Published: 17-06-2024
Who do the ‘techno-optimists’ and gene-editing boosters speak for? As Prof David Christian Rose argued at a recent conference it isn’t necessarily farmers or citizens.
Regulatory Science as Propaganda
Published: 14-11-2023
At its core, powerful institutions have exploited public confidence and trust that science is produced in a neutral and impartial manner. But when private industry information is not subject to robust debate and challenge, it’s propaganda. Call it what it is and we might be able to start changing things.
Gene edited animals – public views add value to policy discourse
Published: 14-10-2022
A new public dialogue on gene edited farm animals, by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, BBSRC and Sciencewise, challenges the notion that members of the public are incapable of contributing to complex policy and regulatory discussions
How a new biotech rule will foster distrust with the public and impede progress in science
Published: 02-06-2020
Reclaiming a baseline of accountability is the first step in building public confidence in regulatory systems that work for people as well as science that the public believes in.
US academics feel the invisible hand of politicians and big agriculture
Published: 31-01-2019
As universities rely more on industry for funds, researchers taking a stand on health or environment say they’re sidelined. The Guardian newspaper delves into the influence that corporate money can have on academics and scientists, and therefore the accepted framing and narratives around global problems – and proposed solutions.
What care ethics can bring to the GMO conversation
How do we deal with the increasing polarisation in the GMO debate? Care ethics, a theme coming from ecofeminism, allows, according to the authors, to assess technologies “not simply as devices designed to create a certain end experience for a user, but as transformative systems that smuggle in numerous social and political interests”
Are GM food opponents stupid?
Published: 25-01-2019
A new survey claims to show that GM food opponents are ignorant extremists. That’s how it’s being spun- with , arguably, too much enthusiasm – in the media but does the evidence for a dumb public with nothing to add to the GMO debate really stand up?
Opinion: Science denialism is dangerous. But so is science imperialism.
Published: 25-07-2018
In this struggle to ensure that science is not pushed out from its well-earned place in our polity by those with political or economic motivations to do so, is there a risk of coming on too strong?