Attitudes Of The Public And Scientists To Biotechnology In Japan At The Start Of 2000

Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 10 (4):106-113 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This survey on biotechnology and bioethics was carried out on national random samples of the public and scientists in November 2000-January 2000 throughout Japan, and attendees at the Novartis Life Science Forum held on 29 September, 1999 in Tokyo. The sample size was 297, 370, and 74 respectively. While there is better awareness of GMOs in 2000 compared to 1991; the trend shows an increase in the perceived risks of GMOs followed by growing resistance in Japan. While a majority of persons believed genetic engineering would make life better over the next twenty years, the proportion of respondents who thought genetic engineering would make life worse over the next twenty years doubled from 1997 to 2000. Respondents were asked whether they had heard about applications in several areas and the order of familiarity was: pest-resistant crops, human genes in bacteria, mouse to develop cancer, food and drinks, pigs with human hearts and pre-implantation diagnosis. A divide of opinion can be seen when the results on benefit, risk and moral acceptability of applications of biotechnology by the public are compared to the forum and scientist samples.A significant change in the acceptance of the public occurred in 2000 where only 22% agreed on the moral acceptability of GM food compared to 41% in 1997. In 2000 fewer people said they are willing to buy genetically modified fruits that taste better compared to 1997. The results show less public support for use of gene therapy than 1993 and twice as many scientists rejected gene therapy than they did in 1991.When asked whom is best placed to regulate modern biotechnology, the respondents were overwhelmingly in favor of international regulatory bodies, such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization, rather than national bodies. The comparison between scientists and public is interesting, however the more enthusastic sample were participants from the Novartis Life Science Forum with its mixed occupations.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,227

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Attitudes of the Public and Scientists to Biotechnology in Japan at the start of 2000.Mary Ann Ng, C. Takeda, T. Watanabe & D. Macer - 2000 - Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 10 (3):106-112.
Attitudes to Bioethics and Biotechnology in Thailand , and Impacts on Employment.Chalobon Kachonpadungkitti & Darryl Macer - 2004 - Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 14 (4):118-134.
Hype and Public Trust in Science.Zubin Master & David B. Resnik - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):321-335.
Biotechnology and the Fear of Frankenstein.Courtney S. Campbell - 2003 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 12 (4):342-352.
Riesenschweine und Retorten: Bilder der Biotechnologie in deutschen Zeitschriften 1980–2000.Manuel Schramm - 2005 - NTM Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin 13 (4):201-215.
How japanese students reason about agricultural biotechnology.Fumi Maekawa & Darryl Macer - 2004 - Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (4):705-716.
Bioethical Attitudes Of Japanese University Doctors, And Members Of Japan Association Of Bioethics.Darryl Macer - 1996 - Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 6 (2):33-48.
Public Opinion and Its Impacts on the 2000 HR election.Ikuo Kabashima - 2000 - Japanese Journal of Political Science 1 (2):341-344.
A social contract for biotechnology: Shared visions for risky technologies?Donald M. Bruce - 2002 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (3):279-289.
Including public perspectives in industrial biotechnology and the biobased economy.Lino Paula & Frans Birrer - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (3):253-267.
Why scientists should cooperate with journalists.Boyce Rensberger - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (4):549-552.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-22

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references