The Ethical Use of GMOs The Ethical Use of GMOs

Dr. Sakarindr BhumiratanaPresident

National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA)

25 March 2005

        

        

GM Products: Benefits and Controversies

Benefits 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

Society New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries

1. Respect for person2. Beneficence 3. Justice 4. Confidentiality

What is a principle-based approach to bioethics? What is a principle-based approach to bioethics?

If in conflict, they should be balanced against one another (but how?)

- Principles Based Ethics The “Big Four” “Big Four” Principles:

Two kinds of ethical arguments GMOsTwo 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.

• 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

GMOs: Ethical Considerations

Components of Acceptability

Judgements about ethical acceptability depend on answering several preliminary questions:

1. What GMOs are we talking about?” What Product?

“Different products have different ethical dimensions” e.g. Bovine somatotropin

Roudup-Ready CropBT cornGolden 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

What Ethical Paradigm?

1. Consequentialist Ethics 2. Ethics of Autonomy /

Consent 3. Ethic of Virtue / Tradition

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology

1. 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

Consequentialists subscribe to the view that acti

ons, policies, practices and technologies ought t o promote people’s needs and preferences .

CC onsequentialist goals: onsequentialist goals: (QQP)(QQP)(1) QuantityQuantity: Produce enough food to feed a growing

- and non r ur al popul at i on. 2( ) Quality:Quality: Produce food that is safe and nutritionall

y adequate. (3 ) Price:Price: Ensure that food is generally affordable for con

sumers while also ensuring that farmers receive profits fr om their work sufficient to keep them in business.

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech

If GMOs/GM foods contribute to the satisfaction of people’s wants/preferences, they are ethically justifiable— perhaps e

ven ethically required (Burkhardt, 2 0 0 1 ).

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.- - 1The so called “f irst generation” of GM technology was designed to fffffff fffffff fffffff fffffff ff fffffffffff.

- fff fffffffffff fffff ffff ffff fff fff fffffff fffff fffffffff f ff, , fffffffffff fff ffffffffff ffff , QQP, shouldwanttechnologiescont i nual l y i mpr oved so a s to achieve even greater productivity and yeild — all the time maintaini

ffffffffff fffff,.

• I n consquentialist terms.

“ greatest good for the greatest number”

• C oncerns that some things that people want other t han QQP.

GMOs may endanger these “other goods.” F or example, environ mental protections, etc.

I ssues for - long term consequences of GMOs:

- W ill our children’s health be placed at risk by the use of GMtechnology?

- What about future people’s wants and preferences? Are they being placed at risk?

The Consequentialist Perspective on Agricultural Biotech

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

Autonomy/Consent and Food/Agricultural Biotech

• The autonomy/consent paradigm begins with the axio - m that self determination implies that people have in

violable 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

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

• 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.

• F armers’ choices.

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

Ethics of Virtue/Tradition and Food/Agricultural Biotech

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

- views agriculture as more than a business or economic sector in society: agriculture is a “way of “way of life”life”

- sees the traditional family farm as a place where real human valuesreal 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.

Agrarianism:

Ethics of Virtue/Tradition and Food/Agricultural Biotech

Ref: Jeffrey Burkhardt, IFAS, UF

- “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.

Nature-ism:

Ethics and Agricultural Ethics and Agricultural Biotechnology:Biotechnology:

Consequentiality perception on agricultural Biotech

Autonomy / consent and food agricultural biotech

Virtue / tradition and food agricultural biotech

ConclusionConclusion

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

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 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)

two-way flow of understanding between scientists and the public is also required

make sure all stakeholder voice are heard

Thank youThank you