Introduction

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its non-military
exploration and/or development of the Earth's oceans.
As our world further globalizes, the need for the use of the Earth's oceans increases by the day.
This policy topic, includes either the exploration of the unknown or the development of our previously
attained knowledge. Covering more than 70% of our Earth's surface, the enormous ecosystem can be of
use in tourism, energy, transportation, scientific research, military (although not under this topics
resolution of course), and a number of other possibilities that weve yet to uncover.
This resolution is set to allow us to delve into the need to better our society through a more
scientific standpoint. It will allow the debaters to understand the potential multitude of consumptions
the ocean holds. The topic will unearth many examples of which policymakers need to focus upon in
terms of the United States wellbeing, and hopefully, the worlds, as well.
It is our goal as a debater, a critical thinker, and presumably a policymaker to use the oceans
properties to the best of our ability to prove its necessity, or to show the judge the harms it will cause.
Considering this topic revolves around, arguably, one of the most important ecosystems on this planet.
To use the ocean to its full potential, many skeptics will have the chance to prove the sheer immorality
that would be exemplified through our decision, or vice versa.
In my opinion, when putting the oceans massiveness into perspective, as well as the human
races need for sustainable energy, that harnessing its power will be a large inclusion of affirmatives
(and subsequently counterplans this season). Towards the negative end, many of these policies while
having a considerable position in helping humans, marine life could be in terminal danger.
All of these accusations, of course, lie in only my thought process. This topic may possibly be
one of the broadest since its sister topic from 2003, bearing in mind that the resolution states the
Earths oceans, not only under the U.S.s jurisdiction. Due to this, I believe a plethora of international
issues will cross with our own nations needs, and provide an intricate debate on our facilitation being
key. Fiat, will be our friend.
Definitions
Substantially: To a great or significant extent (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/)
Increase: Become or make greater in size, amount, intensity, or degree (merriamwebster.com)
Federal Government: Body of individuals at the federal level that sets and administers public policy,
exercises executive and political power through customs, institutions, and laws within a country.
(Business Dictionary Online)
non: A prefix meaning not, freely used as an English formative, usually with a simple negative force as
implying mere negation or absence of something (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/non)
Military: of or relating to soldiers or the armed forces (such as the army, navy, marines, and air force);
of or relating to the army (http://www.merriam-webster.com/)
Exploration: the act of exploring something
exploring: to investigate, study, or analyze (http://www.merriam-webster.com/)
Development: A specified state of growth or advancement (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us)
Oceans: (Physical Geography) a very large stretch of sea, esp one of the five oceans of the world, the
Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, Arctic, and Antarctic (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/)
Affirmative
In order to garner affirmative offense, I have to be able to prove that a substantial increase of
the preexisting policies we have on oceanographic exploration and/or development, would
outweigh any harms the negative side presents, which I assume will be largely based off of the
environment.
This topic holds a wide variety of areas that can be explored, considering the oceans vastness
and unconquered potential. Presumably, many affirmatives will be based upon the ability to
harness the tidal energy that it beholds, and property use for more efficient trading. However,
bio-prospecting, being:
The search for plant and animal species from which medicinal drugs and other commercially
valuable compounds can be obtained. (Oxford Dictionary)
will allow, primarily, our pharmaceutical sector (along with a number of other areas that I will
further describe later on) to expand its horizons of the unexplored areas of the ocean, which I
believe will be a more in-depth approach to the resolution.
1. This card below gives an understanding of the most prominent use of this type of
ocean exploration. The NOAA, I presume, will be my specified sector that the
United States Federal Government will provide funds and oversight to, although
that is open to change once next season nears. Additionally, this card shows how
only 5% of the ocean has been explored, and even in this small portion, have a
considerable amount of marine life that can be tested for their healing
capabilities. The last sentence in the warrant of this card even shows how
further exploration is needed, providing some initial inherency.
Bioprospecting will lead to discovery of life saving marine life
NOAA, No Date (http://www.noaa.gov/features/economic_0309/medicines.html; Medicines from the Sea; National Ocean and
Atmospheric Administration; Governmental organization used for the surveillance and protection of the ocean and atmosphere)
Ocean exploration often leads to new ideas, new theories and discoveries, including new medicines.
From slime to sponges, researchers are exploring the ocean's depths for new medications to treat
cancer, bacterial infections, viruses, heart disease, pain, and other ailments. The seas contain an
uncounted number of species of plants and animals. These creatures provide a vast storehouse of
chemical compounds unknown on land. An ocean commission report lists chemicals and biological
materials from marine organisms now in use or development, including 10 anti-cancer drugs, drugs to
fight inflammation, fungus, tuberculosis, HIV, malaria and dengue. Natural Cures A number of marine
creatures have been used successfully in medical research and testing. A Caribbean sponge has been
discovered to generate compounds used in AZT (zidovudine,Retrovir), which is used to fight the AIDS
virus. Caribbean gorgonian (a soft coral) produces a group of compounds with anti-inflammatory
properties, which are also included in an anti-wrinkle cream. A tentacled aquatic organism, called
bryozoan Bugula neritina, yields a compound being tested as a cancer drug. Skates (a flat fish shaped
like a kite) have provided clues used in treating vision loss. Corals and mollusks are used to make
orthopedic and cosmetic surgical implants. Horseshoe crabs are commonly used to test for bacterial
contamination. Microalgae are used in vitamins and other nutritional supplements. Bone grafts from
coral skeletons, pain relievers from sea snail venom, and infection-fighting agents from shark skin are all
under study. The list is plentiful even though 95 percent of the ocean has yet to be explored. Exotic,
hard-to-reach places, such as deep-sea hot vents and seabed sediments, have barely been documented.
However, as advances in ocean exploration and underwater technology open new depths to scientists,
the oceans potential as a biochemical resource has become more apparent.
2. This upcoming card shows the potential from bio-prospecting, in that it will be
able to be used, not only in pharmaceuticals, but in other sectors as well.
Preferably, I could use this card as a lead-in to a few scenarios within each
advantage to bolster the impacts that I can solve for.
This will lead to the use of these imperative new sources for medicinal, agricultural,
economic and biodiversity impacts
Mary Riley et al, No Date
(http://www.piipa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=43&Itemid=29; Business of Bio-prospecting; Of an
organization that processes; Mary Riley is a Research Associate Program for Collaborative Research in the Pharmaceutical Sciences at University
of Illinois working with Public Interest Intellectual Property Advisors; Page 11)
While it can be argued that bioprospecting activities have always been part and parcel with large-scale
corporate enterprises either in the way of new sources for materials, new product development, or
new markets. However, bioprospecting has gained more attention in recent years because of the
growing awareness that new drugs will be urgently needed in the near future, either to cure currently
incurable diseases that affect increasing numbers of the world population (AIDS, Alzheimers, TB, cancer)
or else to replace drugs that are becoming increasingly ineffective to treat health problems (such as
pathogens resistant to antibiotics). Bioprospecting activites are not limited to the pharmaceutical field
alone bioprospecting can impact any industry that relies (in whole or in part) upon the access,
sourcing, processing or production of genetic resources to develop a commercially viable product for the
world market. Bioprospecting activities also underpin the agricultural and food security sector
(agribusiness and agrochemical industries), the cosmetics, health and beauty aids industries, and the
biosafety sector. Bioprospecting is also inextricably linked to sustainable economic development,
biodiversity conservation and equitable use and stewardship of global natural resources. The outline
below explores some of the resources on-line that cover these concerns.
3. Further in my approach to affirmative is the probably contention of Biotechnology. In
my previous debate years I have encountered this aspect of impact calculus and
discovered how beneficial it can be. In my persona opinion, though not impossible, it
will be harder to garner larger impacts like nuclear war, whereas areas of science and
technology will be the gold mine. The evidence below explains how bioprospecting is
the searching device for the materials needed to delve into biotechnology (which of
course has its benefits that will be later explained), which stems from the use of the
oceans biodiversity.

This leads to an increase in the use of biotechnology
MOEF 02 (Biotechnology and Bioprospecting for Sustainable Development; Ministry of Environment & Forests
Government of India; Is an combined group of officials who speak about environmental affairs;
http://www.pnuma.org/deramb/BiotechnologyandBioprospectingforSustainableDevelopment.pdf; February 18, 2002; Page 3)

1. Introduction Biotechnology, a modern science is revolutionizing production in both industry and
agriculture in certain areas. One of the main features of biotechnology is its linkages with human
welfare, environment and sustainability. Two sectors where biotechnology has already made significant
contributions are pharmaceuticals and agriculture. The search for useful products derived from
biological resources coupled with innovative ways to link benefits with conservation of biodiversity and
economic development is attracting attention worldwide. Bioprospecting describes the systematic
search for and development of new sources of chemical compounds, genes, micro- and macro
organisms, and other valuable products from nature. Bioprospecting incorporates two fundamental
goals, (i) the sustainable use through biotechnology of biological resources and their conservation, and
(2) the scientific and socioeconomic development of source countries and local communities (Sittenfeld
1996). For thousands of years, biodiversity has been source of useful compounds and materials for food,
energy, shelter, medicines, and environmental services. The overall economic value from biodiversity is
not known. However, a recent attempt estimated that biodiversity ecosystem services amounts about
US $ 2.9 trillion for the entire world. From those estimates, $ 500 million represents for ecotourism, $
200 million for pollination, $ 90 million for nitrogen fixation, and $135 million for Co2 sequestration,
worldwide ( Gordon 1998). The pharmaceutical industry has benefited from biodiversity through drugs
developed from natural compounds, while the agricultural industry improves crops by breeding them
with wild relatives (Reid et al 1993). As per one study half of the current best selling pharmaceuticals are
natural or related to natural products. (Demain 1998). The combined market worldwide for
pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, and seeds is over $400 billion annually, and genetic resources provide
the starting material for a portion of this market (Putterman 1994: Ten Kate 1995: Thayer 1998a: James
1997).

4. Generically, people will presumably run a disadvantage that includes a great power
war or a nuclear war impact. Including a link to Hegemony in my case (or at least have
it handy as an add-on) would be an easier take out if our defense on their Uniqueness
fails. Of course, even negative arguments aside it is much easier to branch off in the 2AC
with more solvency with a heg advantage if the other offense falls through. This card
explains that how biotech can give a huge lead in economic competitiveness/leadership
that puts us above other countries. Also, depending on which conflict scenario is most
prevalent in the time of the round (i.e. China/Taiwan or Indo-Pak war) we would put a
unique card of how a hegemonic stance would solve for its harms.

Biotechnology leads to US Hegemony
Reifer and Chase Dunn 02 (Biotechnology as a New Lead Industry;
http://irows.ucr.edu/papers/irows9/irows9.htm; Thomas Reifer and Christopher Chase Dunn are
analysts on connections between international hegemony and biotechnology; Biotechnology as a Lead
New Industry; Published in 2002)
Biotechnology has been heralded as the potential basis for a new round of U.S. economic
hegemony. In this discussion we will need to use a distinction between medical biotechnology and
agricultural biotechnology because of the somewhat different ways in which these branches of the
application of applied biology are related to factors that may influence the economic potential of these
technologies. Agricultural biotechnology is the application of genomics to create new crops, new
sources of animal protein, and to protect crops and domesticated animals from pests. Agricultural
biotechnology is intended to improve the human food supply by lowering the costs of production and by
improving the products. Medical biotechnology is intended to improve human health by developing new
techniques for preventing diseases, curing ailments, producing products for transplants and improving
the genetic makeup of individuals.
5. The concept of bioprospecting also delves into the realm of intellectual property.
Countries that have the resources needed for this extraction my plan would entail,
would presumably be able to make deals with the US that strengthens relations. The
card below specifies that the property rights through biodiversity create a further need
for sovereign protection which could be subsided by my plan.
Partnership on disputes of intellectual property lead to increased relations and
collaborative innovation
Sell 13
(Susan K. Sell; Professor of Political Science and International Affairs; Oxford Bibliographies; Intellectual Property in
International Relations; http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756223/obo-
9780199756223-0061.xml; 05/28/2013)
Introduction Intellectual property refers to patents, copyrights, and trademarks. In making property of
knowledge goods, scarcity is created for resources that were not formally scarce. Intellectual property
rights make commodities of knowledge goods so that they can be bought, sold, withheld, utilized, or
licensed. Once an arcane and technical topic, intellectual property has become an important focus of
contestation in international relations. Technological change, including the digital revolution, economic
globalization, and the emergence of a knowledge- and services-based economy, has led rights holders to
press for greater regulatory harmonization and higher standards of protection worldwide. Since the
adoption of a legally binding, enforceable multilateral intellectual property treaty in the trade regime in
1994, deep fault lines have emerged between countries that are net exporters of intellectual property
and those that are net importers of intellectual property. The emergence of free and open source
software and creative commons licenses has challenged traditional proprietary models of innovation
and cultural production. Clashes between producers and consumers, campaigns against end-users, and
controversies over the impact of intellectual property rights on public health, agriculture, development,
technology transfer, human rights, biodiversity, climate change, culture, research, science, and the
knowledge commons have activated an increasingly broad range of stakeholders. States, multinational
corporations, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), universities, consumers, and international
organizations all have been drawn into these controversies. Designations of property rightswhat
counts as property, who can claim ownership and on what termscreate winners and losers and, thus,
are inherently political. While patents, copyrights, and trademarks dominate the literature, other
important intellectual property rights include geographical indications, plant variety protections, and sui
generis protection, such as that covering the mask works in semi-conductor chips. The expansion of the
scope, duration, and subject matter of intellectual property rights has been likened to a second
enclosure movement, which has raised concerns about access to, and implications for, innovation. While
legal scholars have dominated the study of intellectual property, in recent years international relations
scholars have begun to analyze the politics of this dynamic area of global business regulation.

Negative
In my opinion, the negative end of this topic will lie highly in environmental protection.
Many affirmatives, including my own, that use marine life for humanitys gain, have the
possibility of harming the biodiversity in regions of the ocean. In specifics, the coral reefs are a
large source for marine life and any further tampering with the ocean could severely affect it.
Potentially, the affirmative could be trying to solve for that impact in which case the negative
would try to prove its resiliency. Of course these are just examples, in the case that a round is
based solely on the environmental aspect.
Furthermore, a sufficient range of negative routes could be based on inherency, even
though I disagree with debating on that aspect for the most part, meaning whether or not there
is anything actually hindering this plan from coming into effect, or rather if it already is. This
means that all the negative has to do is prove the status quo solves, if the affirmative cannot
show that a substantial increase is necessary.
1. Considering my research of my affirmative, it has become clear that the ocean has
many disputable areas of sovereignty and within it, a discrepancy of each countrys
intellectual property rights. If someone were to negate a plan similar to mine, it
would be possible to prove that there is a chance that an agreement of usage of
marine life inside another countrys maritime boundary could be violated.


Being deemed a biopirate disallows researches to access materials needed- No
solvency
Gollin 01 (Michael A. Gollin; a patent attorney who has pioneered intellectual property strategies that
help clients put their ideas to work; Biopiracy: The Legal Perspective- The consequences of breaking the
new rules; http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/gollin.html; actionbioscience, Feb., 2001)
There is a very simple reason for people who collect biological samples to followthe new rules on informed consent and benefit sharing. The consequences of following the old take-and-run approach biopiracy are extremely serious. Nations are going to court over misuse of their biological resources. Cancelled patents on natural product inventions Patents on natural
product inventions are subject to attack unless all public knowledge about the species in question and its use are fully disclosed. Organizations in the bioresource-rich but economically poor countries of the developing world have demonstrated a willingness to attack natural product patents on the basis of traditional knowledge, motivated by principles of justice rather than the
economic forces usually underlying patent disputes. For example, a 1995 patent, Use of Turmeric in Wound Healing, was cancelled in 1998 after an investigation instituted by Indias Council of Scientific and Industrial Research. The new evidence established that use of turmeric to promote wound healing had been known for generations in India.
Likewise, the 1986 plant patent claimed an ostensibly new, distinct variety of Banisteriopsis caapi, known in the Amazon as ayahuasca. However, new evidence establishes that the claimed plant is actually the wild uncultivated type, and is neither new nor distinctive. COICA, an organization of indigenous people, and the Amazon Coalition have requested reexamination of the
ayahuasca patent, seeking to eliminate what is perceived as an immoral expropriation of their traditional and biological heri tage. More such challenges can be anticipated.
Where a plant sample is collected illegally and then a new drug compound or valuable gene is isolated from the sample, patented, and commercialized, the patent could be held unenforceable as the result of tainted research. The tainted research doctrine is illustrated in the case Regents of the University of California v. Eli Lilly &Co. In developing cDNA encoding human insulin,
some researchers violated National Institute of Health (NIH) 1970s regulations that embargoed the use of uncertified plasmids in mammalian recombinant DNA research. They then lied in their patent application, stating that they had used a certified plasmid. The lower court held the patent unenforceable for fraud, the illegitimate fruit of a forbidden tree. The appeals court
reversed, holding that it would not have affected examination of the patent if the truth had been told. In other words, recal ling the recent impeachment proceedings, the misrepresentation in the patent was not material. This case teaches that if an invention is based on tainted research material, such as a plant sample smuggled out of a country in violation of its laws, and the
inventor lies about it in a patent, a case of fraud might be made. However, the inventor must have gained some advantage by the misrepresentation, such as being the first to make the invention. Nations can demand a share of profits from products discovered through biopiracy. Loss of profits from illegal removal of biological material If a researcher removes biological material
illegally from a source country, and then profits fromthe material, the source country or affected person could recover all or some of the profits, in a United States court, based on a theory of misappropriation and related doctrines. Thus, there is a real legal risk for someone who fails to reach agreement on an Access and Benefit Sharing Agreement (ABA) before taking a sample
home. The conditions a court might impose for a successful product could be much more onerous than one that could be negotiated at the outset, when success is still a highly unlikely outcome. This risk is highest in a country that requires an ABA.
Corporations and research facilities should not accept illegally-obtained biological materials from
collectors. Lack of clean title to biological material Clean title to biological material now means that it
was obtained legitimately, and with prior informed consent from whoever had initial control over it. If
there is no clean title, the value of the material is seriously reduced. The collector of an illegitimate
sample will not be able to pass it on, in turn, to collaborators, partners, or third parties in the normal
course of conduct for researchers. Absent assurances that the material was collected in compliance with
all applicable laws and regulations including benefit sharing, a savvy recipient of biological material will
not accept material. Moreover, if the supplier certifies that a sample was properly obtained, and it was
not, then the recipient could assert a contractual claim for damages back against the collector.
Collectors may lose their privileges in a dispute. Denial of access to samples As a practical matter, if a
collector does not agree to provide an equitable share of benefits, in advance, to the source of biological
samples, the collector may well be denied access to the samples. Simply put, the possibilities for
fieldwork will dry up.Biopirate is not a label any scientist would want. Blacklisting a
biopirate Someone who is branded as a biopirate will suffer from a bad reputation. Someone who
gains a reputation for evading access restrictions, or for being hard to deal with, may find it increasingly
difficult to find doors open for further research. A company that is associated with biopiracy may end up
with weak patents, be exposed to equitable claims for profit-sharing, lose sources of supply, face the
prospect of consumer and government boycotts, barriers to importation of biotechnology products, and
other loss of market share, and may face financial penalties. Biopiracy can be considered criminal and
result in jail time in some places.

2. The upcoming card can be perceived in two ways. The first being a general piece of
evidence for negative defense on a biotechnology advantage an affirmative may
have, and the second being a link to a politics disadvantage. The former would show
how the use of biotechnology perpetuates this revolution that can escalate to many
impacts, even including harms in a critical sense towards social values. Transitioning
to the possibility of a link card would not be hard, because A. it can be used as a
duo-usage for on and off case and B. due to the fact that it states that political
figures would have to begin to set their focus on these new issues. Combining this,
with uniqueness of a politics disadvantage, could potentially be general, yet
sufficient link evidence.

Biotechnology leads to a revolution of unstable modernity which can inhibit use of
biological weapons, harm biodiversity, disrupt relations and even perpetuation
discrimination

Rhodes 10 (Catherine Rhodes; is a Research Fellow at the Institute for Science, Ethics and Innovation at the
University of Manchester; International Governance of Biotechnology: Needs, Problems and Potential-The
Uncertain Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution;
http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/view/InternationalGovernanceBiotechnology_9781849661812/chapter-ba-
9781849661812-chapter-0000465.xml; Bloomsbury Academic; Nov 30, 2010)

The biotechnology revolution has involved major technological change the move to the new ability to understand and manipulate life forms at the genetic level.
All major technological change has social and economic consequences and because of the breadth of applications of modern biotechnology, the socio-economic
consequences will be many and diverse. It promises a new level of control over ourselves and our environment. There are many positive consequences to this.
Human health can be improved through better understanding, treatment and prevention of disease. New solutions can be found to some of our environmental
problems with alternative sources of energy, cleaner manufacturing processes and new means of reducing pollution. Novel agricultural technologies can provide
crops with enhanced or novel traits: reducing inputs; improving nutritional value; or expanding land available for agricultural use all of which can contribute to
improved food security. Plants can be used for growing drugs and vaccines. Modern biotechnology has potential to contribute to poverty alleviation through
improvements in health and food security, boosting economic development prospects. In the security realm, biodefence (i.e. defence against biological attack)
capabilities can be improved through use of genetic engineering technologies. However, it is extremely unlikely that the revolution will have only positive
consequences historically this has not been the case with any major new technology. This is pointed out by Jeremy Rifkin in The Biotech Century (1998, pp. 356):
If history has taught us anything, it is that every new technological revolution brings with it both benefits and costs. The more powerful the technology is at
expropriating and controlling the forces of nature, the more exacting the price we will be forced to pay in terms of disruption and destruction wreaked on the
ecosystems and social systems that sustain life. The negative consequences of the biotechnology revolution may well be
severe due to an unprecedented level of directed interference with natural processes. While modern
biotechnology can give us new tools to manage environmental problems it also presents new dangers,
particularly in its threat to biodiversity. It may also present new threats to human health. It certainly
challenges many human values and beliefs. Development may be hampered by changes in ownership
patterns in relation to novel crops and seeds and related shifts to monocultural agriculture practices.
And the same tools that can improve biodefence can also be used to create more effective biological
warfare agents, increasing the threat of their use. As well as these more specific consequences, the
biotechnology revolution will have more general consequences. Changes in the geography of
agricultural production are likely to occur, and changes in global trade relations may create new winners
and losers or act to reinforce current inequalities. There will be changes in labour relations and in
manufacturing processes. Many ethical dilemmas are raised by the new technologies and the
possibilities they bring. People will face new choices about health care and reproduction. Social values
and beliefs may have to adjust to incorporate new knowledge. Far more knowledge will be available
about people's genetic endowments and what the implications of these are; which also opens the
possibility of new forms of discrimination. There are implications for changes in power relations. There
will be a need for political direction to deal with many of these challenges at the same time as state
control is diminishing in areas such as health care.
3. The affirmative holds the burden of proving that the United States Federal
Government must do the plan, rather than the private sector or another country
entirely. In terms of my affirmative, the negative could prove that a NGO could have
a faster initiative in the testing of marine life for medicine, or another country would
solve for their impacts. In the case of my card below, a counterplan could be
developed to show that the negative team wins competiveness in the round.
Below, it dictates that China and the US can collaborate together to expand the
biotechnology sector worldwide (which potentially could be more beneficial that my
affirmative as it stands).
China is largely focused on increasing their biotechnology industry and can bolster the
benefits with US help
Nevrivy and Bakin 10
(Daniel J. Nevrivy, Ph.D. is the founder of Nevrivy Patent Law Group, a Washington, DC-based firm that assists
biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies with their intellectual property needs. Robert E. Bakin, Ph.D., is a
registered patent agent. Before becoming a patent agent, Robert was a cancer researcher at the University of
Virginia and Georgetown University.; China gets serious about biotech; http://www.fiercebiotech.com/special-
reports/chinas-rise-poses-challenges-opportunities-biopharma-industry; Fierce Biotech; Article insinuates by the
end of 2010; Page 1)
China recently announced an effort to spend $9.2 billion on technological research and development by
the end of 2010 with the biotechnology sector being highlighted as a major funding recipient.[1] China's
bold and strategic announcement to increase its innovative capability came on the heels of President
Obama's recent speech before the National Academy of Sciences where he proclaimed a vision for
America to lead in scientific discovery and innovation and pledged to devote more than 3 percent of the
U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) to research and development. While the U.S. has already ceded large
swaths of the manufacturing battlefield to the Chinese, China's willingness to strategically invest their
vast financial resources demonstrates a firm resolve to becoming a competing force in innovative
industries such as biotechnology. While China still has considerable hurdles to overcome before it is on
par with U.S. biomedical research and development, the segmented nature of the biotech and pharma
industries, and current and future cost pressures confronting these industries, provide some near term
opportunities for Chinese firms to compete. In addition, the growth of the Chinese market and U.S.
expertise in commercializing cutting edge research provides opportunities for U.S. firms to expand their
market in China. China's resolve to enhance its innovative capability should also reinforce the U.S.
commitment to maintaining a leadership role in these industries. China takes on innovation China's
growing capability and commitment to innovative research was highlighted by recent reports that two
separate teams of Chinese scientists successfully transformed normal adult cells into embryonic stem
cells and subsequently produced live mice from the newly created cells. Dr. Fanyi Zeng, one of the
principal investigators in the study, will be discussing her heralded work at the upcoming World Stem
Cell Summit in Baltimore, Maryland. Once a weak aggregate of individual researchers, institutes,
companies, and investors, the Chinese biotech industry grew 30% annually to $3 billion between 2000
and 2005. [2] By 2010, the Chinese biotech market is projected to reach $9 billion. With nearly 20% of
the world's population, China has an estimated domestic market of 130 million daily consumers of
pharmaceuticals.[ 3] Despite being traditionally dominated by biogenerics, China's biotech market is
taking steps toward serious domestic innovation. Recall that in 2003, the Chinese FDA approved the
world's first commercialized gene therapy product, Gendicine. Today, China boasts more than 580
biopharma companies, the majority of which have net assets of less than $10 million . Areas of major
innovation include stem cells, monoclonal antibodies, cancer, HIV, and vaccine
development . Licensing deals, both domestic and foreign, are on the rise and much needed reform of
its intellectual property laws has been initiated since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.
4. The aspect of logic and the interworking of bioprospecting must be taken into
thought as well. Of course the affirmative could lead to the extraction of marine life,
but at the same time, the quantities are undetermined. In terms of a cost-benefit
analysis, the next card shows how the specific specimens brought up to the surface
cannot even always handle the conditions and die before any testing can be done. If
the plan does not involve any improvement of existing techniques they cannot
solve. Not only this, but even the amount we do find (not even pursuing the fact
that they may die) is very low and not worth the cost to search down that low.
No Solvency- Extraction of deep sea creatures is expensive and many of the specimens
die before surfacing
Carlye 13
(Ryan Carlyle, BSChE, Subsea Hydraulics Engineer;
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/01/31/why-dont-we-spend-more-on-exploring-the-oceans-
rather-than-on-space-exploration/; Why Don't We Spend More On Exploring The Oceans, Rather Than
On Space Exploration?; 1/13/2013; Forbes)
Im one hundred and twenty miles offshore in the Gulf of Mexico right now, working on installing
seafloor equipment for an oil project. No one spends more time exploring the deepest oceans than the
oil industry. In the last twenty years, there has been a veritable explosion of deepwater exploration,
with extensive subsea surveys for pipelines and anchors and oil well infrastructure. We have fantastic
subsea robots that let us see and work down to 10,000 ft depth as well as a host of seismic imaging
systems to see below the seafloor, sonar, Doppler current sensors, monitoring buoys, and so forth. The
equipment to explore the oceans exists today and is in routine use for energy exploration. For example:
Remote Operated Vehicles (ROVs) So as someone whose job deals with exploring the ocean deeps
see my answer to Careers: What kinds of problems does a subsea hydraulics engineer solve? I can tell
you that the ocean is excruciatingly boring. The vast majority of the seafloor once you get >50 miles
offshore is barren, featureless mud. On face, this is pretty similar to the empty expanses of outer space,
but in space you can see all the way through the nothing, letting you identify targets for probes or
telescopes. The goals of space exploration are visible from the Earth, so we can dream and imagine
reaching into the heavens. But in the deep oceans, visibility is less than 100 feet and travel speed is
measured in single-digit knots. A simple seafloor survey to run a 100 mile pipeline costs a cool $50
million. The oceans are vast, boring, and difficult/expensive to explore so why bother? Sure, there are
beautiful and interesting features like geothermal vents and coral reefs. But throughout most of the
ocean these are few and far between. This is a pretty normal view from a subsea robot: Despite the
difficulty, there is actually a lot of scientific exploration going on in the oceans. Heres a pretty good
public website for a science ROV mission offshore Oregon: 2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition To
reinforce my point about it being boring, heres a blog entry from that team where they talk about how
boring the sea floor is: 2009 Pacific Northwest Expedition What IS really interesting in the deep ocean is
the exotic life. You see some crazy animals that are often not well-known to science. Something floats
by the camera 5000 ft down, and you say what the hell was that? and no one knows. Usually its just
some variety of jellyfish, but occasionally we find giant* isopods: Or giant alien squid monsters:
Unfortunately, deep-sea creatures rarely survive the trip to surface. Their bodies are acclimated to the
high pressures (hundreds of atmospheres), and the decompression is usually fatal. Our ability to
understand these animals is very limited, and their only connection to the surface biosphere is through a
few food chain connections (like sperm whales) that can survive diving to these depths. Were
fundamentally quite disconnected from deep ocean life. Also, there is no hope of ever establishing
human habitation more than about 1000 ft deep. The pressures are too great, and no engineering or
materials conceivable today would allow us to build livable-sized spaces on the deep sea floor. The two
times humans have reached the deepest part of the ocean, it required a foot-thick flawless metal sphere
with barely enough internal space to sit down. As far as I can tell, seafloor living is all but impossible a
habitable moon base would be vastly easier to engineer than a seafloor colony. See my answer
to International Space Station: Given the actual space station ISS, would it be cheaper to build the
equivalent at 3-4-5 miles deep underwater? Why?

Conclusion
Our future topic lies upon the exploration/development of our Earths oceans, but it also highly impacts
governmental access to these oceans. This resolution will be influenced by the success of our
technological sector and the ability to use our knowledge in compliance with others. The comparison I
have given between the affirmative and the negative has shown (in terms of bioprospecting) that
science does not only influence the environment, although it shows that there is a wide range of issues
that can occur just from the use of another countrys property. This topic is much more than meets the
eye, in that, its not only about knowledge production from the ocean, but the process in which we
obtain it.