Call it a “new value system for life” or a major 'philosophical step' in the history of our species, Craig Venter and his team have gone ahead and shown it can be done – creating life artificially with chemicals synthesised in the lab. A team of scientists 'stitched' together a chromosome that is 381 genes long and has 5,80,000 base pairs of genetic code. The sequence was ironically based on the bacterium mycoplasma genitalium whose basic life support system was retained while removing a fraction of its genetic make-up. The reconstructed chromsome has been christened mucoplasma lanoratorium and transferred into a live bacterial cell. The new life form will depend for its ability to replicate itself and metabolise on the molecular machinery of the cell into which it has been injected. So to that extent this is not a wholly synthetic life form. However, its DNA is artificial, and it is the DNA that controls the cell. From reading genetic code to copying it to tampering and writing the code has been a natural sequence of the research. It was just a matter of when.
Like every other major technology this one too has two sides to it. While the capability to create artificial life can mean the ability to make new drugs or creating bacteria that can produce butane or propane from sugar, or even absorb carbon dioxide, it also can be a potential bio-weapon. Life forms which once created can wreak havoc on the system were once strictly within the realm of science fiction. Not anymore. All it would require is a small breach of security and much irreversible damage would be done. The bio-engineering possibilities make such bio-weapons far ahead in the game in their potential. The ethical considerations far override even those of cloning.
While it is clear that mankind has the intellectual prowess to create life, the question is whether it is wise play God. The public hasn't had much of a chance anywhere to debate the far-reaching social, ethical and environmental implications. What this case shows is that public opinion and ethical considerations will follow, rather than guide, the march of science and technology. This is not a positive trend. It could well pave the way for what some scientists themselves fear and cite as the reason for mankind to explore other planets.