Public questions gene technology, says new study

The more people think about biotechnology developments, like genetically-modified food and gene therapy, the more they consider the social consequences of where the science is taking us.

That is one conclusion that Murdoch researcher Renato Schibeci has come to following Australia's most thorough investigation into public views of some recent biotechnology developments.

Along with Ian Barns, of Murdoch's Institute for Science and Technology Policy, Professor Schibeci has carried out special focus discussions with individuals and community groups to gauge their attitudes towards examples of gene technology, such as genetically modified tomatoes and pork, and gene therapy to help those with cystic fibrosis.

They found that people were ambivalent towards the new technology; especially wary of the "downsides" they perceived that came with the developments.

The researchers' method involved focus group discussions with people who had an understanding and familiarity with the issues and came from interest groups in the area. In the case of the cystic fibrosis discussion, the groups were disease support groups, religious groups and other community groups such as consumers and environmentalists.

Members of these groups considered issues beyond the consumerist, like clinical issues, legislative concerns, research priorities and wider ethical considerations.

The researchers drew two main conclusions about the exercise. The first was that lay people tended to consider biotechnology issues in a wider, social context than, say, scientists or other experts. Second, the study strongly supported the need for better mechanisms in the community and political system for public information and consultation about significant technology issues.

Professor Schibeci, who is an expert on the role of science in society, said, as in other scientific areas, biotechnology scientists had tended to view a sceptical public as ignorant about technical developments.

"Scientists tend to think: 'If only the public were informed about the developments, they would accept the 'risks' associated with biotechnology developments," he said.

However, such a response missed the point — the community not only needed the information but wanted to understand how to live with the issues related to new developments.

"The community also want a stake in determining the role of new technologies in society," said Professor Schibeci.