-----Original Message-----
Why? - the public are unlikely to understand to any significant
depth anyway - just as they mostly don't understand anything about
anaesthesia, or the implications of having an anaesthetic.
The same principle applies - ie genome knowledge and
associated technological advances will be both good and bad
-----End Quoted (and cut) Message-----
So, if people don't understand something we don't need to have a debate?
People may not know how anaesthetics work, but they do demand that the
profession be properly regulated, that the techniques be 'approved'.
So while there may not be a massive debate on the science of the genome,
there is plenty of room for debate on what use society is prepared to
accept.
Fortunately, not everyone is prepared to leave it to the 'grown ups' to
decide for us. MPs at least have been on the receiving end of some very good
breakfast briefings on aspects of the human genome, given by experts who
were strangely able at communicating what some might consider hard science
to an audience not famous for its intellectual agility.
As anyone who was at the meetings can attest, the MPs responded
intelligently and knowledgeably to the science put before them. Sadly, the
630 or so MPs who did not turn you for these events are probably less
qualified to judge.
MK
_______________________________________________________________________
Michael Kenward OBE / Phone: +44 (0)1444 400568 Fax: 401064
/
Science Writer & Stuff / For light relief visit http://www.absw.org.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|