24-08-2012, 02:15 PM
Biotechnology education
Biotechnology Education.pdf (Size: 68.34 KB / Downloads: 27)
Eric Grace, in his excellent book entitled Biotechnology
ºnzipped: Promises and Realities [1] (reviewed in this
issue of Biochemical Education), concludes that many
public anxieties about biotechnology are misplaced and
are best addressed by more education. He also contends
that the domination of scientiÞc research by corporate
interests is at the core of most anxieties about biotechnology.
Whilst these views have been aired previously by
others, I found GraceÕs wide-scope consideration of biotechnology
provided a particularly good rationalization
for these views. Yet Grace pays only scant regard to
surveys of public opinion of biotechnology. His conclusions,
although persuasive, seemed to be based largely
on qualitative information.
A guide to public opinion survey information on biotechnology
has recently been published [2], which provides
summaries (inevitably somewhat subjective) for 54
surveys carried out in various countries. The guide has
been used here to investigate how GraceÕs conclusions
rest with public opinions on biotechnology; three pertinent
questions relating to GraceÕs conclusions were considered
(survey dates are given in parentheses).
Who are regarded as trusted sources of biotechnology
information?
In Europe (1993), consumer and environmental organizations,
schools and universities are regarded as the
most trusted sources of information on biotechnology.
However, the credibility of di¤erent sources of biotechnology
information vary between di¤erent European
countries (1993). Consumer and environmental organizations
are seen as the most reliable sources of information
in the Netherlands (1991Ð1996), whereas in Denmark
scientists are regarded as the most-trustworthy
(1987Ð1989). In the UK (1991), source credibility has
been identiÞed as an important determinant of public
response to information about genetic information. In
the USA (1995), where factual information is believed to
increase consumer acceptance, independent health and
scientiÞc experts are seen as credible sources of information.
Also in the USA (1993), scientists are trusted as an
information source Ð but they are not trusted to act
properly without strict regulations.