| 为什么人们反对转基因食品?(综述) 《生物科学趋势》 2015年9卷2期发表了一篇综述文章,介绍了过去10多年来转基因食品安全性的著名事件和相关的争议。通过阅读这篇文章,我们就很容易理解为什么很多人反对和抵制转基因产品。这是一篇专业性文章,本人想用通俗的语言介绍给大家,同时考虑到文学城藏龙卧虎,专家学者云集,特此加上原文参考文献供有兴趣的人深度探讨。 下表是有关事件的总结: 可以看出自1999年起至今,大概有五起著名的研究或报告都曾引起学术界特别是媒体的高度关注,而且这些结果都被反转基因运动组织和团体拿来作为证据来反对转基因产品。其实今天媒体网络上很多疯传的信息及照片都是来自这几起事件。上述结果的确可以让所有的人为转基因产品紧张和担忧,甚至相信转基因产品确实对人体有害。人们不仅要问:这么有害的东西政府为什么不去禁止反而支持? 事实上科学界和各国政府机构对这些研究结果同样感到震惊。因为它们主要来自于科学家的研究结果,并且大多数发表在国际著名的专业期刊上。那真相到底如何呢?其实事件发生后,按照惯例,来自不同科研机构的科学家们对这些结果都进行了多次全面的实验和评估,有关政府机构也介入了调查。调查结果显示所有上述研究结果,要么是实验重复不出来,要么是实验设计不合理,缺少说服力。或者是结果与事实不符,再或者是统计有错误,以及仅凭主观意念,缺少科学依据等等。 由此几家学术期刊先后都陆续撤回了上诉研究论文或发表声明澄清有关事实。 大家都知道,科学就是一个探索的过程,在这个过程中由于宇宙的奥秘和人的局限性,出现各种各样的失误是非常正常的,当然这些失误要与少数的科学骗子,伪科学以及那些想出人头地,博人眼球的投机者人完全分开。更不能因为各种失误,我们就怀疑否定一切,应该乐观相信科学是进步的,是逐步完善的。 不幸的是,在每个事件中,媒体总是跑在科学评估的前面,而科学研究为了其严谨性,特别是这些对公众影响力大的事件所进行的进一步实验评估结果发表后,媒体往往对此已经没有了兴趣,导致公众信息滞后及民众的担忧。从这个角度看,科学传播信息的能力常常比媒体差很多。 References 参考文献: 1. Séralini GE, Clair E, Mesnage R, Gress S, Defarge N, Malatesta M, Hennequin D, de Vendômois JS. Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food Chem Toxicol. 2012; 50:4221-4231. 2. Wallace Hayes A. Editor in Chief of Food and Chemical Toxicology answers questions on retraction. Food Chem Toxicol. 2014; 65:394-395. 3. Losey JE, Rayor LS, Carter ME. Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature. 1999; 399:214. 4. Quist D, Chapela IH. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature. 2001; 414:541-543. 5. Sanders D, Kamoun S, Williams B, Festing M. Re: Séralini, G.-E., et al. Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food Chem. Toxicol (2012). Food Chem Toxicol. 2013; 53:450-453. 6. de Souza L, Macedo Oda L. Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food Chem Toxicol. 2013; 53:440. 7. Butler D. Hyped GM maize study faces growing scrutiny. Nature. 2012; 490:158. 8. Arjó G, Portero M, Piñol C, Viñas J, Matias-Guiu X, Capell T, Bartholomaeus A, Parrott W, Christou P. Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: An in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup™ Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup™ cause cancer in rats. Transgenic Res. 2013; 22:255- 267. 9. Séralini GE, Clair E, Mesnage R, Gress S, Defarge N, Malatesta M, Hennequin D, de Vendômois JS. Republished study: Long-term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Environmental Sciences Europe. 2014; 26:14. 10. Delaney B, Appenzeller LM, Roper JM, Mukerji P, Hoban D, Sykes GP. Thirteen week rodent feeding study with processed fractions from herbicide tolerant (DP-Ø73496-4) canola. Food Chem Toxicol. 2014; 66:173-184. 11. Mesnage R, Defarge N, Spiroux de Vendômois J, Séralini GE. Letter to the Editor regarding "Delaney et al., 2014": Uncontrolled GMOs and their associated pesticides make the conclusions unreliable. Food Chem Toxicol. 2014; 72:322. 12. China News Service. Yongyuan Cui was criticized by the President of China Agricultural University for his documentary film on genetically modified foods. http:// www.chinanews.com/cul/2014/06-18/6292872.shtml (accessed February 3, 2015). 13. Article by a doctoral student in plant molecular biology. Scientific mistakes in Yongyuan Cui's documentary film on genetically modified foods. http://www.guokr.com/ article/438078/ (accessed February 4, 2015). 14. Flipse SM, Osseweijer P. Media attention to GM food cases: An innovation perspective. Public Underst Sci. 2013; 22:185-202. 15. Ewen SW, Pusztai A. Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet. 1999; 354:1353-1354.
|