This paper uses word frequency statistics and semantic network analysis to analyse text related to genetically modified organisms(GMOs) in microblog in China. We discuss the structure of the main discourses and change...This paper uses word frequency statistics and semantic network analysis to analyse text related to genetically modified organisms(GMOs) in microblog in China. We discuss the structure of the main discourses and changes in them over the past decade, explore the reasons for those changes and provide possible references that may be useful when related problems or situations occur in future. We have found that conspiracy theories permeated online discussions and that netizens' emotions had a nationalist tendency. The GMO issue was highly socialized. Participants in online discussions were from different backgrounds, and the topics went far beyond GMO technology. The public tended to trust the government, rather than experts, while opinion leaders also played a role in guiding public opinion. The keywords in this discussion have gradually changed in recent years from clustering around ‘harmful’ to clustering around ‘scientific’, and new participation models brought about by new media have provided new reference paths for problem solving.展开更多
Several disputes exist around Genetically Modified Organisms （GMOs）. This article uses the concept of biopolitics to refer to all the GMO-related political issues and the mechanisms that are used to handle them. As ...Several disputes exist around Genetically Modified Organisms （GMOs）. This article uses the concept of biopolitics to refer to all the GMO-related political issues and the mechanisms that are used to handle them. As a world famous genetically modified crop developed for the welfare of humanity by public institutions, Golden Rice has on one hand won glories, whereas on the other met with criticisms. It could be used as an analytical model to illustrate the biopolitics of GMOs. On the basis of an overview of its technological background, this article first introduces the participants and the debated issues of the Golden Rice project and then the disputes between the supporters and opponents and consequently analyzes the biopolitics of the Golden Rice. In conclusion, this article justifies the biopolitics of the GMOs and its doctrine.展开更多
Safety assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a contentious topic. Proponents of GMOs assert that GMOs are safe since the FDA’s policy of substantial equivalence considers GMOs “equivalent” to their...Safety assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a contentious topic. Proponents of GMOs assert that GMOs are safe since the FDA’s policy of substantial equivalence considers GMOs “equivalent” to their non-GMO counterparts, and argue that genetic modification (GM) is simply an extension of a “natural” process of plant breeding, a form of “genetic modification”, though done over longer time scales. Anti-GMO activists counter that GMOs are unsafe since substantial equivalence is unscientific and outdated since it originates in the 1970s to assess safety of medical devices, which are not comparable to the complexity of biological systems, and contend that targeted GM is not plant breeding. The heart of the debate appears to be on the methodology used to determine criteria for substantial equivalence. Systems biology, which aims to understand complexity of the whole organism, as a system, rather than just studying its parts in a reductionist manner, may provide a framework to determine appropriate criteria, as it recognizes that GM, small or large, may affect emergent properties of the whole system. Herein, a promising computational systems biology method couples known perturbations on five biomolecules caused by the CP4 EPSPS GM of Glycine max L. (soybean), with an integrative model of C1 metabolism and oxidative stress (two molecular systems critical to plant function). The results predict significant accumulation of formaldehyde and concomitant depletion of glutathione in the GMO, suggesting how a “small” and single GM creates “large” and systemic perturbations to molecular systems equilibria. Regulatory agencies, currently reviewing rules for GMO safety, may wish to adopt a systems biology approach using a combination of in silico, computational methods used herein, and subsequent targeted experimental in vitro and in vivo designs, to develop a systems understanding of “equivalence” using biomarkers, such as formaldehyde and glutathione, which predict metabolic disruptions, towards modernizing the safety assessment of GMOs.展开更多
Moral psychology holds that negative judgements on genetically modified organisms(GMOs) are likely to be intuitive reactions driven by trait disgust without deliberation, which brings difficulty to genetic science com...Moral psychology holds that negative judgements on genetically modified organisms(GMOs) are likely to be intuitive reactions driven by trait disgust without deliberation, which brings difficulty to genetic science communication. Based on two interrelated experiments examining the processes and conditions of individual and scenario features influencing disgust and moral judgement about GMOs, this study aims to identify the different routes through which disgust influences moral judgement about GMOs in the physical and social dimensions. We found that the process of elicited state disgust influencing moral judgement on GMOs is regulated by pathogen disgust sensitivity and moral disgust sensitivity. The difference in opposition to GMOs brought by preferences for precepts implied in moral theories is evidently subject to the joint effect of the disgust elicitation type and emotion reappraisal(ER). This study clarifies the relationship between disgust for GMOs and moral judgement. It also confirms the effectiveness of ER in promoting the transition of moral judgement on GMOs from intuitive reaction to deliberation, thus offering benefits for science communicators targeting audiences who differ in their preferences for precepts implied in moral theories and trait disgust.展开更多
In 2012, genetically engineered （GE） crops were grown by 17.3 million farmers on over 170 million hectares. Over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food producing animals, making them the major consumers of GE cr...In 2012, genetically engineered （GE） crops were grown by 17.3 million farmers on over 170 million hectares. Over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food producing animals, making them the major consumers of GE crops for the past 15 plus years. Prior to commercialization, GE crops go through an extensive regulatory evaluation. Over one hundred regulatory submissions have shown compositional equivalence, and comparable levels of safety, between GE crops and their conventional counterparts. One component of regulatory compliance is whole GE food/feed animal feeding studies. Both regulatory studies and independent peer-reviewed studies have shown that GE crops can be safely used in animal feed, and rDNA fragments have never been detected in products （e.g. milk, meat, eggs） derived from animals that consumed GE feed. Despite the fact that the scientific weight of evidence from these hundreds of studies have not revealed unique risks associated with GE feed, some groups are calling for more animal feeding studies, including long-term rodent studies and studies in target livestock species for the approval of GE crops. It is an opportune time to review the results of such studies as have been done to date to evaluate the value of the additional information obtained. Requiring long-term and target animal feeding studies would sharply increase regulatory compliance costs and prolong the regulatory process associated with the commercialization of GE crops. Such costs may impede the development of feed crops with enhanced nutritional characteristics and durability, particularly in the local varieties in small and poor developing countries. More generally it is time for regulatory evaluations to more explicitly consider both the reasonable and unique risks and benefits associated with the use of both GE plants and animals in agricultural systems, and weigh them against those associated with existing systems, and those of regulatory inaction. This would represent a shift away from a GE evaluation process that currently focuses only on risk assessment and identifying ever diminishing marginal hazards, to a regulatory approach that more objectively evaluates and communicates the likely impact of approving a new GE plant or animal on agricultural production systems.展开更多
Genetically modified organisms(GMOs) have caused considerable controversy in China in recent years. Uncertainty about the technology, ineffective channels for releasing official information and a lack of sufficient pu...Genetically modified organisms(GMOs) have caused considerable controversy in China in recent years. Uncertainty about the technology, ineffective channels for releasing official information and a lack of sufficient public trust in the government and scientists have led to rampant rumours about genetic modification technology, making it hard for the public to acquire scientific knowledge about it and a rational attitude towards it. In this paper, by using as an example the rumour that genetically modified(GM) soybeans cause cancer, we discuss the content and diffusion of rumours related to genetic modification technology in the new media environment. Based on an analysis of content on the social media platform Weibo one week after the rumour began, we discovered that the ensuing cyber discussions reflected reality, that netizens expressed anxiety and panic while stressing social injustice and reflecting conflict between social classes, and that they exhibited little trust in scientists and the government. On the mechanism of diffusion of rumours on Weibo, we observed that ‘evidence’ that directly or indirectly purported to show that GM soybeans cause cancer was added to the rumours and that the rumours were ‘assimilated’ into people's perception through the stigmatization of GMOs and through conspiracy theories.展开更多
While teaching a course on Crop Biotechnology at Huazhong Agricultural University （Wuhan, Hubei Province, China） this past October, I was asked by one of my students if it is true that American farmers grow genetica...While teaching a course on Crop Biotechnology at Huazhong Agricultural University （Wuhan, Hubei Province, China） this past October, I was asked by one of my students if it is true that American farmers grow genetically modified crops （GMOs） only for export, and that GMO-foods are not sold in the USA. The student implied that Americans thought that such crops were ＂good enough＂ for developing countries but not good enough for themselves.展开更多
Biotechnology has revolutionized agriculture through innovations such as genetically modified(GM)technology and CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.In this review,a comparative analysis of these methods that addresses the conc...Biotechnology has revolutionized agriculture through innovations such as genetically modified(GM)technology and CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.In this review,a comparative analysis of these methods that addresses the concerns regarding the oversimplification of the notion that the CRISPR-based editing approach is equivalent to traditional GM approaches is offered.Since the 1990s,despite the potential benefits for crop improvement and food security,controversies have arisen around recombinant technology and the introduction of GM products due to perceived environmental and health concerns.In contrast,the recent emergence of the CRISPR/Cas systemas a precise genome editing tool has garnered relatively less public resistance.In this review,the reasons for these contrasting findings are explored to shed light on the distinct characteristics inherent to each approach.Additionally,we conduct a bibliographic analysis to examine the shift in research priorities between the two technological eras,followed by a comprehensive comparison of the two approaches,to enable a better understanding of the potential synergies that can be achieved between agricultural biotechnology and conventional techniques for enhancing modern agriculture.A nuanced understanding of these technologies is crucial for informed decision-making,responsible implementation,and addressing the concerns surrounding agricultural biotechnology.展开更多
基金supported by the Science Popularization and Risk Communication of Transgenic Biotechnologies project (grant ID:2016ZX08015002)
文摘This paper uses word frequency statistics and semantic network analysis to analyse text related to genetically modified organisms(GMOs) in microblog in China. We discuss the structure of the main discourses and changes in them over the past decade, explore the reasons for those changes and provide possible references that may be useful when related problems or situations occur in future. We have found that conspiracy theories permeated online discussions and that netizens' emotions had a nationalist tendency. The GMO issue was highly socialized. Participants in online discussions were from different backgrounds, and the topics went far beyond GMO technology. The public tended to trust the government, rather than experts, while opinion leaders also played a role in guiding public opinion. The keywords in this discussion have gradually changed in recent years from clustering around ‘harmful’ to clustering around ‘scientific’, and new participation models brought about by new media have provided new reference paths for problem solving.
基金Acknowlegements This research is supported by National Social Science Foundation of China （04CFX004）.
文摘Several disputes exist around Genetically Modified Organisms （GMOs）. This article uses the concept of biopolitics to refer to all the GMO-related political issues and the mechanisms that are used to handle them. As a world famous genetically modified crop developed for the welfare of humanity by public institutions, Golden Rice has on one hand won glories, whereas on the other met with criticisms. It could be used as an analytical model to illustrate the biopolitics of GMOs. On the basis of an overview of its technological background, this article first introduces the participants and the debated issues of the Golden Rice project and then the disputes between the supporters and opponents and consequently analyzes the biopolitics of the Golden Rice. In conclusion, this article justifies the biopolitics of the GMOs and its doctrine.
文摘Safety assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a contentious topic. Proponents of GMOs assert that GMOs are safe since the FDA’s policy of substantial equivalence considers GMOs “equivalent” to their non-GMO counterparts, and argue that genetic modification (GM) is simply an extension of a “natural” process of plant breeding, a form of “genetic modification”, though done over longer time scales. Anti-GMO activists counter that GMOs are unsafe since substantial equivalence is unscientific and outdated since it originates in the 1970s to assess safety of medical devices, which are not comparable to the complexity of biological systems, and contend that targeted GM is not plant breeding. The heart of the debate appears to be on the methodology used to determine criteria for substantial equivalence. Systems biology, which aims to understand complexity of the whole organism, as a system, rather than just studying its parts in a reductionist manner, may provide a framework to determine appropriate criteria, as it recognizes that GM, small or large, may affect emergent properties of the whole system. Herein, a promising computational systems biology method couples known perturbations on five biomolecules caused by the CP4 EPSPS GM of Glycine max L. (soybean), with an integrative model of C1 metabolism and oxidative stress (two molecular systems critical to plant function). The results predict significant accumulation of formaldehyde and concomitant depletion of glutathione in the GMO, suggesting how a “small” and single GM creates “large” and systemic perturbations to molecular systems equilibria. Regulatory agencies, currently reviewing rules for GMO safety, may wish to adopt a systems biology approach using a combination of in silico, computational methods used herein, and subsequent targeted experimental in vitro and in vivo designs, to develop a systems understanding of “equivalence” using biomarkers, such as formaldehyde and glutathione, which predict metabolic disruptions, towards modernizing the safety assessment of GMOs.
基金supported by the Science Popularization and Risk Communication of Transgenic Biotechnologies project (grant ID:2016ZX08015002)
文摘Moral psychology holds that negative judgements on genetically modified organisms(GMOs) are likely to be intuitive reactions driven by trait disgust without deliberation, which brings difficulty to genetic science communication. Based on two interrelated experiments examining the processes and conditions of individual and scenario features influencing disgust and moral judgement about GMOs, this study aims to identify the different routes through which disgust influences moral judgement about GMOs in the physical and social dimensions. We found that the process of elicited state disgust influencing moral judgement on GMOs is regulated by pathogen disgust sensitivity and moral disgust sensitivity. The difference in opposition to GMOs brought by preferences for precepts implied in moral theories is evidently subject to the joint effect of the disgust elicitation type and emotion reappraisal(ER). This study clarifies the relationship between disgust for GMOs and moral judgement. It also confirms the effectiveness of ER in promoting the transition of moral judgement on GMOs from intuitive reaction to deliberation, thus offering benefits for science communicators targeting audiences who differ in their preferences for precepts implied in moral theories and trait disgust.
基金support from National Research Initiative Competitive Grant no.2009-55205-05057Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant no.2011-68004-30367 and 2013-68004-20364 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculturesupported by funds from the W.K.Kellogg endowment to the UC Davis Department of Animal Science
文摘In 2012, genetically engineered （GE） crops were grown by 17.3 million farmers on over 170 million hectares. Over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food producing animals, making them the major consumers of GE crops for the past 15 plus years. Prior to commercialization, GE crops go through an extensive regulatory evaluation. Over one hundred regulatory submissions have shown compositional equivalence, and comparable levels of safety, between GE crops and their conventional counterparts. One component of regulatory compliance is whole GE food/feed animal feeding studies. Both regulatory studies and independent peer-reviewed studies have shown that GE crops can be safely used in animal feed, and rDNA fragments have never been detected in products （e.g. milk, meat, eggs） derived from animals that consumed GE feed. Despite the fact that the scientific weight of evidence from these hundreds of studies have not revealed unique risks associated with GE feed, some groups are calling for more animal feeding studies, including long-term rodent studies and studies in target livestock species for the approval of GE crops. It is an opportune time to review the results of such studies as have been done to date to evaluate the value of the additional information obtained. Requiring long-term and target animal feeding studies would sharply increase regulatory compliance costs and prolong the regulatory process associated with the commercialization of GE crops. Such costs may impede the development of feed crops with enhanced nutritional characteristics and durability, particularly in the local varieties in small and poor developing countries. More generally it is time for regulatory evaluations to more explicitly consider both the reasonable and unique risks and benefits associated with the use of both GE plants and animals in agricultural systems, and weigh them against those associated with existing systems, and those of regulatory inaction. This would represent a shift away from a GE evaluation process that currently focuses only on risk assessment and identifying ever diminishing marginal hazards, to a regulatory approach that more objectively evaluates and communicates the likely impact of approving a new GE plant or animal on agricultural production systems.
基金supported by the Science Popularization and Risk Communication of Transgenic Biotechnologies project (grant ID:2016ZX08015002)
文摘Genetically modified organisms(GMOs) have caused considerable controversy in China in recent years. Uncertainty about the technology, ineffective channels for releasing official information and a lack of sufficient public trust in the government and scientists have led to rampant rumours about genetic modification technology, making it hard for the public to acquire scientific knowledge about it and a rational attitude towards it. In this paper, by using as an example the rumour that genetically modified(GM) soybeans cause cancer, we discuss the content and diffusion of rumours related to genetic modification technology in the new media environment. Based on an analysis of content on the social media platform Weibo one week after the rumour began, we discovered that the ensuing cyber discussions reflected reality, that netizens expressed anxiety and panic while stressing social injustice and reflecting conflict between social classes, and that they exhibited little trust in scientists and the government. On the mechanism of diffusion of rumours on Weibo, we observed that ‘evidence’ that directly or indirectly purported to show that GM soybeans cause cancer was added to the rumours and that the rumours were ‘assimilated’ into people's perception through the stigmatization of GMOs and through conspiracy theories.
文摘While teaching a course on Crop Biotechnology at Huazhong Agricultural University （Wuhan, Hubei Province, China） this past October, I was asked by one of my students if it is true that American farmers grow genetically modified crops （GMOs） only for export, and that GMO-foods are not sold in the USA. The student implied that Americans thought that such crops were ＂good enough＂ for developing countries but not good enough for themselves.
基金supported by the by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme(Grant No.FRGS/1/2023/STG03/UM/02/2)Universiti Malaya RU Fund(Grant No.ST087-2022).
文摘Biotechnology has revolutionized agriculture through innovations such as genetically modified(GM)technology and CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.In this review,a comparative analysis of these methods that addresses the concerns regarding the oversimplification of the notion that the CRISPR-based editing approach is equivalent to traditional GM approaches is offered.Since the 1990s,despite the potential benefits for crop improvement and food security,controversies have arisen around recombinant technology and the introduction of GM products due to perceived environmental and health concerns.In contrast,the recent emergence of the CRISPR/Cas systemas a precise genome editing tool has garnered relatively less public resistance.In this review,the reasons for these contrasting findings are explored to shed light on the distinct characteristics inherent to each approach.Additionally,we conduct a bibliographic analysis to examine the shift in research priorities between the two technological eras,followed by a comprehensive comparison of the two approaches,to enable a better understanding of the potential synergies that can be achieved between agricultural biotechnology and conventional techniques for enhancing modern agriculture.A nuanced understanding of these technologies is crucial for informed decision-making,responsible implementation,and addressing the concerns surrounding agricultural biotechnology.
