The Ethical Use of GMOs 25 March 2005 Dr. Sakarindr Bhumiratana          The Ethical Use of GMOs 25 March 2005 Dr. Sakarindr Bhumiratana President National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA)         

GM Products: Benefits and Controversies Crops Enhanced taste and quality Reduced maturation time Increased nutrients, yields, and stress tolerance Improved resistance to disease, pests, and herbicides New products and growing techniques Safety Potential human health impact: allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance markers, unknown effects. Potential environmental impact: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity Animals Increased resistance, productivity, hardiness, and feed efficiency Better yields of meat, eggs, and milk Access and Intellectual Property Domination of world food production by a few companies Biopiracy—foreign exploitation of natural resources Environment "Friendly" bioherbicides and bioinsecticides Conservation of soil, water, and energy Better natural waste management Ethics Violation of natural organisms' intrinsic values Tampering with nature by mixing genes among species Labeling Not mandatory in some countries Society Increased food security for growing populations New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries Mention Benefits for Crops: Enhanced taste and quality Reduced maturation time Increased nutrients, yields, and stress tolerance Improved resistance to disease, pests, and herbicides New products and growing techniques Controversies for Crops: Potential human health impact: allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance markers, unknown effects. Potential environmental impact: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity Access and Intellectual Property: Domination of world food production by a few companies Labeling: Not mandatory in some countries. Source: http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Genetically_modified_food

What is a principle-based approach to bioethics? Principles-Based Ethics The “Big Four” Principles: Respect for person Beneficence Justice Confidentiality If in conflict, they should be balanced against one another (but how?)

Two kinds of ethical arguments GMOs 1. Non-scientific base GMOs are wrong, no matter how great the benefits may be. 2. Scientific base GMOs are wrong because risks outweigh benefits. Talking past each other

GMOs: Ethical Considerations 1. Transgenic technology has caused some people to raise questions about the nature and consequences of GMOs. Do GM foods differ in any relevant ways from non-GM foods? Are any differences significant as to how they will they affect human health or the environment? How strictly are GMOs being tested? Who oversees the regulation and registration process? Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

2. The issue is whether GMOs/GM foods morally/ethically acceptable. GMOs: Ethical Considerations 2. The issue is whether GMOs/GM foods morally/ethically acceptable. If they are ethically acceptable, then there is nothing wrong about producing/using/consuming them. If they are not acceptable, people should stop producing them. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

GMOs: Ethical Considerations 3. Why the deeper ethical-philosophical reasons underlying the GMO debates are so important. If we are to resolve ethical (as opposed to scientific) controversies associated with GMOs/GM foods, a key step is to acknowledge differences in basic values, and then debate the matter in terms of these deeper commitments and concerns. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Components of Acceptability Judgements about ethical acceptability depend on answering several preliminary questions: What GMOs are we talking about?” What Product? “Different products have different ethical dimensions” e.g. Bovine somatotropin Roudup-Ready Crop BT corn Golden Rice Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Components of Acceptability (cont’d) 2. Bear on ethical acceptability is the context in which the analysis or argument is set. need to be paid to all of relevant context in which a judgment about the ethical acceptability of GMOs can (or should) be made. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Consequentialist Ethics Ethics of Autonomy / Consent What Ethical Paradigm? Consequentialist Ethics Ethics of Autonomy / Consent Ethic of Virtue / Tradition Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology Consequentialist Perception on Agricultural Biotech subscribe to the view that actions, policies, practices and technologies ought to promote people’s needs and preferences. the question is whether agriculture does this, and the answer is usually that it does. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology 2. Autonomy/Consent and Food/Agricultural Biotech begins with the axiom that self-determination implies that people have inviolable rights, which establishes the ethical demand that people be given a choice concerning how they want to act and be treated. people have the ethical right to choose what they consume/purchase and to avoid or reject it if they so desire. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology 3. Ethics of Virtue/Tradition and Food/Agricultural Biotech virtue/tradition ethics defines ethical acceptability in terms of consistency with some deeply-held values and virtues, whether they relate to farming as a way of life, to life in accord with Nature, or to following God’s plan and will. Not all virtue/tradition ethical perspectives will necessarily reject GMOs or biotechnology overall. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech Consequentialists subscribe to the view that actions, policies, practices and technologies ought to promote people’s needs and preferences. Consequentialist goals: (QQP) (1) Quantity: Produce enough food to feed a growing and non-rural population. (2) Quality: Produce food that is safe and nutritionally adequate. (3) Price: Ensure that food is generally affordable for consumers while also ensuring that farmers receive profits from their work sufficient to keep them in business. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech The key to achieving QQP is efficiency in agricultural production. -This means getting the most output from the least inputs, or in standard farming terms, productivity and yields. -The so-called “first generation”1 of GM technology was designed to help farmers achieve greater degrees of efficiency. - It is not surprising, then, that farmers and policymakers concerned with efficiency, and ultimately with QQP, should want technologies continually improved so as to achieve even greater productivity and yeild — all the time maintaining safe, affordable food. If GMOs/GM foods contribute to the satisfaction of people’s wants/preferences, they are ethically justifiable— perhaps even ethically required (Burkhardt, 2001).

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech In consquentialist terms. “greatest good for the greatest number” Concerns that some things that people want other than QQP. GMOs may endanger these “other goods.” For example, environmental protections, etc. Issues for long-term consequences of GMOs: - Will our children’s health be placed at risk by the use of GM technology? - What about future people’s wants and preferences? Are they being placed at risk? Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Autonomy/Consent and Food/Agricultural Biotech The autonomy/consent paradigm begins with the axiom that self-determination implies that people have inviolable rights. (Foremost among these rights is the right not to be harmed or placed at risk against one’s will.) Autonomy/consent ethicists and Consequentialists concern about: Is our food safe? Transparency of the food system. - farm production techniques - transportation and processing systems - packaging and marketing activities Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Autonomy/Consent and Food/Agricultural Biotech People have a right to purchase items that will not unknowingly place them at risk and thus may demand the choice to avoid these products. The strongest supporters of some form of labeling of GM foods. Many people believe that the autonomy/consent issues that are raised are not so much a matter of biotechnology as a matter of power and control: consumers and farmers want greater control over the choices available to them in their respective arenas. Farmers’ choices. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Autonomy/Consent and Food/Agricultural Biotech People have the ethical right to: - choose what they are consuming - avoid or reject it if they so desire Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Agrarianism: Ethics of Virtue/Tradition and Food/Agricultural Biotech - views agriculture as more than a business or economic sector in society: agriculture is a “way of life” - sees the traditional family farm as a place where real human values and virtues can be practiced. - GMOs are designed, intended, for business-like efficient production; are not designed to enhance the quality of life for farm families or their communities; favor larger farms, make traditional agriculture less competitive; may make foodstuffs cheaper, forcing traditional farmers out of business. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Nature-ism: “playing God” Ethics of Virtue/Tradition and Food/Agricultural Biotech Nature-ism: “playing God” ecosystem -- upsetting of the operation of ecosystems. Not to cause irreparable damage. for Nature-ists, once we recognize the delicate balancing processes that constitute ecosystems or Nature, we must see that human beings have no right to manipulate species or processes in this way. Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Conclusion Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology:                                                                                                    Conclusion Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology: Consequentiality perception on agricultural Biotech Autonomy / consent and food agricultural biotech Virtue / tradition and food agricultural biotech

Need to: 1. Risk assessment maintain a safe, nutritious, and                                                                                                    Need to: 1. Risk assessment maintain a safe, nutritious, and plentiful food supply preserve ecosystems balance production and wise stewardship of the earth

Need to: demand scientific and political vigilance                                                                   Need to: demand scientific and political vigilance support: regulatory oversight on case-by-case basis Do not support: a ban on all GMOs or GM crops 2. Regulation (Risk Management)

Need to: 3. Communication                                                                   Need to: 3. Communication increase public understanding of the science behind GMOs debate develop tools for public communication and promoting the public understanding of this and related issues not just one-way communication but should encourage dialogue between all participants

Need to: 3. Communication (cont’d)                                                                   Need to: 3. Communication (cont’d) two-way flow of understanding between scientists and the public is also required make sure all stakeholder voice are heard

Thank you