EMBO

From GMOs to Nanotechnology and beyond; learning from the past, looking to the future
Andrew Moore, Science & Society Programme Manager, European Molecular Biology Organization

EMBO

The crux of the matter

GMO debate

Consumer information: You can easily recognise genetically modified foods by their evil smile; crops without genes just look stupid.

Society wants, needs and appreciates marvelous things, but is it prepared to accept the way in which they are made, and their possible risks?

Nanotechnology
Picture sources: Fruit and veg. basket: EMBO reports, 5, 5, (2004); immune cell: Kompetenzzentrum fr Nanolanalytik, Munich, Germany; biomolecular motor: Cornell University, USA

EMBO

Part 1: the Tomato - or public

knowledge and opinion about the technology

EMBO

GM - public knowledge and opinion

Are there genes in tomatoes? Is (certain) DNA toxic? (popular terminology didnt help) GM Perceived as an unregulated technological revolution. Natural (good) versus unnatural (bad) Perceived risks outweighed marginal benefit. EU-15: 86% only if scientifically proven harmless New states: 79% only if scientifically proven harmless EU-15: 71% dont want GM food New states: 68% dont want GM food UK particularly strongly affected (media and NGOs)

EMBO

Nanotech - public knowledge and opinion (UK)

29% aware of term (68% positive), but 34% of aware had no definition 46% of aware define it as making things small/small technology (generally very little knowledge, 1 defines nano) Perceived as technical evolution Some benefits already taken for granted In general, people more positive about nanotechnology, and more in touch with its applications, but large awareness and knowledge gaps

EMBO

Part 2: the culturing of public opinion - or the effect of NGOs and the media

EMBO

GM - the effect of NGOs and the media

Consumer groups, environmental and activist organisations were very successful in guiding public opinion against GM - very polarised stances. Media had a bonanza of saleable material, mainly based on generating fear of the new technology. Eventually: absolute confusion and lack of distinctions

EMBO

Headlines around the time of the Great GM Debate

The GM pollen that can mean a cloud of death for butterflies

Daily Mail, 20.05.1999

EMBO

Mutant porkies on the menu

News of the World, 20.05.1999

EMBO

GM risk in daily food of millions

The Guardian, 24.05.1999

EMBO

GM food threatens the planet

The Observer, 20.06.1999

EMBO

M&S sells genetically modified Frankenpants

The Independent on Sunday 18.06.1999

EMBO

EMBO

Frankenstein tomato?

www.veggies.co.uk

EMBO

GM reduced to a joke-like catch-phrase

EMBO

Nanotech - the effect of NGOs and the media

ETC (for global regulation, governance, fair use) Moratorium called for in 2002 Main concerns are nanoparticles and nanotubes Anger at use of anti-erosion nanotech product Nanobiotechnology, green goo, nanobiotechnology comes alive, coming to life sciences Greenpeace (sees benefits as well as problems) Scaremongering on the Internet about the evil-ness of nanotechnology; novels of doom scenarios Headlines mixed, depending on subject

EMBO

Headlines on nanotechnology

Charles fears science could kill life on Earth

The Scotsman 27.04.2003

EMBO

Prince asks scientists to look into 'grey goo'

The Telegraph 05.06.2003

EMBO

HRH the Prince of Wales: Menace in the minutiae

New nanotechnology has potential dangers as well as benefits

The Independent 15.06.2004

EMBO

Flower 1,000th of a hair

The Sun 24.06.2004

THIS astonishingly beautiful flower is less than one THOUSANDTH the width of a human hair

EMBO

Part 3: Industry - or who sells what to

whom, and how

EMBO

GM - who sold what to whom, and how

All about the very food we eat every day Large multinational, Monsanto RoundUp ready Soya imports to Europe, 1996 Massive, targeted advertising campaign Approach: educational rather than consultational Immediate outrage from NGOs and consumers More battles followed (Syngenta/Greenpeace)

EMBO

Nanotech - whos selling what to whom, and how

We dont (yet) ingest nanotechnology products. Many small companies, not selling much yet Very large diversity of technologies Companies very sensitive to damage that could be done by negative public perception Many applications still some way off, so time to develop good PR and consultation strategies Existing applications mainly improvements hidden away in an existing device Some problems with the definition and use of the term nanotechnology

EMBO

RS / RAE definitions "Nanoscience is the study of phenomena and manipulation of materials at atomic, molecular and macromolecular scales, where properties differ significantly from those at a larger scale." "Nanotechnology is the design, characterisation, production and application of structures, devices and systems by controlling shape and size at nanometre scale."

EMBO

Sequoia Pacific Research Company and SoilSETTM

SoilSET is a chemically engineered liquid organic binder Why is SoilSET a nanotechnology? The SoilSET mixture is configured through reactions at the nano measurement level. SoilSET contains no manufactured nanoparticles Definition of nanotechnology: The application of science to developing new materials and processes by manipulating molecular and atomic particles

EMBO

Part 4: Investigations and regulations - or is it safe?

EMBO

GM - is it safe?
No evidence of adverse effects on consumers Extensive farm scale evaluations (2003) Report from ACRE (2004) Review of science behind GM (2004) Several reports on scientific, social and ethical issues Nuffield Council paper on use of GM in dev. World BMA states No robust evidence to prove that GM foods are unsafe. (2004) New EU regulations on labelling and traceability None of the above had any noticeable effect.

EMBO

Nanotech - is it safe?
RS evidence on environmental applications and impacts (2003) RS / RAE study (July 2004) Many nanotechnologies pose no new risks to health A substance needs new safety testing once in nanoparticulate form Life cycle assessments needed No case for a moratorium EU funded project Nanosafe (FP6) in progress How will the precautionary principle be applied if and when needed?

EMBO

Part 5: Europe and the rest of the world - or our involvement in the
bigger picture

EMBO

GM - our involvement in the bigger picture

Europe is out of the picture. Romania only significant producer (0.05 million hectares); USA 42.8 million (Clive James, 2003) Green biotech has virtually disappeared (Syngenta moves GM research out of Europe, July 2004) Funding for GM crop research down Some of our best young scientists leaving The precautionary principle applied too much led to stagnation and regression. If you dont play the game, you cant make the rules. Such polarity is disadvantageous to everyone in Europe, and many outside.

EMBO

Nanotech - our involvement in the bigger picture

Europe is up there with the others (USA 1.6B$, Asia 1.6B$, Europe 1.3B$) (luxresearch 2004). World-leading centres (Cambridge, Oxford, Munich) EC dedicated to continued substantial support, realising that Europe needs to compete globally.

EMBO

Part 6: Scientists - outreach or out of

reach?

EMBO

GM - scientists; outreach or out of reach?

A few shining exceptions, but generally: Unaware of public concerns Media unfriendly / un-savvy Unprepared for emotional arguments Unused to listening (rather than giving information) Unable to compete with other opinion makers Un-co-ordinated and unsupportive of each other Reactive instead of proactive Swiss referendum forced them onto streets to save their research

EMBO

Nanotech - scientists; outreach or out of reach?

Scientists more aware of social context of research Scientists improving communication skills (media / communication workshops) Many realise need for interdisciplinary discussion with academics trained in the humanities. More professional PR from research institutes

EMBO

Conclusions and short term outlook for nanotechnology

EMBO

Nanotechnology has generally not yet reached the state of application that elicit intense public interest. Nanotechnology is a big investment; there is a lot at stake. Public fears exist concerning self replicating systems; regulators concerned about particles etc. Nanobiotechnology can easily fall into the pre-made trap of GM. Nanobiotechnology will likely give us the first nanobiologically active entities for use in the human body. Bio-nanomachines have already been made by nature, and their adaptation for use by or in humans is on the horizon.

EMBO

Possible problems with public perception of nanobiotechnology could easily spread to whole field (interdisciplinarity). A very large part of the science of the future will likely depend on nano-technological approaches. Perhaps scientists and industry should concentrate on talking in terms of applications rather than nano-x or y. If somethingunconsented outrages or a report scares, the GM saga could be repeated with nanotechnology (human or environmental risk). Many unknowns, prospects that seem fantastic today

EMBO

Looking to the future - lessons

learnt, and how to apply them

EMBO

Public outrage is a very powerful component of risk perception - scientists (and industry) heed! Outrage at one sector of a field can spread like wildfire > indiscriminate demonisation. Once public perception badly damaged, no number of studies can get discussions back onto a balanced track. Unilateral moratoria not as good as remaining in the game, however slowly you move. Misconceptions about lack of regulation of R&D must not be allowed to develop - scientists communicate! Science is not out of control.

EMBO

Scientists should: be more proactive rather than reactive; co-ordinate and support each other; master the art of rapid media communication; master the art of risk communication. Early risk identification and analysis Consultation by industry; not post hoc convincing Absolute clarity, accuracy and transparency; resisting temptation to use nano trivially as a marketing aid. Public fears or possible areas of anxiety must be discussed, however irrational they may seem, or however far from emergence the technology in question is. Introduction of latest science and debate in classroom.

EMBO

And what became of the GM tomato?

QuickTime and a GIF decompressor are needed to see this picture.

EMBO