OMGMO: Recent Episodes
OMGMO
Where Biotechnology and Philosophy Meet. We are Kristian and Jose and in this podcast, we discuss different topics within biotechnology through a philosophical lens. If you are interested to know more, visit www.omgmopodcast.com
A promising alternative to the shortage of organs is to actually print new ones with the cells of the host. While this application is still far from available, it gives a promise of a time when we can fix our bodies without current limits and without sacrificing pigs. Maybe this would mean very long lives, almost immortality. But, how far should we push our lifespan?
Some references:
P. Sreekala, M. Suresh, S. Lakshmi Priyadarsini, 3D organ printing: Review on operational challenges and constraints, Materials Today: Proceedings, Volume 33, Part 7, 2020, Pages 4703-4707, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.349.
Qian Yan, Hanhua Dong, Jin Su, Jianhua Han, Bo Song, Qingsong Wei, Yusheng Shi, A Review of 3D Printing Technology for Medical Applications, Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 5, 2018, Pages 729-742, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.07.021.
Critical organ failure can only be solved by organ transplants. However, the supply of organs is far lower than the demand, and immunological reactions make everything more difficult. An alternative to this problem is to grow pigs whose organs can be transplanted into humans, a process called xenotransplantation. Both genetically engineered pigs and human-pig chimeras could potentially be used as organ donors. However, their use is surrounded by doubts and ethical concerns. Would you accept a heart grown in a pig?
Some References:
Xenotransplantation Review
Video on xenotransplantation
BBC article on human-pig chimeras
In this episode we explore different classifications of models and dicuss problems such as the problem of accuracy (what does it mean for a model to be accurate and is it always something to strive for?), the problem of style (what are the different ways of representing?), and the problem of ontology (what types of things are models). We also discuss idealizations (omissions or distortions that make a model more explanatory or that allow it to be used mathematically) and the role it plays in scientific modelling.
Some references:
- Frigg, Roman and James Nguyen, 2016, “The Fiction View of Models Reloaded”, The Monist, 99(3): 225–42.
- Frigg, Roman, and Stephan Hartmann. "Models in science." (2006).
- Niiniluoto, Ilkka, 1988, “Analogy and Similarity in Scientific Reasoning”, in Analogical Reasoning: Perspectives of Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science, and Philosophy, D.H. Helman (ed.), Dordrecht: Kluwer, 271–98.
- Toon, Adam, 2010, “Models as Make-Believe”, in Frigg and Hunter 2010: 71–96.
-
Vaihinger, Hans, 1911 [1924], The Philosophy of ‘as If’: A System of the Theoretical, Practical, and Religious Fictions of Mankind, 1924 English Translation, London: Kegan Paul.
-
Weisberg, Michael, 20072013, Simulation and Similarity: Using Models to Understand the World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
In this episode we discuss the problem of representation: in virtue of what does something represent something else? A plausible account should be able to provide understanding of how representation operates. We explore the classical accounts of similarity and structuralism, as well as their shortcomings using the example of DNA.
Some references:
- Bueno, Otávio, 1997, “Empirical Adequacy: A Partial Structure Approach”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 28(4): 585–610. doi:10.1016/S0039-3681(97)00012-5
- Contessa, Gabriele, 2007, “Scientific Representation, Interpretation, and Surrogative Reasoning”, Philosophy of Science, 74(1): 48–68. doi:10.1086/519478
- French, Steven, 2003, “A Model-Theoretic Account of Representation (or, I Don’t Know Much About Art…But I Know It Involves Isomorphism)”, Philosophy of Science, 70(5): 1472–83. doi:10.1086/377423
- Frigg, Roman, 2002, “Models and Representation: Why Structures Are Not Enough”, Measurement in Physics and Economics Project Discussion Paper Series, DP MEAS 25/02.
- Goodman, Nelson, 1972, “Seven Strictures on Similarity”, in Problems and Projects, Nelson Goodman (ed.), Indianapolis and New York: Bobs-Merril, 437–46.
- Suárez, Mauricio, 2003, “Scientific Representation: Against Similarity and Isomorphism”, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17(3): 225–44.
In this episode we explore the debate on scientific modelling. Models are central to scientific practice and are often the gateway to understanding phenomena. What does it mean for a model to represent something in the world? Is there an appropriate way to delineate scientific and non-scientific models? Are some models better than others? Tune in to find out the answer to these and many more questions.
Some references:
- Frigg, R., & Nguyen, J. (2016). Scientific representation. In Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.
- Cartwright, N. (1997). Models: The blueprints for laws. Philosophy of Science, 64, S292-S303.
- Giere, R. N. (1999). Using models to represent reality. In Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery (pp. 41-57). Springer, Boston, MA.
- Toon, A. (2012). Models as make-believe: Imagination, fiction and scientific representation. Springer.
- Frigg, R. (2006). Scientific representation and the semantic view of theories. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia, 21(1), 49-65.
- Callender, C., & Cohen, J. (2006). There is no special problem about scientific representation. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia, 21(1), 67-85.
A gene drive is a way to cheat the way evolution usually works, it's a piece of DNA that does not care about Mendelian rules. They happen in nature, but we can also engineer them. Gene drives are a very powerful technique, with a huge potential impact in terms of global health, but with great power comes great responsibility, and human society will have to regulate its use to ensure that the world can benefit from them.
Some references:
News Article from Nature
New York Times Article
Alphey LS, Crisanti A, Fil F et al. Standardizing the definition of gene drive. PNAS 2020;117:30864–7.
Champer J, Buchman A, Akbari OS. Cheating evolution : engineering gene drives to manipulate the fate of wild populations. Nat Publ Gr 2016;17:146–59.
Church GM. Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild populations. Elife 2014;3:1–21.
Courtier-Orgogozo V, Morizot B, Boëte C. Agricultural pest control with CRISPR- based gene drive : time for public debate. EMBO Rep 2017;18:878–80.
Esvelt KM, Gemmell NJ. Conservation demands safe gene drive. PLoS Biol 2017;15:1–8.
There are already genetically modified mosquitos that could be used to eradicate malaria. However, as their use is based on their liberation in ecosystems, there are concerns on how will these mosquitos affect them. These concerns arise from the idea that ecosystem relations are unpredictable, and that they are very difficult to engineer. But difficult is not impossible, and with time we will learn how to engineer ecosystems.
Some references:
BBC Article on genetically modified mosquitos being released in Florida
The company behind the release of mosquitos in Florida
Position of WHO on genetically modified mosquitos
Spanish blog-post on genetically modified mosquitos
The Guardian article on the failed dutch rewilding experiment
New York Times article on the failed Biosphere experiments
Scientific article on repopulation of forests using flammable pines
Article with information on the governance, regulation, and public engagement on genetically modified mosquitos
Cloning can help bring genetic diversity to animal populations at risk of extinction, but there are also some cases in which it could be used to bring back dead species. Even if cloning is not possible, genetic engineering can help bring back extinct species whose genome has been sequenced. How can we do this? How far are we? And ultimately, should we bring extinct species back to life?
Some references:
- Revive & Restore webpage
- Science news article on bringing back extinct species. Read here
- Article about de-extinction. Read here
- Article about governance in biotechnology, including de-extinct species. Read here
Humans can be cloned, the technology is already out there. But even if a clone with an identical genome has been created, does this mean we can clone individuals? Individuals are characterized by their identity, but this identity seems impossible to clone. But first, we should ask, what is human identity?
Some references:
Tachibana M, Amato P, Sparman M, et al (2013) Human embryonic stem cells derived by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Cell 153:1228–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.006
Reasons and Persons by Derek Parfit (1984) Read here
Katerina V.-A. Johnson, Gut microbiome composition and diversity are related to human personality traits, Human Microbiome Journal, Volume 15, 2020, 100069, ISSN 2452-2317, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humic.2019.100069.
Dog cloning is nowadays possible, and although expensive, it has allowed some companies to invest in this ethically dubious business. How are dogs cloned? How similar are dogs cloned? What are the problems associated to dog cloning? Would you clone your dog?
Some references:
The New Yorker Times article about Barbara Streisand
Vanity Fair article about dog cloning businesses
Verma, G., Arora, J. S., Sethi, R. S., Mukhopadhyay, C. S., & Verma, R. (2015). Handmade cloning: recent advances, potential and pitfalls. Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 6, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-015-0043-y
Lee, SH, Oh, HJ, Kim, MJ, et al. Dog cloning—no longer science fiction. Reprod Dom Anim. 2018; 53(Suppl. 3): 133– 138. https://doi.org/10.1111/rda.13358
The discovery of penicillin, proposing the theory of evolution, and applying CRISPR for gene editing have in common that luck or chance seem to have affected the scientific outcome or recognition of these events. But these are not exceptions, and science is a complex process that spans beyond just the intelligence of the scientist. Join us to discover the role of luck and creativity in science.
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry of 2020 was awarded to Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier for the development of CRISPR as a tool for genomic editing. In this episode, we give an overview on the importance of CRISPR and we discuss if Nobel Prizes can reflect the reality of modern day science.
There are some worries about a nutritional collapse in agriculture produced by intensive techniques. However, we need to take the statements out there with a grain of salt. There is some truth behind the so-called nutritional collapse, but it is very nuanced. Join us to discover why this is nothing to worry about.
Biofuels are a better alternative than fossil fuels, but they are considered to be a less ecological option than electricity and batteries to fuel cars and other transports. But biofuels are evolving, and new types of biofuels might be more desirable than batteries. Should we follow this path? Or should we bet all our resources on an electrical transition? Join us in the search for the best path forward in this episode.
Netflix's show Biohackers deals with students performing experiments outside academic environments. Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Biology is a movement that aims to bring biological sciences and technologies to the general public. This movement is received both with praise for democratizing science but also with skepticism and concern about the potential problems on biosafety and biosecurity. Join us in discussing the promises and challenges of DIY Biology.
In our society, experimenting on one's body is frown upon. But this is a practice that not only is happening, it has been happening throughout history. There are people trying to do genetic engineering on themselves. Are they pioneers or just crazy weirdos? Join us in this episode and make up your mind.
Brain implants are a technology that may not be too far, but those are not the only implants available to upgrade human capabilities. Some people have started to wear implants for several purposes, from communicating with machines to just cosmetic reasons. Can implants change our identity and how many implants can you incorporate into your body before stop being human? Join to find the answers in this episode.
Gene-edited crops are a kind of genetically engineered crop, another example being transgenic crops. Even those these two types of crops are created using different techniques, they are generally perceived the same by the population and they are not distinguished in EU legislation. Why do gene edited crops generate such strong feelings? Discover why in this episode.
Animal experimentation has a direct impact on the welfare of the subject animals, but not all animals are the same. Society has decided that some animals deserve more protections than others, such as cephalopods (octopus, squid, cuttlefish…). Why are these animals protected, while insects are not? Discover why in this episode.