Team:Evry/HumanPractice/publicoutreach

From 2012.igem.org

Revision as of 22:40, 26 October 2012 by Marquet (Talk | contribs)

Public Outreach





frog has left

We participated to a science fair organized by the biocluster Genopole on October the 13th. This event called “La Fête de la Science” is lead in a shopping center so that people can and get in touch with today’s scientific practices. It was the occasion for the team to see the difficulty of such exercise. We mostly discussed about the metamorphosis of tadpoles into frogs and questions concerning the theory of evolution. More fundamental and complex work such as our synthetic orthogonal hormonal system only interested people already in close contact with biology. Such events are getting quite common and important in our societies, and nearly every team in iGEM do public outreach. Many believe that if science gets closer to society numerous controversies will be avoided. It often stated that the public doesn’t accept GMOs, nanotechnologies or nuclear energy because of some irrationality or some lack of knowledge. Thus many social apparatus are created, such as public understanding of science, public acceptability or consensus building forum, in order to help solving those issues.

Our experience triggered some questioning among the team… it is not obvious at all that coming to the public in order to explain what is science should be meant to make them accept controversial technologies. Furthermore stating that to know what a GMO is imply that we accept this technology might quite hasty. In 2001 Claire Marris published a study in EMBO reports entitled “Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the myths” [1].

Claire Marris exposes 7 myths, 7 preconceptions of public expectations and reluctances:

  • First, the public is "for" or "against" GMOs

  • Second, the public is "irrational and unscientific"

  • Third, people are obsessed with the idea that GMOs are "unnatural"

  • Fourth, agricultural versus medical use of GMOs

  • Fifth, BSE (Brain Spongiform Encephalopathy) amalgam

  • Sixth, demands for zero risks

  • Seventh, selfish about the Third World

What result from this study is that the main reluctance of the public do not concern directly the products of science or technology. People rather insist on their mistrust towards the firms doing business with these products and some lack of transparency concerning the toxicity tests. Thus public acceptability operations may miss a more important issue, the regulation of biotechnologies. As the development of synthetic biology is in close relation with its applications and the business that can be made of its products, it is quite uncertain that doing public acceptance will really help neutralize some forthcoming reluctances.



[1] Marris C. 2001, "Public View on GMOs: Deconstructing the myths", EMBO Reports Vol. 21 no. 7