Why Now? Why Asilomar?

“Once you get to synthetic genetics the scope is just unbelievable” — John Tooze (1976)

Today, software analyzes and emits strings of life – DNA, RNA, proteins. Increasingly accessible AI tools are accelerating. Who or what is steering the ship? To what ends?

“Do I want to go ahead with experiments that could have catastrophic consequences?’ — Paul Berg (2015)

Researchers are organizing to construct life entirely from scratch. What seemed fantastical just a few years ago is now reducible to clear questions, programs of work, and budget proposals. Life beyond lineage, long contemplated, raises entirely new concerns and questions.

“If we had any guts at all, we’d tell people not to do these experiments until we can see where we are going” —Norton Zinder (1974)

Nations now publicly accuse one another of having offensive biological weapons programs. The foundational argument that those advancing biological weapons are enemies of all mankind is eroding. How do we make sure the peace holds?

“We believed, somewhat naively, that there was a treaty that everyone held to prohibiting use of technology to make biological weapons… We clearly have an unfinished agenda from Asilomar on biowarfare.” — David Baltimore (2006)

Half a century of recombinant DNA is yielding burgeoning bioeconomies operating at scales attracting national and geopolitical attention. Are we citizens, consumers, subjects, or objects of the resulting bioeconomies?  Are we the people building the bioeconomies the people wish for? 

“The issue was not an issue that scientists could decide ultimately for themselves in splendid isolation from the rest of the world.”  — David Baltimore (1975)

Consumers can source and grow bioluminescent petunias, blueberry tomatoes, and other GMOs. Policies based only on physical containment may no longer best match a moment in which biotechnologies are increasingly deployed on, in, and around us all.   

“There was, at Asilomar, no explicit consideration of the potential broader social or ethical implications of initiating this line of research—of its role, as a possible prelude to longer-rage, broader-scale genetic engineering of the flora and fauna of the planet, including, ultimately, man.” — Robert Sinsheimer (1975)

In the half-century since, scientists, scholars, policymakers, and critics have debated whether “Asilomar” was a paradigmatic or exemplary event, recounting how it unfolded and what it all meant. Many have questioned whether “other Asilomars” are needed. There are many reasons to NOT have a meeting at Asilomar.

“If new concerns arise, it would be the same thing all over again—a process as primitive and as inefficient as before." — Paul Berg (1975)

“Certainly we learned some lessons, although most of them are rather negative. We have learned, perhaps, what not to do. But given the dilemma it is not at all certain that we would act in a wiser fashion in the future.” — Maxine Singer (1979)

“The fact that this conference is taking place may well be much more important than the conclusions that may be reached on the subject...”  — International Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules, Asilomar (1975)

Want to learn more?  See the The Spirit of Asilomar 2025 Program.