Citizens in Defence of Something Called Science

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. For example, despite little public support for the commercialization of GM crops expressed through the centrally organized GM Nation? debate (described below), in February 2004 Government approved a GM maize that had successfully passed through a technical risk assessment, the only commercialization criteria required by EU legislation. 2. 'Science-in-general' as an abstract entity or principle and 'science-in-particular' as an activity directed at specific phenomena or problems are terms coined by Michael (1991 Michael, M. 1991. Discourses of danger and dangerous discourses: patrolling the borders of science, nature and society. Discourse and Society, 2(1): 5–28. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], 1992 Michael, M. 1992. Lay discourses of science: science-in-general, science-in-particular, and self. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 17(3): 313–333. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). See also Stern (2004 Stern, M. 2004. Jurassic Park and the moveable feast of science. Science as Culture, 13(3): 347–372. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]) for a discussion of the distinction between 'Science' and 'science'. 3. This is also not to say that the categories science and scientist were not used as strategies to silence or marginalize others. For example, on occasion a participant could be stripped of their right to speak if they could not demonstrate scientific competence. 4. In 1999, Pusztai conducted experiments where rats were fed potatoes modified to express lectin. Lectins are a group of naturally occurring toxins that protect plants from insects. The results seemed to show the GM potatoes damaged parts of the rats' digestive tract, even though the lectin in question had previously been shown to be harmless to mammals. The validity of these results, and the integrity and skill of the scientists' involved, became subject to a very public and political dispute. For an introduction to the controversy, see Levidow (2002 Levidow, L. 2002. Ignorance-based risk assessment? Scientific controversy over GM food safety. Science as Culture, 11(1): 61–67. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]). For a detailed analysis from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge, see Eriksson (2004 Eriksson, L. 2004. "From persona to person: the unfolding of an (un)scientific controversy". Cardiff University. PhD Thesis [Google Scholar]). 5. The report Seeds of Doubt (Warwick and Meziani, 2002 Warwick, H. and Meziani, G. 2002. Seeds of Doubt: North American Farmers' Experiences of GM Crops, Bristol: Soil Association. [Google Scholar]) was cited by some participants. 6. For examples of their scientific contributions see Ho (1999 Ho, M.-W. 1999. Genetic Engineering: Dream or Nightmare, Dublin: Gateway. [Google Scholar]), Quist and Chapela (2001 Quist, D. and Chapela, I. 2001. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature, 414: 541–542. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), and Ewen and Pusztai (1999 Ewen, S. and Pusztai, A. 1999. Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet, 354: 1353–1354. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).