"
Ethics
Benefit
and Risk Perception of Synthetic Biology by Laymen in Various Countries
A Survey by the “international Genetically Engineered
Machine”
(iGEM)
Team Freiburg 2009
Abstract
In the
course of the “international Genetically Engineered
Machines” (iGEM)
competition, the Freiburg team conducted a survey to discover the
general
population´s opinion on genetic engineering and synthetic
biology. To obtain a
global perspective, the survey was conducted in 13 countries across the
world. Our
aim was to collect opinions from laymen who do not study biology and
are not involved
in biological research. Altogether, 306 people between 15 and 80 years
were interviewed
in their mother tongue with five questions concerning the relation of
synthetic
biology to health, food, risks, prospects and ethical-moral worries.
Overall, a
huge lack of understanding about gene technology and synthetic biology
was
observed in every country. A negative, skeptical, and incredulous
outlook over
the potential benefits of synthetic biology became apparent, especially
concerning genetically-modified food. In contrast, people have notable
confidence in gene technology concerning medical research and the
contribution
of synthetic biology to environmental and energy problems.
Introduction
Synthetic
Biology is the standardized, modularized design of biological
systems and organisms with help from standardized
“BioBricks” involving several
scientific disciplines. Based on the principles of genetic engineering,
it has
been steadily growing and has become its own discipline distinct from
conventional biotechnology. The worldwide interconnection between
different
countries and cultures is higher than ever before. Thus, problems such
as
climate change, epidemics, pollution and starvation are becoming
globally
recognized issues. Modern research in genetic engineering tries to find
possible solutions to special aspects of these difficulties. However,
these
technologies raise ethical and moral worries and important questions
about its
challenges and limits. A survey was conducted to determine whether the
perception
of new technologies such as genetic technology and synthetic biology is
influenced by the nationality of laymen not familiar with the topic.
Survey
and Results
Because we were
highly interested in the opinions of persons from
different countries, we tried to interview the majority of people in
their
country of origin. In total 306 persons were interviewed with at least
20
persons per country (Fig. 1). In order to interview the persons of
interest in
their proper language, the questionnaires were translated into Chinese,
English, French, German, Spanish, Romanian, Portuguese, Italian,
Japanese and
Russian (Pdf files 1-10).
In the case of
the Bahamas, Brazil, England, France, Germany, Italy,
Spain and the USA, almost all investigations were carried out directly
in the
respective countries of interest. People were interviewed at public
locations
such as pedestrian areas, bus stops, shopping centers, university
campuses etc,
or in a few cases, by telephone calls. People from China, Japan,
Romania,
Russia and the Ukraine were interviewed via the internet using such
methods as
e-mail, Skype etc. or telephone calls (Fig. 11).
In general, the
five questions regarding gene technology and moral
issues were read to the person who chose one of three possible answers
(yes,
no, or I don´t know). Afterwards, the interviewees had the
chance to add
personal comments and ideas.
To get a better
idea of the demographics of the interviewees, each person
was asked for their sex (Fig. 8), age (Fig. 7), actual residence (Fig.
10), and
occupation. Occupations were later classified into different categories
including pupil, science student, humanities student, scientific
employee, and
non-scientific employee (Fig. 9). Data (pdf file 11) were collected and
analyzed with Excel.
 |
| Figure 1: Total number of interviewees per country. |
 |
|
Figure
2: Percentages of interviewee responses to the question: “In
case of severe
disease, would you take drugs produced by means of gene
technology?” Blue
indicates a positive response, red a negative and green
indifference/ignorance.
|
 |
|
Figure 3:
Percentages of interviewee responses to the question: “What
do
you think about genetically modified food?
Would you by such food?” Blue indicates a
positive response, red a
negative and green indifference/ignorance.
|
 |
|
Figure 4:
Percentages of interviewee responses to the question: “Do you
believe that synthetic biology can solve problems concerning energy,
production
and health?” Blue indicates a positive response, red a
negative and green
indifference/ignorance.
|
 |
|
Figure 5:
Percentages of interviewee responses to the question: “Do you
believe that synthetic biology is a risk for health and
environment?” Blue
indicates a positive response, red a negative and green
indifference/ignorance.
|
 |
|
Figure 6:
Percentages of interviewee responses to the question: “Do you
have ethical-moral concerns regarding gene technology?” Blue
indicates a
positive response, red a negative and green indifference/ignorance.
|
 |
|
Figure 7: Age
demographics of interviewees divided into decades starting
at 15 years.
|
 |
|
Figure 8:
Gender demographics of interviewees, percentage male or
female.
|
 |
|
Figure 9:
Professional categories of interviewees. Raw data was divided
into six groups: pupil, sciences student, sciences employee,
non-science
employee, and unknown.
|
 |
|
Figure 10:
Percentage of current residence of interviewees at time of
interview. Categories include located in the country of origin, located
in Germany
in the course of exchange, or located in Germany with immigrant status.
|
 |
|
Figure 11:
Percentage of interviews performed by personal interview,
telephone call, or internet correspondence.
|
Discussion
In the case of
endangered health, 73% of interviewees would take drugs
produced by means of gene technology (Fig.2). The highest positive
response was
observed in Italy, Spain, Romania, and the USA with over 70%. The
largest negative
response was found in the Bahamas with more than 60%. It was observed
that the
expression “severe disease” often pushed people to
answer yes, even if the idea
of gene technology derived medication was generally mistrusted.
Only 20% of the
interviewees responded that they would buy genetically-modified
food (Fig.3). Frequently mentioned reasons for this opinion were: i)
unknown
consequences for human health such as cancer or allergies ii) threat to
“natural” biotopes and plant species, iii) loss of
flavor and lack of need for
such genetic modifications, because all essential food is already
present on
earth. The most prominent populations against the marketing of
genetically-modified
food are the Bahamians with 100%, and the Germans with 90%. In Germany
the
motivation to choose “bio” or
“eco” products instead of genetically-modified or
treated products was frequently observed. In general many people are
afraid
that conventional food will be suppressed by genetic modified food and
prices
will skyrocket. The nutrition of the Romanian population is still based
on home
farming and traditional agricultural products. This is presumed to be
the
reason why most of the people do not want to eat artificially modified
food and
therefore become dependent on the countries selling genetically
engineered
seeds. In the USA most of the people do not like the idea of
genetically
modified food either. However, they buy it because it is generally
accepted and
consequently not well labeled as such. The USA is one of the leading
countries
for “Green Gene Technology”. An astounding 40% of
the cultivatable land is used
for RoundupReady-Soy (RR-Soy),
which
was first introduced by Monsantos in 1996. It contains a modified gene
that
makes it resistant against the herbicide Roundup, in order to be
treated but
not damaged by this herbicide.
A positive 48%
of the interviewees believe that with the help of synthetic
biology problems such as energy, production and environmental pollution
can be
solved (Fig.4). Over 70% of the people interviewed in Brazil and the
USA were convinced
of this fact. However, the same portion of the interviewees thinks that
gene
technology bears a risk for the environment and health (Fig.5). The
interviewed
citizens from the Bahamas, France and Germany turned out to be the most
critical. Further research could be improved by de-polarizing the
questions as
many people claimed that gene technology was not so clear cut.
Over 70% of
interviewees asked in Germany and China and over 60% of the
Bahamas and France have ethical and moral concerns regarding gene
technology
(figure 6). Most people are afraid of discrimination by health
insurances and
employers due to possible distribution of personal genome information.
In
addition, many fear the extent of human genome intervention and the
discrepancy
of treatment available to different social classes. In contrast, others
believe
that humans have always been altering nature to their advantage, from
dog
breeding to crop enhancement, and that gene technology is merely a
natural step
in this progression.
The answer
“I don’t know” was often chosen because
the interviewees had
no background knowledge about the topic and were therefore not familiar
with
risks and chances or prospects of the topic. It is important to note
that due
to the limited number of interviewed persons, the results show a trend
but
cannot be interpreted as representative for the country´s
population.
Conclusion
Ultimately, an
overall negative, skeptical, and incredulous outlook over
the potential benefits of synthetic biology became apparent. Our
international
survey about the perceptions of risks and benefits of gene technology
from
laymen not involved in gene technology shows similar trends for almost
all
countries. The marketing of genetically modified food is in general not
appreciated. Ethical- moral doubts are concerned mainly with
interventions occurring
in the natural genome of human beings.
The high
percentage of “I don´t know” answers (24%
on average) shows a
huge lack and the incomplete understanding of gene technology among
laymen in
every country. Such misunderstanding could potentially lead to both
real and
unfounded fears about the risks of such technology.
In contrast, people have notable confidence in gene technology concerning medical research and the contribution of synthetic biology to environmental and energy problems. This supports the conclusion that the maintenance of human health and the ability to heal diseases is one of the most important issues the world is facing today. Gene therapy, a method that tries to replace defective genes with functional ones, could be an important step in providing therapy for currently untreatable genetic diseases. Our project, “universal programmable restriction enzyme,” will help to streamline new therapies in gene therapy and to realize a new standard of healthcare.
Questionnaires:
