Georgia’s Wayne Parrott: ‘Time to end transparency double-standard targeting biotech scientists

— Written By
en Español

El inglés es el idioma de control de esta página. En la medida en que haya algún conflicto entre la traducción al inglés y la traducción, el inglés prevalece.

Al hacer clic en el enlace de traducción se activa un servicio de traducción gratuito para convertir la página al español. Al igual que con cualquier traducción por Internet, la conversión no es sensible al contexto y puede que no traduzca el texto en su significado original. NC State Extension no garantiza la exactitud del texto traducido. Por favor, tenga en cuenta que algunas aplicaciones y/o servicios pueden no funcionar como se espera cuando se traducen.

English is the controlling language of this page. To the extent there is any conflict between the English text and the translation, English controls.

Clicking on the translation link activates a free translation service to convert the page to Spanish. As with any Internet translation, the conversion is not context-sensitive and may not translate the text to its original meaning. NC State Extension does not guarantee the accuracy of the translated text. Please note that some applications and/or services may not function as expected when translated.

Collapse ▲

Wayne Parrott | September 15, 2015 | Genetic Literacy Project

I have long been a firm believer that any public scientist who cannot explain, defend and justify his/her work to the public and to funding agencies has no business receiving those funds or doing that research. This philosophy is underscored by some federal granting agencies that require a commitment to broader impacts by scientists; these can include, among other things, “increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology”—in other words, science communication and outreach. Yet, when the science encompasses controversial topics, public engagement is more easily said than done.

Scientists communicating about controversial topics have long had to endure numerous personal attacks on their competence, credibility and/or ethics. It is not a job for thin-skinned people. However, the current all-out assault on scientists who seek to explain the science behind GMOs is unprecedented in scope and vitriol. That the anti-GMO sector now attacks scientists personally indicates they have been reduced to attacking the messenger in the absence of evidence that GMOs are unsafe. Attacking the messenger is a time-honored strategy of those who have no evidence and whose arguments to the contrary have failed.

Read more.