and has proven to positively impact both the environment and human health. The global chemical industry, in excess of $1.8 trillion, continues to play a significant role in improving the quality of life. However, concerns associated with the use of environmentally damaging production processes and excessive reliance on nonrenewable energy sources is putting increasing pressure on governments and industry to change current working practices. The industry is beginning a transition to using biological catalysts, enzymes, and other tools of biotechnology for the production of a large fraction of their products. This will result in cheaper and more environmentally safe products for the consumer.
Biotechnology has revolutionized the pharmaceutical industry and continues to have the most profound impact on public health and in particular on vaccine and therapeutic development and production. Governments, the public health community, and private industry are seeking novel protein expression and production platforms with the potential to accelerate development, reduce costs, and broaden the landscape of proteins that can be targeted for vaccine and therapeutic development. As recent events have demonstrated, the emergence of infectious diseases creates cascading effects on a nation’s public health, national security and economy. Population expansion, increased international travel and global warming have contributed to the recent re-emergence of infectious diseases such as dengue fever, yellow fever, West Nile virus, malaria and tularemia. As the global population continues to encounter emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases, requirements for vaccines and therapeutics will evolve and expand. With the emergence of new methodologies and an in-depth understanding of pathogen molecular biology, pathogenesis, and interactions with the human immune system, new approaches to vaccine development and delivery have emerged. Over the past four to five decades several systems for target protein expression have been developed and new ones continue to emerge. Bacterial, yeast, mammalian and insect cell cultures have been used extensively for producing target proteins and both regulatory and manufacturing infrastructure has been established for these systems. To respond to rapidly emerging threats and market needs, Fraunhofer USA Center for Molecular Biotechnology (FhCMB) has developed a unique, accelerated plant-based technology platform that can revolutionize the manufacture of biopharmaceuticals. This technology platform allows for engineering and expression of novel protein targets in approximately three weeks. This greatly reduced production time, compared to other technologies, is achieved using a ‘launch vector’ system, and is applicable to a broad range of monomeric and multimeric proteins at relatively low cost. For example, considering the HA target of influenza A/California/04/09 (H1N1) and an estimated dose of 50g, current target yield using the launch vector system is approximately 150 mg per kg of fresh plant biomass, giving a cost estimate of 40 cents per dose.
The transient expression platform has three key elements:
FhCMB has applied this approach to producing targets of viral, microbial and parasitic origin. Over the last ten years the Center has taken this platform from early vector development, through technological improvements and scale up, to platform validation, as evidenced by extensive pre-clinical studies, with lead candidates now in clinical development, including vaccine candidates against malaria and diverse strains of influenza.
In conclusion, there is an urgent global need to develop medical countermeasures to protect populations against infectious disease pathogens. Many infectious diseases, some passed from animals to humans, are emerging or re-emerging, often in more virulent forms. To this point, significant unmet needs exist in Azerbaijan in the field of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, whether in education and science or its applications in public health (disease surveillance, diagnosis, treatment and prevention infectious diseases and autoimmune disorders), agriculture (sustaining and growing the country’s food security) and industry (application of clean biotechnology based systems to the chemical and energy industries). Creation of infrastructure and capabilities in biotechnology to address these needs will enhance Azerbaijan’s competitiveness and establish it as a global player in these rapidly growing science-based market sectors as a provider of solutions to governments, the public health community, and private industry. Additionally, this will enhance the country’s preparedness and security against emerging diseases.
Ismayil S. Zulfugarov – Research-Professor at the Department of Molecular Biology, Pusan National University, Korea; Institute of Botany, Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences
Investigation of the transgenic plants
PsbS is a 22-kDa photosystem (PS) II protein involved in non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) of chlorophyll fluorescence. Of the two rice (Oryza sativa L.) PsbS genes (PsbS1 and PsbS2), only PsbS1 knockout (PsbS1-KO) and RNAi transgenic lines were deficient in qE, the energy-dependent component of NPQ. The growth rate of young seedlings lacking PsbS was reduced under fluctuating high light and PSII in detached leaves of the mutants was more sensitive to photoinhibitory illumination than wild type. The levels of reactive oxygen species including singlet oxygen, superoxide and hydrogen peroxide were determined in leaves using both histochemical and fluorescent probes. The PsbS-deficient plants produced more superoxide and hydrogen peroxide in chloroplasts. The superoxide in these PsbS-deficient plants appeared to be generated at PSII and not at PSI. Time-course experiments using isolated thylakoids showed that superoxide production is the initial event, and hydrogen peroxide production is a consequence of this. Microarray analysis shows that expression levels of many genes in these PsbS-deficient plants were changed: specially, the genes which involved in the plant response to pathogens were up-regulated. I found that these PsbS-deficient plants are more tolerant to the rice blast fungus Magnaporthe grisea and to Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae which causes bacterial blight of rice which is one of the most important diseases of rice. I also found that proteome profiles of these PsbS-deficient plants are significantly changed. Stefan Jansson group from Umea Plant Science Centre (Umeå Plant Science Centre, Department of Plant Physiology, Umeå University, SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden) have compared Arabidopsis thaliana wild type and two “photoprotection genotypes”, npq4 and oePsbS that, respectively, lack and overexpress PsbS. When leaves of the three genotypes, after transfer from a growth chamber to the field, were profiled for changes in composition of metabolites using GC-MS, they found significant differences in metabolite composition. Taken together, these results indicate that although function of the PsbS gene is related to photosynthesis only, its disturbance (knock-out, silencing and over-expression) cause changes in many aspects of the plants life. This is the just one example out of 40 transgenic plants which have been investigated in our laboratory. Therefore I recommend that usage of the transgenic plants (equal to the genetically modified organisms – GMO) should be under strong control and scientist have to show evidence by monitoring whole compounds analysis using facilities of the OMICS – genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, lipidomics, etc. of the GMO’s and after than recommend it for usage by the population.
The text of verbatim report was provided by Azerbaijan Medical University.