Attitudes of the public and scientists to biotechnology in Japan at the start of 2000.

M A C Ng, C Takeda, T Watanabe, D Macer
{"title":"Attitudes of the public and scientists to biotechnology in Japan at the start of 2000.","authors":"M A C Ng,&nbsp;C Takeda,&nbsp;T Watanabe,&nbsp;D Macer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This survey on biotechnology and bioethics was carried out on national random samples of the public and scientists in November 2000-January 2000 [sic]throughout Japan, and attendees at the Novartis Life Science Forum held on 29 September 1999 in Tokyo. The sample size was 297, 370, and 74 respectively. While there is a better awareness of GMOs in 2000 compared to 1991; the trend shows an increase in the perceived risks of GMOs followed by growing resistance in Japan. While a majority of persons believed genetic engineering would make life better over the next twenty years (57%), the proportion of respondents who thought genetic engineering would make life worse over the next twenty years doubled from 1997 to 2000 (from 12% to 25%). Respondents were asked whether they had heard about applications in several areas and the order of familiarity (high-low) was: pest-resistant crops, human genes in bacteria, mouse to develop cancer, food and drinks, pigs with human hearts and pre-implantation diagnosis. A divide of opinion can be seen when the results on benefit, risk and moral acceptability of applications of biotechnology by the public are compared to the forum and scientist samples. A significant change in the acceptance of the public occurred in 2000 where only 22% agreed on the moral acceptability of GM food compared to 41% in 1997. In 2000 fewer people said they are willing (20%) to buy genetically modified fruits that taste better compared to 1997 (36%). The results show less public support for use of gene therapy than 1993 and twice as many scientists rejected gene therapy than they did in 1991. When asked who is best placed to regulate modern biotechnology, the respondents were overwhelmingly in favor of international regulatory bodies, such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization (72%), rather than national bodies. The comparison between scientists and public is interesting, however the more enthusiastic sample were participants from the Novaritis Life Science Forum with its mixed occupations.</p>","PeriodicalId":87251,"journal":{"name":"Eubios journal of Asian and international bioethics : EJAIB","volume":"10 4","pages":"106-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eubios journal of Asian and international bioethics : EJAIB","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This survey on biotechnology and bioethics was carried out on national random samples of the public and scientists in November 2000-January 2000 [sic]throughout Japan, and attendees at the Novartis Life Science Forum held on 29 September 1999 in Tokyo. The sample size was 297, 370, and 74 respectively. While there is a better awareness of GMOs in 2000 compared to 1991; the trend shows an increase in the perceived risks of GMOs followed by growing resistance in Japan. While a majority of persons believed genetic engineering would make life better over the next twenty years (57%), the proportion of respondents who thought genetic engineering would make life worse over the next twenty years doubled from 1997 to 2000 (from 12% to 25%). Respondents were asked whether they had heard about applications in several areas and the order of familiarity (high-low) was: pest-resistant crops, human genes in bacteria, mouse to develop cancer, food and drinks, pigs with human hearts and pre-implantation diagnosis. A divide of opinion can be seen when the results on benefit, risk and moral acceptability of applications of biotechnology by the public are compared to the forum and scientist samples. A significant change in the acceptance of the public occurred in 2000 where only 22% agreed on the moral acceptability of GM food compared to 41% in 1997. In 2000 fewer people said they are willing (20%) to buy genetically modified fruits that taste better compared to 1997 (36%). The results show less public support for use of gene therapy than 1993 and twice as many scientists rejected gene therapy than they did in 1991. When asked who is best placed to regulate modern biotechnology, the respondents were overwhelmingly in favor of international regulatory bodies, such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization (72%), rather than national bodies. The comparison between scientists and public is interesting, however the more enthusiastic sample were participants from the Novaritis Life Science Forum with its mixed occupations.

2000年初日本公众和科学家对生物技术的态度。
这项关于生物技术和生命伦理的调查是在2000年11月至2000年1月期间对全日本的公众和科学家以及1999年9月29日在东京举行的诺华生命科学论坛的与会者进行的全国性随机抽样。样本量分别为297、370和74。虽然与1991年相比,2000年对转基因生物的认识有所提高;这一趋势表明,日本对转基因生物风险的认知在增加,随之而来的是越来越多的人对转基因生物的抵制。虽然大多数人相信基因工程将在未来二十年使生活变得更好(57%),但认为基因工程将在未来二十年使生活变得更糟的受访者比例从1997年到2000年翻了一番(从12%到25%)。受访者被问及他们是否听说过在几个领域的应用,熟悉的顺序(高-低)是:抗虫作物、细菌中的人类基因、患癌症的老鼠、食品和饮料、有人类心脏的猪和植入前诊断。当将公众对生物技术应用的利益、风险和道德可接受性的结果与论坛和科学家样本进行比较时,可以看到意见分歧。公众对转基因食品的接受度在2000年发生了重大变化,只有22%的人同意转基因食品在道德上的可接受性,而1997年这一比例为41%。与1997年(36%)相比,2000年表示愿意购买味道更好的转基因水果的人减少了(20%)。结果显示,公众对使用基因疗法的支持比1993年有所减少,而反对基因疗法的科学家是1991年的两倍。当被问及谁最适合管理现代生物技术时,受访者绝大多数支持国际监管机构,如联合国和世界卫生组织(72%),而不是国家机构。科学家和公众之间的比较很有趣,然而更热情的样本是来自诺华生命科学论坛的参与者,他们的职业不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信