OneStart Europe 2015 Semi-finalist: Shyden Biotechnology - Shyam Masrani
OneStart, co-organised by SR One and the Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable, is the world #39;s largest life science startup accelerator programme. Learn how you can get extended mentoring and win ...
By: OxbridgeBiotech
View post:
OneStart Europe 2015 Semi-finalist: Shyden Biotechnology - Shyam Masrani - Video
Biotechnology is the application of scientific and engineering principles to the processing of materials by biological agents to provide goods and services.[1] From its inception, biotechnology has maintained a close relationship with society. Although now most often associated with the development of drugs, historically biotechnology has been principally associated with food, addressing such issues as malnutrition and famine. The history of biotechnology begins with zymotechnology, which commenced with a focus on brewing techniques for beer. By World War I, however, zymotechnology would expand to tackle larger industrial issues, and the potential of industrial fermentation gave rise to biotechnology. However, both the single-cell protein and gasohol projects failed to progress due to varying issues including public resistance, a changing economic scene, and shifts in political power.
Yet the formation of a new field, genetic engineering, would soon bring biotechnology to the forefront of science in society, and the intimate relationship between the scientific community, the public, and the government would ensue. These debates gained exposure in 1975 at the Asilomar Conference, where Joshua Lederberg was the most outspoken supporter for this emerging field in biotechnology. By as early as 1978, with the synthesis of synthetic human insulin, Lederberg's claims would prove valid, and the biotechnology industry grew rapidly. Each new scientific advance became a media event designed to capture public support, and by the 1980s, biotechnology grew into a promising real industry. In 1988, only five proteins from genetically engineered cells had been approved as drugs by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but this number would skyrocket to over 125 by the end of the 1990s.
The field of genetic engineering remains a heated topic of discussion in today's society with the advent of gene therapy, stem cell research, cloning, and genetically modified food. While it seems only natural nowadays to link pharmaceutical drugs as solutions to health and societal problems, this relationship of biotechnology serving social needs began centuries ago.
Biotechnology arose from the field of zymotechnology or zymurgy, which began as a search for a better understanding of industrial fermentation, particularly beer. Beer was an important industrial, and not just social, commodity. In late 19th century Germany, brewing contributed as much to the gross national product as steel, and taxes on alcohol proved to be significant sources of revenue to the government.[2] In the 1860s, institutes and remunerative consultancies were dedicated to the technology of brewing. The most famous was the private Carlsberg Institute, founded in 1875, which employed Emil Christian Hansen, who pioneered the pure yeast process for the reliable production of consistent beer. Less well known were private consultancies that advised the brewing industry. One of these, the Zymotechnic Institute, was established in Chicago by the German-born chemist John Ewald Siebel.
The heyday and expansion of zymotechnology came in World War I in response to industrial needs to support the war. Max Delbrck grew yeast on an immense scale during the war to meet 60 percent of Germany's animal feed needs.[3] Compounds of another fermentation product, lactic acid, made up for a lack of hydraulic fluid, glycerol. On the Allied side the Russian chemist Chaim Weizmann used starch to eliminate Britain's shortage of acetone, a key raw material in explosives, by fermenting maize to acetone. The industrial potential of fermentation was outgrowing its traditional home in brewing, and "zymotechnology" soon gave way to "biotechnology."
With food shortages spreading and resources fading, some dreamed of a new industrial solution. The Hungarian Kroly Ereky coined the word "biotechnology" in Hungary during 1919 to describe a technology based on converting raw materials into a more useful product. He built a slaughterhouse for a thousand pigs and also a fattening farm with space for 50,000 pigs, raising over 100,000 pigs a year. The enterprise was enormous, becoming one of the largest and most profitable meat and fat operations in the world. In a book entitled Biotechnologie, Ereky further developed a theme that would be reiterated through the 20th century: biotechnology could provide solutions to societal crises, such as food and energy shortages. For Ereky, the term "biotechnologie" indicated the process by which raw materials could be biologically upgraded into socially useful products.[4]
This catchword spread quickly after the First World War, as "biotechnology" entered German dictionaries and was taken up abroad by business-hungry private consultancies as far away as the United States. In Chicago, for example, the coming of prohibition at the end of World War I encouraged biological industries to create opportunities for new fermentation products, in particular a market for nonalcoholic drinks. Emil Siebel, the son of the founder of the Zymotechnic Institute, broke away from his father's company to establish his own called the "Bureau of Biotechnology," which specifically offered expertise in fermented nonalcoholic drinks.[5]
The belief that the needs of an industrial society could be met by fermenting agricultural waste was an important ingredient of the "chemurgic movement."[6] Fermentation-based processes generated products of ever-growing utility. In the 1940s, penicillin was the most dramatic. While it was discovered in England, it was produced industrially in the U.S. using a deep fermentation process originally developed in Peoria, Illinois. The enormous profits and the public expectations penicillin engendered caused a radical shift in the standing of the pharmaceutical industry. Doctors used the phrase "miracle drug", and the historian of its wartime use, David Adams, has suggested that to the public penicillin represented the perfect health that went together with the car and the dream house of wartime American advertising.[7] In the 1950s, steroids were synthesized using fermentation technology. In particular, cortisone promised the same revolutionary ability to change medicine as penicillin had.
Even greater expectations of biotechnology were raised during the 1960s by a process that grew single-cell protein. When the so-called protein gap threatened world hunger, producing food locally by growing it from waste seemed to offer a solution. It was the possibilities of growing microorganisms on oil that captured the imagination of scientists, policy makers, and commerce.[8] Major companies such as British Petroleum (BP) staked their futures on it. In 1962, BP built a pilot plant at Cap de Lavera in Southern France to publicize its product, Toprina.[9] Initial research work at Lavera was done by Alfred Champagnat,[10] In 1963, construction started on BP's second pilot plant at Grangemouth Oil Refinery in Britain.[10]
As there was no well-accepted term to describe the new foods, in 1966 the term "single-cell protein" (SCP) was coined at MIT to provide an acceptable and exciting new title, avoiding the unpleasant connotations of microbial or bacterial.[9]
The "food from oil" idea became quite popular by the 1970s, when facilities for growing yeast fed by n-paraffins were built in a number of countries. The Soviets were particularly enthusiastic, opening large "BVK" (belkovo-vitaminny kontsentrat, i.e., "protein-vitamin concentrate") plants next to their oil refineries in Kstovo (1973) [11][12][13] and Kirishi (1974).[14]
By the late 1970s, however, the cultural climate had completely changed, as the growth in SCP interest had taken place against a shifting economic and cultural scene (136). First, the price of oil rose catastrophically in 1974, so that its cost per barrel was five times greater than it had been two years earlier. Second, despite continuing hunger around the world, anticipated demand also began to shift from humans to animals. The program had begun with the vision of growing food for Third World people, yet the product was instead launched as an animal food for the developed world. The rapidly rising demand for animal feed made that market appear economically more attractive. The ultimate downfall of the SCP project, however, came from public resistance.[15]
This was particularly vocal in Japan, where production came closest to fruition. For all their enthusiasm for innovation and traditional interest in microbiologically produced foods, the Japanese were the first to ban the production of single-cell proteins. The Japanese ultimately were unable to separate the idea of their new "natural" foods from the far from natural connotation of oil.[15] These arguments were made against a background of suspicion of heavy industry in which anxiety over minute traces of petroleum was expressed. Thus, public resistance to an unnatural product led to the end of the SCP project as an attempt to solve world hunger.
Also, in 1989 in the USSR, the public environmental concerns made the government decide to close down (or convert to different technologies) all 8 paraffin-fed-yeast plants that the Soviet Ministry of Microbiological Industry had by that time.[14]
In the late 1970s, biotechnology offered another possible solution to a societal crisis. The escalation in the price of oil in 1974 increased the cost of the Western world's energy tenfold.[16] In response, the U.S. government promoted the production of gasohol, gasoline with 10 percent alcohol added, as an answer to the energy crisis.[7] In 1979, when the Soviet Union sent troops to Afghanistan, the Carter administration cut off its supplies to agricultural produce in retaliation, creating a surplus of agriculture in the U.S. As a result, fermenting the agricultural surpluses to synthesize fuel seemed to be an economical solution to the shortage of oil threatened by the Iran-Iraq war. Before the new direction could be taken, however, the political wind changed again: the Reagan administration came to power in January 1981 and, with the declining oil prices of the 1980s, ended support for the gasohol industry before it was born.[17]
Biotechnology seemed to be the solution for major social problems, including world hunger and energy crises. In the 1960s, radical measures would be needed to meet world starvation, and biotechnology seemed to provide an answer. However, the solutions proved to be too expensive and socially unacceptable, and solving world hunger through SCP food was dismissed. In the 1970s, the food crisis was succeeded by the energy crisis, and here too, biotechnology seemed to provide an answer. But once again, costs proved prohibitive as oil prices slumped in the 1980s. Thus, in practice, the implications of biotechnology were not fully realized in these situations. But this would soon change with the rise of genetic engineering.
The origins of biotechnology culminated with the birth of genetic engineering. There were two key events that have come to be seen as scientific breakthroughs beginning the era that would unite genetics with biotechnology. One was the 1953 discovery of the structure of DNA, by Watson and Crick, and the other was the 1973 discovery by Cohen and Boyer of a recombinant DNA technique by which a section of DNA was cut from the plasmid of an E. coli bacterium and transferred into the DNA of another.[18] This approach could, in principle, enable bacteria to adopt the genes and produce proteins of other organisms, including humans. Popularly referred to as "genetic engineering," it came to be defined as the basis of new biotechnology.
Genetic engineering proved to be a topic that thrust biotechnology into the public scene, and the interaction between scientists, politicians, and the public defined the work that was accomplished in this area. Technical developments during this time were revolutionary and at times frightening. In December 1967, the first heart transplant by Christian Barnard reminded the public that the physical identity of a person was becoming increasingly problematic. While poetic imagination had always seen the heart at the center of the soul, now there was the prospect of individuals being defined by other people's hearts.[19] During the same month, Arthur Kornberg announced that he had managed to biochemically replicate a viral gene. "Life had been synthesized," said the head of the National Institutes of Health.[19] Genetic engineering was now on the scientific agenda, as it was becoming possible to identify genetic characteristics with diseases such as beta thalassemia and sickle-cell anemia.
Responses to scientific achievements were colored by cultural skepticism. Scientists and their expertise were looked upon with suspicion. In 1968, an immensely popular work, The Biological Time Bomb, was written by the British journalist Gordon Rattray Taylor. The author's preface saw Kornberg's discovery of replicating a viral gene as a route to lethal doomsday bugs. The publisher's blurb for the book warned that within ten years, "You may marry a semi-artificial man or womanchoose your children's sextune out painchange your memoriesand live to be 150 if the scientific revolution doesnt destroy us first."[20] The book ended with a chapter called "The Future If Any." While it is rare for current science to be represented in the movies, in this period of "Star Trek", science fiction and science fact seemed to be converging. "Cloning" became a popular word in the media. Woody Allen satirized the cloning of a person from a nose in his 1973 movie Sleeper, and cloning Adolf Hitler from surviving cells was the theme of the 1976 novel by Ira Levin, The Boys from Brazil.[21]
In response to these public concerns, scientists, industry, and governments increasingly linked the power of recombinant DNA to the immensely practical functions that biotechnology promised. One of the key scientific figures that attempted to highlight the promising aspects of genetic engineering was Joshua Lederberg, a Stanford professor and Nobel laureate. While in the 1960s "genetic engineering" described eugenics and work involving the manipulation of the human genome, Lederberg stressed research that would involve microbes instead.[22] Lederberg emphasized the importance of focusing on curing living people. Lederberg's 1963 paper, "Biological Future of Man" suggested that, while molecular biology might one day make it possible to change the human genotype, "what we have overlooked is euphenics, the engineering of human development."[23] Lederberg constructed the word "euphenics" to emphasize changing the phenotype after conception rather than the genotype which would affect future generations.
With the discovery of recombinant DNA by Cohen and Boyer in 1973, the idea that genetic engineering would have major human and societal consequences was born. In July 1974, a group of eminent molecular biologists headed by Paul Berg wrote to Science suggesting that the consequences of this work were so potentially destructive that there should be a pause until its implications had been thought through.[24] This suggestion was explored at a meeting in February 1975 at California's Monterey Peninsula, forever immortalized by the location, Asilomar. Its historic outcome was an unprecedented call for a halt in research until it could be regulated in such a way that the public need not be anxious, and it led to a 16-month moratorium until National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines were established.
Joshua Lederberg was the leading exception in emphasizing, as he had for years, the potential benefits. At Asilomar, in an atmosphere favoring control and regulation, he circulated a paper countering the pessimism and fears of misuses with the benefits conferred by successful use. He described "an early chance for a technology of untold importance for diagnostic and therapeutic medicine: the ready production of an unlimited variety of human proteins. Analogous applications may be foreseen in fermentation process for cheaply manufacturing essential nutrients, and in the improvement of microbes for the production of antibiotics and of special industrial chemicals."[25] In June 1976, the 16-month moratorium on research expired with the Director's Advisory Committee (DAC) publication of the NIH guidelines of good practice. They defined the risks of certain kinds of experiments and the appropriate physical conditions for their pursuit, as well as a list of things too dangerous to perform at all. Moreover, modified organisms were not to be tested outside the confines of a laboratory or allowed into the environment.[18]
Atypical as Lederberg was at Asilomar, his optimistic vision of genetic engineering would soon lead to the development of the biotechnology industry. Over the next two years, as public concern over the dangers of recombinant DNA research grew, so too did interest in its technical and practical applications. Curing genetic diseases remained in the realms of science fiction, but it appeared that producing human simple proteins could be good business. Insulin, one of the smaller, best characterized and understood proteins, had been used in treating type 1 diabetes for a half century. It had been extracted from animals in a chemically slightly different form from the human product. Yet, if one could produce synthetic human insulin, one could meet an existing demand with a product whose approval would be relatively easy to obtain from regulators. In the period 1975 to 1977, synthetic "human" insulin represented the aspirations for new products that could be made with the new biotechnology. Microbial production of synthetic human insulin was finally announced in September 1978 and was produced by a startup company, Genentech.,[26] although that company did not commercialize the product themselves, instead, it licensed the production method to Eli Lilly and Company. 1978 also saw the first application for a patent on a gene, the gene which produces human growth hormone, by the University of California, thus introducing the legal principle that genes could be patented. Since that filing, almost 20% of the more than 20,000 genes in the human DNA have been patented.[27]
The radical shift in the connotation of "genetic engineering" from an emphasis on the inherited characteristics of people to the commercial production of proteins and therapeutic drugs was nurtured by Joshua Lederberg. His broad concerns since the 1960s had been stimulated by enthusiasm for science and its potential medical benefits. Countering calls for strict regulation, he expressed a vision of potential utility. Against a belief that new techniques would entail unmentionable and uncontrollable consequences for humanity and the environment, a growing consensus on the economic value of recombinant DNA emerged.
With ancestral roots in industrial microbiology that date back centuries, the new biotechnology industry grew rapidly beginning in the mid-1970s. Each new scientific advance became a media event designed to capture investment confidence and public support.[28] Although market expectations and social benefits of new products were frequently overstated, many people were prepared to see genetic engineering as the next great advance in technological progress. By the 1980s, biotechnology characterized a nascent real industry, providing titles for emerging trade organizations such as the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO).
The main focus of attention after insulin were the potential profit makers in the pharmaceutical industry: human growth hormone and what promised to be a miraculous cure for viral diseases, interferon. Cancer was a central target in the 1970s because increasingly the disease was linked to viruses.[29] By 1980, a new company, Biogen, had produced interferon through recombinant DNA. The emergence of interferon and the possibility of curing cancer raised money in the community for research and increased the enthusiasm of an otherwise uncertain and tentative society. Moreover, to the 1970s plight of cancer was added AIDS in the 1980s, offering an enormous potential market for a successful therapy, and more immediately, a market for diagnostic tests based on monoclonal antibodies.[30] By 1988, only five proteins from genetically engineered cells had been approved as drugs by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA): synthetic insulin, human growth hormone, hepatitis B vaccine, alpha-interferon, and tissue plasminogen activator (TPa), for lysis of blood clots. By the end of the 1990s, however, 125 more genetically engineered drugs would be approved.[30]
Genetic engineering also reached the agricultural front as well. There was tremendous progress since the market introduction of the genetically engineered Flavr Savr tomato in 1994.[31] Ernst and Young reported that in 1998, 30% of the U.S. soybean crop was expected to be from genetically engineered seeds. In 1998, about 30% of the US cotton and corn crops were also expected to be products of genetic engineering.[31]
Genetic engineering in biotechnology stimulated hopes for both therapeutic proteins, drugs and biological organisms themselves, such as seeds, pesticides, engineered yeasts, and modified human cells for treating genetic diseases. From the perspective of its commercial promoters, scientific breakthroughs, industrial commitment, and official support were finally coming together, and biotechnology became a normal part of business. No longer were the proponents for the economic and technological significance of biotechnology the iconoclasts.[32] Their message had finally become accepted and incorporated into the policies of governments and industry.
According to Burrill and Company, an industry investment bank, over $350 billion has been invested in biotech since the emergence of the industry, and global revenues rose from $23 billion in 2000 to more than $50 billion in 2005. The greatest growth has been in Latin America but all regions of the world have shown strong growth trends. By 2007 and into 2008, though, a downturn in the fortunes of biotech emerged, at least in the United Kingdom, as the result of declining investment in the face of failure of biotech pipelines to deliver and a consequent downturn in return on investment.[33]
There has been little innovation in the traditional pharmaceutical industry over the past decade and biopharmaceuticals are now achieving the fastest rates of growth against this background, particularly in breast cancer treatment. Biopharmaceuticals typically treat sub-sets of the total population with a disease whereas traditional drugs are developed to treat the population as a whole. However, one of the great difficulties with traditional drugs are the toxic side effects the incidence of which can be unpredictable in individual patients.
Read the original:
History of biotechnology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What is Biotechnology?
Biotechnology is a group of related technologies that use biological agents in a broad spectrum of applications to provide goods and services. In only a few years, biotechnology has revolutionized many disciplines including:
The Biotechnology Technician Program provides students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge and skills needed to perform competently in a life sciences laboratory environment. The industry is a large and growing contributor to regional and national economic output. As such, Biotechnology is an important emerging industry that is expected to contribute dramatically to the 21st century economy and is thus an excellent career choice for students.
Program personnel seek to foster a sense of excitement for scientific discovery, teamwork, critical thinking, effective communication, and a positive attitude in students. In addition, partnerships with local industries provide students with the most current and cutting edge knowledge and techniques in the field. The program provides hands-on experience with over 100 hours spent in the laboratory, beginning in the first semester.
DNA manipulation and analysis
Expression and purification of proteins
Cell culture techniques
Enzyme and antibody assays
Lab safety
Critical thinking and problem solving
Continue reading here:
Salt Lake Community College - Biotechnology
What is Southern Blotting? Molecular Biology(B.Sc. M.Sc.Biotechnology)
Dr. Leena Kansal, Biyani Girls college, Jaipur, Describes about southern blotting which was discovered by E. M. Southern. It is used for the detection of DNA with the help of radioactive probes....
By: Guru Kpo
Read this article:
What is Southern Blotting? Molecular Biology(B.Sc. & M.Sc.Biotechnology) - Video
Polymerase Chain Reaction ( B.Sc. M.Sc. Biotechnology)
Dr. Leena Kansal, Biyani Girls college, Jaipur, explains about Polymerase chain reaction which was developed by Kary Mullis in 1985. It is used for amplification of DNA fragments which includes...
By: Guru Kpo
Go here to see the original:
Polymerase Chain Reaction ( B.Sc. & M.Sc. Biotechnology) - Video
Industry placement opportunities in UQ #39;s Bachelor of Biotechnology
Hear from Ann Damien about her industry placement with Cook Medical. Ann completed this industry placement while doing her Bachelor of Biotechnology at The University of Queensland.
By: UQ Faculty of Science
Read the original post:
Industry placement opportunities in UQ's Bachelor of Biotechnology - Video
Class12,Biology,Lec-10,Biotechnology Products,Trangenic Plants(Biotehnology)
Class XII,Biology,Lec-10,Biotechnology Products,Trangenic Plants(Biotehnology) Covers Information about Biotechnological Products especially Transgenic Plants and how they are helping in now...
By: sci4you
Continue reading here:
Class12,Biology,Lec-10,Biotechnology Products,Trangenic Plants(Biotehnology) - Video
Lessons from the Biotechnology pop and drop
They say that from false moves come fast moves. Well, I would like to add that from too-steep moves come #39;very fast #39; moves. Such has been the case with the biotechnology sector this week when...
By: Serge Berger
Go here to read the rest:
Lessons from the Biotechnology pop and drop - Video
Final year biotechnology project presentation BATCH 1
Biodiesel production from macro algal oil by using lipase and whole cell biocatalyst.
By: yogi G.D
Originally posted here:
Final year biotechnology project presentation BATCH 1 - Video
Class 12 Biology,Lec-6,Analyzing DNA,Finger printing Electrophoresis(Biotechnology)-New
Covers about analyzing DNA with the help of Electrophoresis and printing of results in the form of DNA Fingerprints. This lecture also include uses of DNA Fingerprints in Forensic and Legal...
By: sci4you
Excerpt from:
Class 12 Biology,Lec-6,Analyzing DNA,Finger printing & Electrophoresis(Biotechnology)-New - Video
Class 12 Biology,Lec-5,Polymerase Chain Reaction,(Biotechnology)
Class 12 Biology,Lec-5,Polymerase Chain Reaction,(Biotechnology)-English-Hindi Mix Video covers introduction and all the steps of Polymerase Chain Reaction CBSE Class XI,Class XII,Physics ...
By: sci4you
Original post:
Class 12 Biology,Lec-5,Polymerase Chain Reaction,(Biotechnology) - Video
ESSENTIAL OIL WITH BIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION METHOD
ESSENTIALOIL PRODUCTION WITH BIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION METHOD, PROCESSING WITH FRESH RAW MATERIAL ONLY 2 DAYS WITHOUT DRYING FIRST, FASTER, MUCH OIL, GOOD ...
By: minyak atsiri biotek dan CFD
Read more:
ESSENTIAL OIL WITH BIOTECHNOLOGY INNOVATION METHOD - Video
What is Allosteric Enzyme? Biotechnology (B.Sc. M.Sc.)
Ms. Poonam Rajawat, Assistant Professor, Biyani Group of Colleges, described about Allosteric Enzyme which is multifunctional enzyme. It binds the substrate at site other than active. It also...
By: Guru Kpo
Read more here:
What is Allosteric Enzyme? Biotechnology (B.Sc. & M.Sc.) - Video
AS Germaine Escames, biotechnology against cellular ageing
More videos at http://www.andalusianstories.com She specialises in melatonin, in fact Germaine Escames is co-director of the International Institute of Melatonin. After more than 20 years...
By: Andalusian Stories
Original post:
AS Germaine Escames, biotechnology against cellular ageing - Video
Biotechnology industry expected to grow unceasingly
In spite of tremendous growth Biotechnology has shown in a short period, experts are of the opinion that all this growth witnessed so far is a tiny fragment of potential prospects of biotechnology. According to IBISWorld, $92 billion biotechnology is going to reach $146 billion by the year 2016.
Biotechnology: Unending source of new products
In spite of the fact that the industry is still in nascent stage, its products have already revolutionized medicine, agriculture and industries. Also, it must be remembered that there are hundreds of new products being developed in laboratories with promising results. When the market conditions were unfavorable, biotechnology start ups obtained funds from VC investments, which were eager to invest because of the high potential of the products being developed.
The companies also chose the route of mergers and acquisitions to leverage their core competencies and reduce costs in the period of unfavorable investor confidence during 2008 to 2010. Smaller companies merged with larger companies to get higher market shares and get access to resources. These developments have made biotechnology firms leaner and left them in better condition to proceed ahead with new efforts at research and development.
Another factor that is favoring the growth of biotechnology companies is the benefit of federal funding and support for biological defense projects. Pharmaceutical companies have acquired biotechnology firms in efforts to develop new formulations based on this revolutionary technology. Many companies are on the verge of breakthrough developments in developing drugs for conquering diseases like cancer and diabetes with the help of biotechnology.
Healthcare programs of federal government also support these companies to develop generic biological medicines and give them tax breaks. The role of biotechnology in improving the agriculture is evident; it offers solutions for increasing food production without degrading soil quality or posing threat to environment. The sustainable agriculture is clearly possible as shown by the new products and processes developed by biotechnology industry.
Conclusion:
With great promise of improved products in healthcare and agriculture, biotechnology is set to break its own record of tremendous growth seen so far!
Commerce is understood as any activity that creates wealth. For the past few decades, Biotechnology has been seen as an industrial means to generate wealth, most likely by adopting a ‘buying-selling’ model. Well!Biotechnology , in purest understanding, intends to tap a living process, most likely through gene manipulation, for contributing, directly or indirectly, towards improving the quality of human life. In the spate of economic struggle, states and corporations have started seeing Biotechnology as a core idea, systematized in a larger commercial cum industrial procedure for producing goods, to be sold for profit.
The Biotechnology products
Insulin has long been used by medics to control Diabetes. The recombinant protein is obtained from insulin secreting cultures, transformed through microbial bio techniques. As a matter of fact, some other approved products including antibiotics, fermented beverages, enzymes, bio degradable plastic etc. Are popularly used and now socially accepted. A longer list of newly researched products, still under development as a product line, is much waited for being introduced in the fast growing markets of developing nations. Moreover, the goods in this case are just not limited to be lifeless. The latest version of advancement through Biotechnology is to produce, in large-scale, germ plasm that grows into plant and live stock which is disease resistant and better yielding.
The sociopolitical resistance
People still have hunger pangs while food security bills are lingering in the Parliament. About a situation, when new concepts face allegations and non acceptance, there is nothing new. Genetically Modified food is often dismissed for harboring polluted DNA, once out for cultivation, would have no control from becoming promiscuous with the ‘natural’ variety. But why do we not resist the chemicals we have used for decades to voraciously grow crops and often ripen them artificially, with the same zest.
Well, the answer lies with us i.e. We dare to use the modern technology or bow before the conservative and orthodox methods. This is a fascinating field that has grown by leaps and bounds. Hence, we should look forward and seeing the advantages adopt Biotechnology with open hands.
Professionals in biotechnology come up with answers to a host of humanity's problemsfrom Ebola to failing crops. With a bachelor's degree in biotechnology from University of Maryland University College, you can become a part of the solution.
For this program, you are required to have already gained technical and scientific knowledge of biotechnology through transferred credit and direct experience in the field.
The major combines laboratory skills and applied coursework with a biotechnology internship experience and upper-level study and helps prepare you to enter the pharmaceutical, agricultural, or biomedical research industries and organizations as a laboratory technician, quality control technician, assay analyst, chemical technician, or bioinformatician.
In your courses, you'll study biological and chemical sciences, biotechniques, bioinstrumentation, bioinformatics, microbiology, molecular biology, and cell biology.
Through your coursework, you will learn how to
In past projects, students have had the opportunity to
Our curriculum is designed with input from employers, industry experts, and scholars. You'll learn theories combined with real-world applications and practical skills you can apply on the job right away.
Arts and Humanities Classes | 6 Credits
Classes must be from different disciplines.
Technological Transformations (3 Credits, HIST 125)
A 3-credit class in ARTH or HIST
Introduction to Humanities (3 Credits, HUMN 100)
A 3-credit class in ARTH, ARTT, ASTD, ENGL, GRCO, HIST, HUMN, MUSC, PHIL, THET, dance, literature, or foreign language
Behavioral and Social Science Classes | 6 Credits
Classes must be from different disciplines.
Economics in the Information Age (3 Credits, ECON 103)
Technology in Contemporary Society (3 Credits, BEHS 103)
Biological and Physical Sciences Classes | 7 Credits
Introduction to Biology (4 Credits, BIOL 103)
Introduction to Physical Science (3 Credits, NSCI 100)
Computing Classes | 6 Credits
Overall Bachelor's Degree Requirements
In addition to the general education requirements and the major, minor, and elective requirements, the overall requirements listed below apply to all bachelor's degrees.
Double majors: You can earn a dual major upon completion of all requirements for both majors, including the required minimum number of credits for each major and all related requirements for both majors. The same class cannot be used to fulfill requirements for more than one major. Certain restrictions (including use of credit and acceptable combinations of majors) apply for double majors. You cannot major in two programs with excessive overlap of required coursework. Contact an admissions counselor before selecting a double major.
Second bachelor's degree: To earn a second bachelor's degree, you must complete at least 30 credits through UMUC after completing the first degree. The combined credit in both degrees must add up to at least 150 credits. You must complete all requirements for the major. All prerequisites apply. If any of these requirements were satisfied in the previous degree, the remainder necessary to complete the minimum 30 credits of new classes should be satisfied with classes related to your major. Contact an admissions counselor before pursuing a second bachelor's degree.
Electives: Electives can be taken in any academic discipline. No more than 21 credits can consist of vocational or technical credit. Pass/fail credit, up to a maximum of 18 credits, can be applied toward electives only.
Lower-level coursework must be taken as part of an appropriate degree program at an approved community college or other institution. Coursework does not have to be completed prior to admission, but it must be completed prior to graduation. Transfer coursework must include 4 credits in general microbiology with a lab, 4 credits in general genetics with a lab, and 7 credits in biotechnology applications and techniques with a lab. Additional required related science coursework (17 credits) may be applied anywhere in the bachelor's degree.
The BTPS is only available to students who have completed the required lower-level coursework for the major either within an Associate of Applied Science degree at a community college with which UMUC has an articulation agreement or within another appropriate transfer program. Students should consult an admissions counselor before selecting the BTPS.
Visit link:
Bachelor's Degree in Biotechnology | UMUC
Biotechnology companies are saving on taxes by transferring patents on their lucrative and expensive drugs to foreign subsidiaries; tactic is not as advantageous as an inversion, but provides substantial tax benefit. MORE
Bioengineers for the first time create functional three-dimensional brain-like tissue, discovery that could eventually be used to study brain disease, injury and treatment; research is published in the journal PNAS, and is the latest example of biomedical engineering being used to make realistic models of organs such as the heart, lungs and liver. MORE
Michael Behar article examines growing field of bioelectronics, in which implants are thought to be able to communicate directly with the nervous system in order to try to fight wide variety of diseases; notes that GlaxoSmithKline runs newly formed Bioelectronics R & D Unit, which has partnerships with 26 independent research groups in six countries. MORE
Scientists at Scripps Research Institute create first living organism with artificial DNA, taking significant step toward altering the fundamental alphabet of life; accomplishment could lead to new antibiotics, vaccines and other products, though a lot more work needs to be done before this is practical; research, published online in journal Nature, is bound to raise safety concerns and questions about whether humans are playing God. MORE
Jeff Sommer Strategies column argues that while recent surge in Internet and biotech stock values may recall notorious bubble of 2000, overall Standard & Poor's 500-stock index remains far more tethered to reality than it was in that period. MORE
Harlem Biospace, new business incubator focused on biotechnology, will provide start-up lab space in renovated former confectionery research lab on West 127th Street in Harlem, near City College and Columbia University; incubator represents new investment in a neighborhood that has for decades struggled to restore its former economic and social vitality. MORE
Dr Shoukhrat Mitalipov has shaken field of genetics with development of process in which nucleus can be removed from one human egg and placed into another; procedure, intended to help women conceive children without passing on genetic defects in their cellular mitochondria, has drawn ire of bioethicists and scrutiny of federal regulators. MORE
Food and Drug Administration's new proposal to purge artery-clogging trans fats from foods could ease marketing of genetically modified soybean, which has been manipulated to be free of trans fat; new beans, developed by Monsanto and DuPont Pioneer, could help image of biotechnology industry because they are among the first genetically modified crops with a trait that benefits consumers, as opposed to farmers. MORE
California Gov Jerry Brown vetoes bill that would have allowed biosimilar versions of biologic drugs to be substituted by pharmacists if Food and Drug Administration deemed them 'interchangeable' with the brand-name reference product. MORE
Hawaii has become hub for development of genetically engineered corn and other crops that are sold to farmers worldwide, and seeds are state's leading agricultural commodity; activists opposed to biotech crops have joined with residents who say corn farms expose them to dust and pesticides, and they are trying to drive companies away, or at least rein them in. MORE
Some farmers are noticing soil degradation after using glyphosate, while others argue that the herbicide, along with biotech crops, produces yields too profitable to give up; some critics warn that glyphosate may be producing herbicide-resistant 'superweeds'; issue is part of larger debate over long-term effects of biotech crops, which account for 90 percent of corn, soybeans and sugar beets grown in the United States. MORE
David Blech, who was once considered biotechnologys top gunslinger and was worth about $300 million, is about to begin a four-year prison term, having pleaded guilty to stock manipulation; Blech's downfall reflects maturation of biotechnology from get-rich-quick days to sophisticated, multibillion dollar industry. MORE
Researchers at laboratories around world are experimenting with bioprinting, process of using 3-D printing technology to assemble living tissue; while research has made great progress, there are still many formidable obstacles to overcome. MORE
Researchers at University of Illinois have used 3-D printer to make small hybrid 'biobots'--part part gel, part muscle cell--that can move on their own; research may someday lead to development of tiny devices that could travel within body, sensing toxins and delivering medication. MORE
Developers of biotechnology crops, facing increasing pressure to label genetically modified foods, begin campaign to gain support for products by promising openness; centerpiece of effort is Web site to answer questions posed by consumers about genetically engineered crops and will include safety data similar to that submitted to regulatory agencies. MORE
The rise of personalized medicine has spurred giant pharmaceutical companies to home in on small biotechnology firms. MORE
Physician and tissue engineer Mark Post is attempting to grow so-called in vitro meat, or cultured meat, in Netherlands laboratory through use of stem cells and techniques adapted from medical research for growing tissues and organs; arguments in favor of such technology include both animal welfare and environmental issues, but questions of cost, safety and taste remain. MORE
Group of hobbyists and entrepreneurs begin project to develop plants that glow, potentially leading way for trees that can replace electric streetlamps and potted flowers to read by; project, which will use sophisticated form of genetic engineering called synthetic biology, is unique in that it is not sponsored by corporate or academic interests, and may give rise to similar do-it-yourself ventures. MORE
Interview with Nick Goldman, British molecular biologist who led study that successfully stored digital information in synthetic DNA molecules and then recreated it without error; study, suggesting the possibility of a storage medium of immense scale and longevity, was published in journal Nature. MORE
Craig Venter, controversial scientist and the head of Synthetic Genomics Inc, is convinced that synthetic biology holds the key to solving many of the world's problems, and his company has been actively trying to find and use new microbes for wildly varied purposes. MORE
Obama administration will announce a broad plan to foster development of the nation's bioeconomy, including the use of renewable resources and biological manufacturing methods to replace harsher industrial methods. MORE
Firms are racing to cut the cost of sequencing the human genome, as hope rises for faster development of medical advances; promise is that low-cost gene sequencing will lead to a new era of personalized medicine, yielding new approaches for treating cancers and other serious diseases. MORE
Central New Jersey, with its concentration of pharmaceutical giants and academic powerhouses has long had the potential to be a major center for life sciences business, but has never lived up to that potential; now, signs of a small revival are apparent; the number of biotechnology companies has grown to 335 from 10 in 1998; a 64,000-square-foot specialized office building leased to Elementis PLC is being built on spec in a new Woodmont Properties development called SciPark. MORE
Essay by Stanford University bioengineer Drew Endy discusses the outlook for biological computers that could operate at the cellular and even genetic level. MORE
Geron, the company conducting the world's first clinical trial of a therapy using human embryonic stem cells, says it is halting that trial and leaving the stem cell business entirely; company says its move does not reflect a lack of promise for the controversial field, but a refocusing of its limited resources. MORE
There are no additional abstracts to display.
Go here to read the rest:
Biotechnology - News - Times Topics - The New York Times
Mission Statement
The mission of the Biotechnology Program at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls is to provide its students with an education that establishes a strong foundation and appreciation for understanding developments in the rapidly advancing field of biotechnology, to develop the technical and critical thinking skills necessary for success in the field, to foster ethical behavior, and to promote outreach.
The field of modern biotechnology was born of molecular biology and biochemistry. Modern Biotechnology provides a set of tools that allow scientists to modify and harness the genetic capabilities of organisms. This has led to rapid advances in many areas including pharmaceutical development, agriculture, food microbiology, medical devices and environmental sciences.
Some examples of the products of biotechnology include herbicide, drought and insect resistant crops, drugs targeted specifically to disease processes resulting in fewer side effects, and bioremediation capable of removing greater amounts of environmental toxins at reduced cost.
The Biotechnology major at UWRF is an interdepartmental program with an emphasis on the molecular basis of life and the techniques utilized to study and control these processes under in vivo, in vitro, and commercial production conditions. UWRF LogoThe Biotechnology curriculum is an integrated sequence of courses selected from the curricula of the departments of Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Animal and Food Science, and Plant and Earth Science. It includes both traditional offerings of the departments involved and courses that reflect advances in biochemistry, biophysics, and molecular biology. The Biotechnology major is designed to provide students interested in pursuing careers in this rapidly expanding field with the academic background required to either secure entry level positions in industry or to continue their education in graduate or professional schools. A student may complete a B.S. degree in Biotechnology in the College of Arts and Sciences or the College of Agriculture, Food and Environmental Sciences.
Current curriculum check list (2008-2009)
Planning sheets
A scholarship has been established that is awarded to an outstanding junior or senior biotechnology major that either has worked on a research project, or will be participating in a research project during the year of the scholarship award. Follow the link above for information regarding scholarship criteria, recipients of the scholarship, and contributing to the scholarship fund.
Assessment of student learning is important to the University, the Colleges and the Biotechnology Program. Through appropriate assessment practices, we maintain a strong, current degree program and improve the quality of the education our students receive.
Continue reading here:
Biotechnology | University of Wisconsin-River Falls
Biotechnology, or the genetic modification of living materials, has ignited heated debates over trade policy. Innovations in the manipulation of microbes, plants, and animals raises serious ethical questions related to the commoditization and exchange of living organisms. In the arena of trade policy, these ethical questions pose a unique economic dilemma: to what extent should trade policy reflect moral and ethical judgments about the fruits of biotechnology?
Debate on Genetically Modified Foods
The principal cause of the debate surrounding products of biotechnology is the uncertainty of the long-term health and environmental effects of genetically modified living materials. Though many scientists believe GM foods to be safe, a small but influential group of researchers maintain that uncertainty about their effects on human health justifies extreme precaution, including the possible use of trade restrictions. Some supporters of GM foods agree that rigorous testing and research should continue but that in the meantime the benefits of heartier or enriched crops are too great to ignore and are essential in eliminating world hunger and malnutrition. Advocates of sustainable development are also wary of the long-term effects that GM crops could exert on the environment.
Agricultural concerns center on issues of 'genetic pollution' or the genetic flow from GM crops to unmodified plants in the wild. Transfer of genes from GM to wild plants could create health problems in humans, anti-biotic resistance in plants and associated insects, long-term damage to ecosystems, loss of biodiversity, and lack of consumer choice.
Defenders of biotechnology often argue that genetic manipulation holds the key to eliminating hunger and suffering across the world. One commonly cited example is 'Golden rice' which scientists have engineered to produce extra Vitamin A. The rice has been hailed as a godsend for malnourished people in the developing world because Vitamin A helps prevent blindness. Critics take two different stances on these wonder-foods. Some refer to recent studies and statements by doctors that Golden rice is not a sufficient source of vitamin A. Specifically, people with diarrheal diseases are incapable of absorbing vitamin A from the rice, thus people in developing countries who commonly suffer from diarrheal disease and vitamin A deficiency remain afflicted by both. Other critics reply that 'Franken foods' are the wrong answer to the problems of hunger and malnutrition, which they claim are the outcomes of distributional problems. Instead of posing a viable long-term solution, GM foods distract from and exacerbate the real issues involved.
Patenting Life
Biotechnology issues related to intellectual property rights are concerned with the moral and ethical implication of patenting living organisms. These concerns are linked to fears that biotechnology will transfer resources from the public sphere to private ownership via the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Firms that have invested in the development of genetically modified varieties want to protect their proprietary knowledge, but many farmer groups have protested that enforcing intellectual property rights will disrupt their access to seed. Farmers accustomed to harvesting and replanting their seeds are not willing to pay for GM seeds year after year. These debates draw attention to the controversial TRIPs Article 27.3(b), which exempts certain life forms from patentability but requires countries to establish some form of protection for plant varieties.
GM Food and Hunger
Producers of GM crops argue that biotechnology could be the world's cure for hunger. They cite the technology's ability to produce high yields, resist natural disasters such as drought and certain viruses, and be enriched with vital nutrients that starving people are likely to lack.
However, aid agencies and anti-GM countries argue that in regards to eliminating world hunger, alternatives to GM crop production have not been sufficiently researched. In fact, they note that many countries where hunger is a major problem do produce adequate amounts of food to feed their population. Hunger, they argue, is not only a function of agricultural yield; it is also a function of mismanaged government and a series of other factors, which technology cannot resolve.
At present there is no international law dealing with aid shipments of GM crops to needy countries. However, debates over a country's right to refuse GM food aid during a famine are bringing this issue to the forefront of biotechnology concerns.
Multiple Forums for Debate
There are a number of forums attempting to guide the international debate on biodiversity. At the WTO level, the March 8, 2004 TRIPS Council meeting saw the nations of Brazil, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, India, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand and Venezuela called for greater urgency in resolving possible conflicts between the TRIPS agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). [1] The Convention was established with the three main goals of conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources. [2] The CBD is concerned with preservation while the TRIPS agreement examines the intersection of business and biodiversity and so there would naturally be conflicts between the different missions of the two arenas. The U.S. and Japan have called for discussions to take place in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) forum instead which is mandated to increase intellectual property protection. Meanwhile, free trade agreements continue to change the intersection of trade law and biotechnology. For instance the U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement encourages plant patentability, a step beyond that of the TRIPS agreement, reflecting the U.S. desire for intellectual property protection to encourage innovation. It also and forbids reversion to weaker patent laws once stronger laws have been enacted. [3]
Current Events
Since 1998, the EU has placed a moratorium on the import of genetically modified living materials, citing insufficient proof that these organisms do not cause long-term negative effects to public health. The ban has frustrated the US, the largest producer of genetically modified crops, and it has long been threatening to file a formal complaint with the WTO over the EU ban, citing the ban as unjustified and discriminatory. In July 2003, however, the EU lifted the five-year ban on the condition that all products containing at least 0.9% genetically altered ingredients be explicitly labeled as such. Despite this move, which would finally allow US farmers of genetically altered crops access to European markets, the US, Canada, Argentina, Brazil and numerous other countries filed a formal complaint with the WTO in May 2003. They argued that the EU's moratorium on the approval of new GM foods violated WTO rules, and cost their farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues each year. [4] These countries have also expressed dissatisfaction with the EU's new stipulation that all GM foods be labeled, but the EU has called the complaint unnecessary in light of their new policy toward GM foods. In March 2004 a WTO panel was appointed to rule on the US-Argentina-Canada complaint against the EU de facto moratorium on the approval of new GMOs. [5] (See also the GTN SPS/TBT page.)
The issue of biotechnology's ability to battle hunger has also manifested itself in the complicated cases of 6 African nations, who have banned GMO food aid. [6] Zambia rejected GM food aid while it was hard hit by a famine in 2003 for health and environmental reasons. [7] Zambia voiced concern that GM seed might contaminate their local crop, thus jeopardizing their ability to continue shipping organically grown crops to the EU. The fear that millions in Zambia might starve proved false and the nation ended up producing a 120,000 ton surplus. [8] US food aid which most likely contain GM crops had to be rerouted by the UN World Food Program which distributes the aid. The US has said that it is impossible in practice to keep separate GM foods from non-GM foods. [9]
Conclusion
Biotechnology and its products have created some amazing possibility as well as raised fears among many of their potential negative consequences. There is also the moral dimension of playing with living beings. Nevertheless, the technology and its products are here to stay. GM foods highlight both the potential and the problems with this technology. Foods like "golden rice" may one day ensure that malnutrition is never a concern. However, the fears and uncertainty of its impact on health and the environment have raised important ethical issues as in the case of Zambia turning down GM food aid while in the midst of a famine.
Last updated April 2004.
[1] BRIDGES Monthly Review. Year 8, Number 3, March 2004. [2] http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/guide.asp [3] http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/guide.asp [4] http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/05/0157.htm [5] http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/04-03-10/wtoinbrief.htm#2 [6] http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,2763,1182378,00.html [7] Southern Africa; Controversy rages over 'GM' food aid. AllAfrica Africa News. February 12, 2003. [8] http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,2763,1182378,00.html [9] http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/News/0,6119,2-11-1447_1509711,00.html
Read more from the original source:
Biotechnology - Harvard University