This week in Manchester, UK, a pivotal gathering of scientists is underway to address the implications of research that could potentially lead to the creation of mirror life — synthetic cells constructed from molecules that are the mirror images of those found in nature. As advancements in mirror-image biology progress, the scientific community is grappling with whether to impose restrictions on this line of research due to significant concerns regarding human health and environmental safety.
Over the past year, numerous scientists have expressed serious apprehensions regarding experiments that might culminate in the development of mirror-image cells. According to John Glass, a synthetic biologist at the J. Craig Venter Institute in La Jolla, California, “Pretty much everybody agrees” that the emergence of mirror-image cells would have negative consequences. However, there is ongoing debate about how to appropriately limit research in this area, considering the potential benefits that might arise from such studies.
A critical aspect of this discussion is the concept of chirality. Many molecules within our bodies are chiral, existing in one of two mirror-image forms, similar to how right-handed and left-handed gloves differ. For instance, proteins are comprised of left-handed amino acids, while DNA exhibits a right-handed twist. Some researchers argue that examining these mirror-image versions of molecules could provide insights into the origins of biological chirality. Furthermore, since the body’s enzymes and immune systems may not easily recognize right-handed amino acids or left-handed DNA, these mirror-image molecules could prove resilient against degradation, presenting potential applications as therapeutic drugs.
The clinical viability of using mirror-image molecules is not merely theoretical. In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration approved a small peptide composed of mirror-image amino acids, known as etelcalcetide, for treating chronic kidney disease. While this demonstrates the therapeutic potential of mirror-image biology, it also raises critical questions about safety and environmental impact.
Some researchers warn that the ability of mirror-image cells to evade degradation could become a serious concern. If an entire mirror-image cell were ever synthesized, it might proliferate uncontrollably within the human body or disseminate unchecked in the environment. This inherent risk underscores the importance of the discussions taking place in Manchester this week.
Sven Klussmann, a biochemist and the founder of Aptarion Biotech in Berlin, which is working on developing short strands of therapeutic mirror-image RNA, acknowledges the necessity of considering the potential risks associated with mirror life. He states, “But we should not panic yet, and we should not restrict research too early.”
Conversely, Kate Adamala, a synthetic biologist at the University of Minnesota, argues that the risks tied to mirror life research outweigh any possible benefits. “There is no benefit of mirror biology that couldn’t be achieved through conventional biological methods,” she asserts. “That’s not a risk I think we should be taking.”
John Glass mentions that several research teams, including his own, are on the verge of creating a synthetic cell utilizing the chirality observed in nature. However, he emphasizes that no one is currently constructing a mirror-image cell, and achieving this goal could take decades, if it is even feasible. Despite this, advancements in technologies that could support such endeavors are being made. Notably, in 2019, prior to the realization of potential risks, the US National Science Foundation allocated research grants to initiatives aimed at developing a mirror cell.
Adamala, one of the recipients of that grant, indicates that her escalating concerns ultimately led her and her team to abandon their research in this area. As the dialogue in Manchester continues, the scientific community remains at a crossroads, weighing the potential breakthroughs in mirror-image biology against the ethical and safety implications of such research.
