|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
1st
EMBL/EMBO Joint Conference 2000 |
 |
|
Session
IV |
|
|
|
Science in the spotlight |
|
| |
Julian kinderlerer [Chair], Assistant
Director of the Sheffield Institute of Biotechnological Law
and Ethics, UK
There are a number of issues that have to be addressed in our discussion.
It is clear that a very large proportion of the public is opposed
to the introduction of foods, feeds or agricultural products that
have been modified using modern biotechnology.
If we are convinced that GM foods pose little or no risk to human
health and to the environment, how do we convince others? How do
we justify our conviction? If this conviction is based on comparison,
why test if we don't test everything?
Why can we not test new GM-derived foods in the same way as we
test new medicines? What are the constraints for testing foods which
suggest that we should not apply the same standards as we insist
on for pharmaceuticals. There are many answers, including the simple
question as to what constitutes a dose.
Why is it acceptable to consider GM as a class, rather than discussing
each modified product in relation to the changes made and possible
predicted effects, trying to take into account indirect and delayed
effects. We can be fairly sure that the products currently on the
market have no immediate effect on consumers [or we would have already
seen the impact]. We have some evidence that the impact on the environment
has been benign, if not providing an advantage - this evidence suggests
that wildlife diversity has actually increased. Others speculate,
based on laboratory experiments, that the delayed or indirect effects
could be dreadful for the environment. Can we find any common ground?
When traits are introduced that have real changes on the way in
which products interact with the environment, such as drought resistance,
saline tolerance, modified oils, will not the blanket objection
and therefore the blanket acceptance by scientists make the assessment
more difficult and more dangerous?
Biography
Julian kinderlerer
Julian Kinderlerer is currently Assistant Director
of the Sheffield Institute of Biotechnological
Law and Ethics. His plans for the near future
include starting an approved and large project
funded by the Wellcome Trust providing an on-line
resource for bioethics in the UK. He has been
involved in issues relating to the regulation
of Biotechnology worldwide for many years, having
joined the UK's Advisory Committee on Genetic
Modification in 1984, when it was founded. He
is currently seconded to the UNEP in Nairobi to
help develop capacity Building projects in Biosafety
in terms of the Cartagena Protocol and the Biological
Diversity Convention. |
|
|
|
|
