INTERVIEW were quick off the mark, and that’s great I must say: they put all their resources into the development of a vaccine against the coronavirus. Technically, it’s not tremen- dously different to developing a drug for cancer. Conceptually, however, it’s much more complex and much more difficult. But they did it, which is admirable. And that was also the idea back then. You set new standards in biochemistry and molecular biology, researched the differentiation of cells, the multiplication of genetic material, prions and associated diseases such as BSE, as well as the big world of viruses. What fascinates you so much about viruses? As a researcher, indeed, you are interested in viruses because they are good model systems for practicing sequencing, for conducting the first genetic engineering experiments. Apart from the fact that they are also pathogens. But you can only fight them if you know what you’re talking about and if you know what you’re working on. The major achievement or breakthrough with the coronavirus came when some- one published this sequence on January 27, 2020. Then everyone, including the BioNTech founders and many others, could draw appropriate conclusions and start working with it. The fact that we can currently lead an almost normal life again in this country can be attributed to the effective vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Despite ge- netic engineering in biological production, the novel vaccines are welcomed by the majority of the population. Genetic engi- neering in agriculture, on the other hand, is widely rejected by society. Recently, you called for a change of perspective in ge- netic policy. How could this be achieved? To date, it has not been achieved. Medical applications have been accepted from the very beginning. Such as the first time insulin was produced by means of ge- netic engineering. Suddenly, the difficult conditions under which pancreases from cattle all over the world were transported frozen to Europe or the U.S. and from which insulin was then isolated, could be elimi- nated. That was over in one fell swoop and everyone else was able to produce insulin. Hundreds of these proteins are now on the market. Growth factors, monoclonal antibodies etc. This is accepted because it works. In agriculture, a kind of proxy war is being fought with the help of genetic engineering. Agriculture as it is currently practiced is not sustainable. In Europe and in Germany, it’s getting better and better. But these huge fields that you see in Brazil and in Ukraine, where the farms have an average size of 4,000 to 5,000 hectares, there is not a single farm in Bavaria of that size. You can no longer pluck the weeds by hand, you need plants that can either somehow cope with them or you need insecticides. The population is against insecticides and herbicides because they are chemicals, even though they have been tested hundreds of times. But in this way, the whole of agriculture is discredited and, with it, genetic engineering, which is supposedly to blame. In Europe, how- ever, there is no genetic engineering in agriculture at all because it is prohibited. Nevertheless, agriculture is not sustainable and attempts are continually made to limit the areas of land and to achieve sustain- ability. By banning herbicides etc. Why I have hope now is because a new era has dawned. There is a new technology, I call it genetic engineering 2.0, namely CRISPR/ Cas technology, which can be used to edit genomes. So, you no longer have to isolate and transfer whole genes, but can change individual building blocks. Two women – Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna – were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry two years ago for this tech- nology. This technology has enormous potential because, unlike conventional genetic engineering, it no longer involves genes but individual building blocks. On the occasion of BioM’s 25th anniver- sary, what are your hopes for the next 25 years, for the complete biotech industry and for BioM? BioM has of course been key to this whole story. Mr. Domdey, at that time a dedi- cated group leader at the Gene Center and one of the first, if not the first young scientist, set up the center envisaged in the BioRegio application, which we sub- sequently won, when it was clear in the summer of 1997 that I would be leaving as DFG President. Many of the things we see here, especially all the companies, are of course his babies. Achieving this was a mammoth task. Not only did you have to empower young people who wanted to start companies, but you needed money. Then you needed permission to build here. Then you needed the state government. He somehow convinced everyone that this would work. One big wish would be that this continues in the future. It’s fair to say that this is the century of biology. The new CRISPR technology, which has since been further developed, has modified, or is opening up, I would almost have said, endless new possibilities. Not only for basic research, but also for company start-ups. The concept of interdisciplinarity persists. Back then, we had physicians, biologists, chemists, pharmacists, microbiologists, everyone together. That has not changed at all. On the contrary, because of the new instruments that are now available, it is be- coming more and more important. But you must maintain that standard of excellence. You must still try to find young people. I’m now going to say something really mean: I don’t think you find young people with committees. Not if you appoint ten people and say: this microbiologist is now the best in the world. It sounds very arrogant, but I was lucky at the time that I was allowed to do it on my own. It could have gone wrong; it could have been a disaster if the wrong people had been appointed. But you must observe the field closely and enjoy these things. I can only hope that there will be people like that in the future. Today, the Gene Center is managed very well. I can only hope that there are people who will continue to do that and especially continue so methodically, also here at BioM. You can listen to the full interview from our BioM podcast series Biotech Talk aus Bayern in German or read it in English under: www.bio-m.org/Podcast/Interview_Winnacker 38 BIOTECH IN BAVARIA - REPORT 2021|22