After Dolly—Ethical limits to the use of biotechnology on farm animals
Section snippets
Dolly and the public awareness of animal biotechnology
Dolly was an unusual sheep. She was in a radical sense fatherless. She originated from a cell taken from the udder of her biological mother. This cell was inserted into a sheep ovum from which the nuclear genome had been removed, and it was manipulated so that it fused with the ‘egg-mass’ or cytoplasm of the ovum to form a embryo. The embryo was then inserted into a foster mother who went through a normal, albeit closely monitored, pregnancy, which resulted in the birth of Dolly—the first
Biotechnology, animals, ethics and the public
For the general public animal biotechnology does not exist in a vacuum. It coexists with other applications of biotechnology, primarily within agriculture and the medical area. It therefore makes good sense to discuss, first of all, how animal applications relate to these other uses of biotechnology.
In order to monitor lay perceptions of the new biotechnologies within the EU, the European Commission has carried out regular surveys since 1989—the most recent being undertaken in 2002. Each of
Scepticism does not merely reflect lack of knowledge
It might be supposed that the pronounced public scepticism about forms of biotechnology such as cloning and other animal biotechnologies reflects a low level of understanding of biotechnology among lay observers. According to this so-called ‘knowledge deficit’ or ‘knowledge gap’ model, inadequate knowledge leads the public to draw moral conclusions about practices within science that are ill informed. And since the problem is knowledge, the cure is to feed information into the public sphere
Animals, biotechnology and the public: moving beyond the general picture
Apart from the indications given by the follow-up questions about cloning, the Eurobarometer does not offer any detailed explanation of the motives and reasoning lying behind critical attitudes to the mix of animals and biotechnology. Thus, to add more detail to the picture painted by the Eurobarometer, a series of seven focus group interviews were carried out in Denmark in 2000. Each focus group involved between four and seven participants. Since the aim of the interviews was to explore the
Ethical limits to the use of biotechnology on animals?
In this article, we have tried to show what kinds of concern the use of biotechnology on farm animals evokes in Europeans in connection with farm animals both as species and as production units in the agricultural sector. These concerns can, roughly speaking, be said to give a list of the ethical questions that a society such as Denmark needs to discuss when considering the ethical aspects of biotechnology and establishing a framework for the use of it—at least, if the discussion is to be
Conclusion
The European public is worried about animal cloning and other forms of animal biotechnology. However, contrary to a widespread belief in the scientific community, this worry cannot simply be explained in terms of a lack or distortion of factual information. To create a socially robust framework for discussion of the ethical limits concerning the use of biotechnology on animals, we believe that one should take these worries as the point of departure. It is not that they should be uncritically
Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank Novo Nordisk A/S and the Danish Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Fisheries for providing financial support for the research on which this paper is based. Thanks are also due to Paul A. Robinson for editorial assistance.
References (14)
- et al.
Beyond the knowledge deficit. Recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks
Appetite
(2003) - et al.
Early egg production in genetically blind (rc/rc) chickens in comparison with sighted (rc+/rc) controls
Poult Sci
(1985) - Gaskell G, Allum N, Stares S. Europeans and biotechnology in 2002. Eurobarometer 58.0, 2nd ed.; March 21, 2003...
- INRA (Europe)—ECOSA. Eurobarometre 52.1. Les Europeens et la biotechnologie; 15 mars 2000....
- European Commission. Eurobarometer 58.0, services of general interest. European Commission, DG Press and...
Cited by (52)
Ethical issues in animal biotechnology
2020, Animal Biotechnology: Models in Discovery and TranslationThe moral status of the embryo from the standpoint of social perceptions
2018, Clinical Ethics at the Crossroads of Genetic and Reproductive TechnologiesConsumers' attitudes about milk quality and fertilization methods in dairy cows in Germany
2016, Journal of Dairy ScienceCitation Excerpt :Public perception of milk products arising from the introduction of new technologies is difficult to assess (von Keyserlingk et al., 2013). In general, the public frequently distrusts the use of biotechnology in food production (Gaskell et al., 2000; Lassen et al., 2006). More specifically, the public perceives hormones undesirably as the word “hormones” holds negative connotations in the context of food production (Higgins et al., 2013; Jung et al., 2015).
Ethical Issues in Animal Biotechnology
2013, Animal Biotechnology: Models in Discovery and TranslationInvited review: Sustainability of the US dairy industry
2013, Journal of Dairy ScienceCitation Excerpt :Clearly, research efforts focusing on alternative strategies that are potentially less contentious must begin now. The public frequently distrusts the use of biotechnology in food production (Gaskell et al., 2000; Lassen et al., 2006), even though it seems clear that biotechnologies, such as the use of transgenics for improving milk production and composition, could play a significant role in ensuring global food security (Wheeler, 2007). Scientists and industry specialists often argue that the public’s rejection of biotechnology is due to a lack of understanding of science and that this knowledge deficit can be overcome by educating the public (Lusk and Norwood, 2011; Ahteensuu, 2012).