Claire Marris’ article, “Synthetic biology’s malaria promises could backfire,” posits that synthetic biologists—by using semi-synthetic artemisinin as a prime example of why synthetic biology is important—are repeating history and, in doing so, repeating past mistakes.  The mistake at issue first arose with the advent of genetic modification and its role in crop production, as the public realized that scientists would fail to deliver on exaggerated promises made in the late 1990s concerning this new science.  Ironically, it appears that while synthetic biologists are keen on remedying the subsequent bad reputation of genetic modification, they are attempting to do so using the exact methods—overstated promises that reach beyond scientists’ expertise or current capabilities—that had led to this bad reputation.