The Bioscience Resource Project is a public interest organization that describes itself as providing independent research and analysis in the agriculture-related biosciences since 2006. In 2011, they started Independent Science News, a website providing news and critical comment on topics where food, agriculture, and biotechnology impact human health and the environment.
Video Bioscience Resource Project
Philosophy and mission
The mission statement of the Bioscience Resource Project says the organization aims to provide high quality scientific information and analysis "to enable a healthy food system and a healthy world." Underpinning this mission are the beliefs that (1) public interest science and an independent science media are essential to healthy food and agricultural systems and (2) the hallmark of a healthy food and agricultural system is its ability to support human health while preserving biodiversity and ecosystem health.
Maps Bioscience Resource Project
History
Drs. Allison Wilson and Jonathan Latham initiated the Bioscience Resource Project to help remedy a perceived deficit of independent scientific analysis of genetic engineering and its risks.
In 2006, the Project published two related scientific review papers: Transformation-induced Mutations in Transgenic Plants: Analysis and Biosafety and The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation. The Bioscience Resource Project website launched in 2007.
In 2008, the Project published a third scientific review, Transcomplementation and synergism in plants: implications for viral transgenes?, and became a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit.
In 2011, the Project launched a second website, Independent Science News.
Project activities
Websites
The Bioscience Resource Project publishes two websites:
Independent Science News
Independent Science News. Acting as a science watchdog, Independent Science News reports on conflicts of interest and their implications, and provides independent analysis of topical issues in genetic engineering, human genetics and disease causation, agriculture and food policy, and biosafety regulation. The website also links to science news on the web, from both traditional and alternative media sources.
Bioscience Resource Project
Bioscience Resource Project. The Bioscience Resource Project website describes the Project and its current work. It also links to additional resources [e.g. scientific articles and websites ] on topics covered by Independent Science News.
Publications
The Bioscience Resource Project publishes biosafety reviews of genetic engineering techniques, such as plant transformation and the use of viral DNA to engineer virus resistance, that are used to produce GM crops for commercial use. The Project reviews (see 1.2 History for titles) are cited in academic articles and books on genetic engineering.
Other activities
Project scientists speak at meetings and to the public. Recent venues include the 7th Annual North American Summit on Food Safety (Canada, 2012), GMLSII (Implications of GM crop cultivation at large spatial scales, Germany 2010), Plant Transformation Technology II (Vienna 2011), and on National Public Radio.
Controversies
Contesting the precision of plant genetic engineering
Article Content: The Bioscience Resource Project's biosafety analyses of genetic engineering techniques (see 1.3.2 Publications) challenge two key assumptions that underlie both current GMO regulation in the U.S. and the claims of proponents of genetic engineering worldwide: (1) that genetic engineering is a precise and predictable technique and (2) that unintended consequences resulting from the genetic engineering process are highly unlikely.
Reception: Individuals, NGOs, and scientists critical of genetic engineering cite the Project's biosafety analyses to support the argument that, due to the likelihood of unintended effects, each new genetically modified plant requires careful analysis and strict regulation. Scientific and industry advocates of genetic engineering dispute this, arguing that genetic engineering produces unintended consequences that are equivalent to those found in conventionally bred plants. An exchange in Nature Biotechnology, that includes the viewpoint of Project scientists, illustrates both sides of the debate.
Challenging the idea that common western diseases are genetically determined
Article Content: In 2010, Independent Science News published "The Great DNA Data Deficit: Are Genes for Disease a Mirage?" The article brought together three separate bodies of scientific evidence to support the theory that lifestyle and environment, and not genes, are the important determinants of most common western diseases. The three bodies of evidence summarized included (1) Scientific reviews claiming the failure of GWA studies to find major disease genes, (2) Research challenging the reliability of the heritability estimates for disease that were the reason to expect important disease genes, and (3) Research indicating the existence of large environmental and lifestyle effects on the prevalence of common non-infectious diseases. The article also questioned the value of genetic research compared to research into disease prevention and the study of non-genetic causes, and it questioned the motives of human geneticists and government backers.
Reception: After its publication, geneticist and environmentalist David Suzuki, author Michael Pollan, scientist Marion Nestle, and doctor and columnist David Katz (Huffington Post) cited "The Great DNA Deficit" and supported the contention that genes are not the major determinant of western disease susceptibility. At the same time the article's authors, and those who gave it positive reviews, were criticized by writers for various genetics websites, including Newsweek writer Mary Carmichael, on the Open Helix blog, Discover magazine blogger Razib Khan, Wired contributor and geneticist Daniel MacArthur, and John Derbyshire of the New Republic. The debate also reached National Public Radio, where Dr. Latham debated geneticist Stanley Nelson, MD on the Patt Morrison show. Dr. Latham's subsequent Guardian article "Failure of the Genome" resulted in further debate over the value of human genetics research in the prevention and treatment of common non-infectious disease.
See also
Other organizations
- Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Pesticide Action Network
- Physicians for Social Responsibility
- Union of Concerned Scientists
References
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments