“If the cost of sequencing a human genome can drop to $1,000 or below, experts say it would start to become feasible to document people’s DNA makeup to tell what diseases they might be at risk for, or what medicines would work best for them. A DNA genome sequence might become part of each newborn’s medical work-up, while sequencing of cancer patients’ tumors might help doctors look for ways to attack them.” Andrew Pollack, New York Times, February 9, 2008.
Are we in danger of over selling genomics and promising more than can be delivered in a foreseeable time?

The early optimism that new genetic data, especially sequence information and the identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), would bring new cures for important diseases has all but dissipated. Drug discovery continues to be plagued by the inability of science to predict the effects of a potential new medicine in people. Indeed, the drug discovery process is arguably the only industrial process whose efficiency has decreased over the past decades – as measured by the cost to develop a novel medicine. It is proposed that the focus on commercialization of intellectual property is crippling the development of new medicines, and that drug discovery science is best explored through open access public-private partnerships. These concepts will be explored through a round table discussion.

“A global investment in plant genomics is under way, thanks to increasing recognition of the services provided by higher plants to ecosystems. These plants fix the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, enrich soil constituents and are valuable as a source of food, fuel, fibres and medicines.” Andrew H. Paterson, University of Georgia, Nature 451, 19 2008

This session will explore how genomics can be applied to feed the world, address greenhouse gases, energy and other needs while sustaining the environment.

“The well-being of any human society is dependent on the health of its children and their successful transition to becoming robust and productive adults. Prematurity, poor perinatal outcomes and congenital anomalies are a leading cause of perinatal and childhood mortality and morbidity in Canada and the world. One in one hundred children is born with a cardiac anomaly that leads to significant problems in childhood and beyond. The burden of mental illness is growing and has a major impact on children, particularly in vulnerable populations. The growing obesity epidemic begins in childhood and has lifelong consequences. And importantly, there is growing evidence that adult onset diseases, like hypertension, atherosclerosis and diabetes, have their origins prenatally or in early childhood. Understanding the complex genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors affecting child health will impact on all phases of the human life cycle.”  Janet Rossant and Guy Rouleau, EOI, Genome Canada website.

The Canadian government has recently been the subject of criticism in a ‘Nature’ editorial for its parsimonious treatment of science and for the recent dismissal of its science advisor. As the American general election draws near, scientists in the USA are debating how to engage with Government. The Labour government in the UK has a science advisor and a Science Minister and seems ready to tap into science advice. What is the proper role of science in government?

The application of stem cells to therapeutics is one of the more exciting and controversial areas of current research. When will embryonic stem cells yield viable therapies? Can adult stem cells differentiate into different tissues? Can induced pluripotency cells generate personalized therapeutic cells? Is it appropriate for governments to regulate basic scientific research? What are the ethics of clinical trials? How do we ensure safety, informed consent, choosing who to treat? These are but few of the issues which require deep and thoughtful consideration.