Biotechnological risk is a form of existential risk that could come from biological sources, such as genetically modified biological agents. The origin of such an important pathogen could be a deliberate release (in the form of bioterrorism or biological weapons), an accidental release, or a natural event. There are numerous international treaties and regimes to help mitigate the risks involved with biotechnology. Three of the most important are the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on Biological Weapons (BWC) and the Australian Group.
Each of these agreements or regimes addresses a different aspect of the risk profile: biosecurity, biological weapons and prohibited substances, but each of them has limitations, such as limited scope, scarcity of funding and inadequate verification and monitoring mechanisms. None of the agreements creates a binding framework to comprehensively address biosafety and biosafety risks, leading to a general lack of accountability and making international standard-making fragmented and incomplete. In this regulatory environment, it is difficult to keep up with rapid advances in biotechnology or to address pressing issues, such as the release of biotech products, such as genetic drivers, into nature. Genetic modifications can alter existing ecosystems in unforeseen ways.
Modifying human genes could alter the very meaning of humanity. The now easy reengineering of human pathogens could lead to the deliberate or accidental release of hugely destructive pathogens. Although the risks of biotechnology have been a concern for decades, the increasing rate of progress (from low-cost DNA sequencing to rapid gene synthesis and accurate genome editing) suggests that biotechnology is entering a new area of maturity in terms of both beneficial applications and the most worrying risks. These measures would greatly contribute to increasing the chances that the world will be able to take advantage of advances in biotechnology while mitigating risks and disadvantages.
For now, many of the benefits of biotechnology are concrete, while many of the risks are still hypothetical, but it's better to be proactive and know the risks than to wait for something to go wrong first and then try to address the harms. The United States argued that the verification process would jeopardize the patented information of biotech and pharmaceutical companies without solving the problem because, it was argued, biological activities are inherently impossible to verify, a position that the U. The group's goal is to help countries decide which substances should be governed by export controls to minimize the risk that exporters may unwittingly assist in the creation of a biological or chemical weapon. Concern about the continued use of fossil fuels and the problems associated with pollution and climate change have led to debates about the benefits and risks of using biotechnology.
This will help in the analysis of risks and benefits to human health and the environment, to the evaluation of socio-economic factors, including intellectual property rights, and to the consideration of ethical aspects. Understanding these risks brings us closer to understanding the growing relevance of humanitarian experience in the form of bioethics. Changes in the way land and water are currently used may pose risks to the environment and to those who use it. Secondly, if in the previous century risk was considered the result of insufficient development of technologies and scientific knowledge, today the risk arises when there is excessive technological and scientific progress.
While technology has immense and beneficial applications, it is important to update existing regulations and initiate a public debate on the benefits and risks of this emerging technology. Before addressing the protection and safety of biotechnological research and the need to balance risk mitigation with innovations in the field, it is important to understand the scope and applications of such technologies. . .
