The genetic manipulation of plants, animals and microbes : the social and ethical issues for consumers : a discussion paper / by Roger Straughan.

  • Roger Straughan
Date:
1989
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Credit: The genetic manipulation of plants, animals and microbes : the social and ethical issues for consumers : a discussion paper / by Roger Straughan. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    36/44 page 34
    milk contains bst and none could therefore be described as BST-free. This example underlines the broader problem of how the consumer should be given information about products which have in some way involved genetic manipulation. There is clearly a limit to the amount of information that can be squeezed on to a label, and it may be that the best way of offering detailed, technical information to those consumers who want it is not to resort to increasingly wordy labels. A possible alternative line of development is suggested by the recently established Food Safety Advisory Centre and its Foodline telephone service. Whatever method is used, however, the crucial question of language will have to be addressed. (b) Language The language used to describe and discuss genetic manipulation has been a recurring theme of this report, and it is fitting to return to it again finally in the context of consumer education. The four proposals suggested earlier in this section require that consumers be told a lot about genetic manipulation. But how is this to be done? Many of the terms used in current discussions of genetic manipulation, for example, have negative overtones. Genetic manipulation itself and genetic engineering have a sinister ring to them, and it is significant that the American pressure groups campaigning against bst always refer to it as bovine growth hormone. A UK producer of bst comments ruefully; ... the word hormone, that class of 200 plus chemicals which are the biological messengers of all living creatures, has become misunderstood and mistrusted by the consuming public (3). The language of genetic manipulation in fact tends to fall into one of two extreme categories - either the highly technical language of the scientist or the highly emotive language of the propagandist. There is an urgent need for the general public to be informed about genetic manipulation in language which avoids reference on the one hand to eukaryote-prokaryote genetic exchange, and on the other to scientists playing God and tinkering with the stuff of life. Information expressed in neutral, non-technical language is needed to enable consumers to appreciate 34
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3