According to alliedmarketresearch.com , by the year of 2020, the synthetic biology market will be worth about 5,245.7 million dollars. Synthetic biology is a research area that uses engineering principles as criteria for biological investigation. Accordingly, as Fangzhong and Weiwen discussed in their research report, “Synthetic Biology: Recent progress, biosafety concerns, and possible solutions”, they spoke about the recent advances of this field. This was written against a context of increased concern about gene therapy, hereditary circuits, and biomedicine. For example, ongoing advances in this field have advanced metabolic designing of Corynebacterium glutamicum as an amino-acid maker for use in insightful microbial-cell industrial facilities.
Fangzhong and Weiwen brings in these issues throughout the research report to show how recent advances in synthetic biology has helped some of the world issues. The study was published by the The Journal of Biosafety and Biosecurity, which is a journal that focuses on different areas in Biotechnology. The authors Weiwen Zhang and Fangzhong Wang are both scientists at the Center for Biosafety Research and Strategy in Tianjin University in China. The purpose of writing this rhetorical analysis was to try to understand their motives behind creating this intricate report.
The purpose of this study was to educate the audience about the advances in the field of synthetic biology and possible solution to some of its problems. This research was published on September 30,2018 and was accepted by scientists on December 10,2018. The publishing company, Elsevier is a global information business that aids institutions and professional advanced healthcare, open science and improve performance for the benefit of humanity. During the time they published this report, synthetic biology wasn’t widely accepted due to the ethical risks associated with it. They also wanted to inform the general public about the risks associated with abusing such technology (Wang&Zhang,2018).
The audience of this report is mainly catered to scientists who are in the biotechnology, engineering, and biology fields. The authors revealed this by the use of their sophisticated scientific language that most of the general public probably wouldn’t understand. This research will capture the interests of scientists in the Europe and the United States of America who are trying to create better Genome- scale engineering tools DNA synthesis, and analytic tools.
Using the IMRAD format, the report begins with an abstract that describes the information in the report. The authors then used the CARS model to strategically write their research report. In Move 1, they briefly spoke about the history of synthetic biology and the significant progress that it has made through the years. The authors established their credibility by incorporating previous research that had been conducted on the topic (Penrose&Katz,2010).
By incorporating previous research into their report and making generalizations about the topic, they rightly proved their credibility.
In Move 2, the authors established a “niche” by proposing an extension to the previous research that was conducted. In certain instances, the authors would use the quantity word some to show how some progress been made in the development of synthetic biology tools. The gap shows that more research needs to be conducted on synthetic biology and biosafety. The authors also realized that there was a serious problem. They realized that there was a rise in potential risks of Synthetic Biology. They used the contrast word although to signal that there was a weakness in the previous research that was done (Penrose&Katz,2010).
In Move 3, the authors outline their purposes and announced the main findings. The research report that there are 44 risks in synthetic biology which can be related to human health and environmental pollution. To state their solutions to the problem, they used the present verb tense to show that these problems and solutions are relatively current. They also announce present research that they are conducting. “With the progress of synthetic biology, the possibility of bioterrorism via the dual-use synthetic-biology technology is also increasing”(Wang&Zhang , 2018).
The authors ethos appeal was subdued , which allowed their evidence to tug at their readers’ conscience and establish their credibility. They spoke about the changes in the environment which today is a very controversial topic to speak about. The use of human genome editing appealed to pathos since there is a sense of ethical morality. The authors tried to alter the belief that laboratory management is sufficient in meeting the challenges raised by synthetic biology. The authors used a lot of statistics and research to bolster their logos appeal. For example they said, “ Since 2005, between 500 million and 1 billion dollars have been invested in synthetic biology research in the U.S.A”(Wang&Zhang, 2018). They use bold headings to structure the research report in a way the general public can understand.
This research reports discussed a lot about the ethical concerns of biosafety. They established 5 general principles which are : public beneficence, responsible stewardship, intellectual freedom and responsibility, democratic deliberation, and justness and fairness. These principles similarly reflect the values of communication ethics in Chapter 3 of Writing for The Sciences. These principles helped give these scientists the discipline that they needed to conduct proper research. They spoke about a group of biologists who decided in 2016 that they would launch a Human Genome Project-Write Federation. Their goal was to develop a technology that will chemically synthesize the human genome. This project caused ethical discomfort and caused significant debates on biological research. A few months later, the scientists decided to come forward and say that there was a miscommunication, noting that the project was aimed at improving DNA-synthesis.
In the conclusion of their study, they provided a recapitulation of what they had previously said. Rapid progress has been made in synthetic biology and it has made significant contributions to scientific research, health, environmental protection, and economic growth. They suggested that laboratory efforts should be improved to cater to the problems of synthetic biology in the future. They also urge scientists to address ethical concerns that can sometimes confuse the general public. Scientists should be more open to having public dialogs and conferences to aid in less confusion. Further investigation of technical and ethical measures will be necessary in the future. Lastly, there should also be a goal to broadcast synthetic biology more at an international level.
Overall, I believe Fangzhong Wang and Weiwen Zhang made an effective argument on the recent progress of synthetic biology and bioethical concerns. In analyzing this report, I was able to learn how to properly write a research report and how to present my findings. The use of logos, ethos, and pathos showed me how to ensure that my message will appeal to the whole reader’s heart, mind, and conscience. Reading this research report allowed me to explore my fascination with synthetic biology and its benefits to society. Learning more about the CARS model can really help me to write a very clear and effective research report that can help the general public understand the scientific topics that are very current today.
References
Penrose, A.M., & Katz, S.B.(2010). Reading and Writing Research Reports. Writing in the sciences: exploring conventions of scientific discourse(3rd ed.). New York: Longmman.p.94-99
Wang, F., Zhang, W. (2018). Synthetic biology: Recent progress, biosafety and biosecurity concerns, and possible solutions. Journal of Biosafety and Biosecurity,22-30
