I am a plant geneticist. I study genes that make plants resistant to disease and tolerant of stress. In recent years, millions of people around the world have come to believe that there's something sinister about genetic modification. Today, I am going to provide a different perspective.
Bavim se biljnom genetikom. Proučavam gene odgovorne za otpornost biljaka na bolesti i toleranciju na stres. Posljednjih godina, milijuni ljudi diljem svijeta vjeruju da ima nešto zlokobno u pogledu genetičke modifikacije. Danas želim predstaviti drugačiju perspektivu.
First, let me introduce my husband, Raoul. He's an organic farmer. On his farm, he plants a variety of different crops. This is one of the many ecological farming practices he uses to keep his farm healthy. Imagine some of the reactions we get: "Really? An organic farmer and a plant geneticist? Can you agree on anything?"
Najprije vam želim predstaviti svoga muža, Roula. On se bavi organskom poljoprivredom. Na svojoj farmi uzgaja mnoštvo različitih biljnih vrsta. Ovo je jedna od brojnih ekoloških uzgojnih praksi koje koristi kako bi očuvao farmu u dobrom stanju. Zamislite reakcije ljudi: "Doista? Organska poljoprivreda i biljna genetika? Slažete li se u ičemu?"
Well, we can, and it's not difficult, because we have the same goal. We want to help nourish the growing population without further destroying the environment. I believe this is the greatest challenge of our time.
Pa, slažemo se, i nije teško jer imamo isti cilj. Želimo pomoći u ishrani rastuće svjetske populacije bez daljnjeg uništavanja okoliša. Vjerujem da je to najveći izazov našeg vremena.
Now, genetic modification is not new; virtually everything we eat has been genetically modified in some manner. Let me give you a few examples. On the left is an image of the ancient ancestor of modern corn. You see a single roll of grain that's covered in a hard case. Unless you have a hammer, teosinte isn't good for making tortillas. Now, take a look at the ancient ancestor of banana. You can see the large seeds. And unappetizing brussel sprouts, and eggplant, so beautiful.
Danas genetička modifikacija nije novost; praktično sve što jedemo, genetički je modificirano na neki način. Evo nekoliko primjera. S lijeve strane nalazi se slika drevnog pretka modernog kukuruza. Vidite svitak zrna prekriven tvrdom opnom. Osim ako nemate čekić, od teosinte nećete moći napraviti tortilje. A sada pogledajmo drevnog pretka banane. Možete vidjeti velike sjemenke. Te neukusne klice prokulica. Te patlidžan. Kako lijepo.
Now, to create these varieties, breeders have used many different genetic techniques over the years. Some of them are quite creative, like mixing two different species together using a process called grafting to create this variety that's half tomato and half potato. Breeders have also used other types of genetic techniques, such as random mutagenesis, which induces uncharacterized mutations into the plants. The rice in the cereal that many of us fed our babies was developed using this approach.
U stvaranju tih sorti, uzgajivači su godinama koristili različite genetičke tehnike. Neke su prilično kreativne, poput križanja dviju različitih vrsta korištenjem procesa zvanog kalemljenje kako bi stvorili sortu koja je pola rajčica a pola krumpir. Uzgajivači su, također, koristili i druge vrste genetičkih tehnika poput slučajne mutageneze, koja inducira nekarakteristične mutacije u biljkama. Riža u žitaricama kojima mnogi od nas hrane svoju djecu razvijena je korištenjem ovog pristupa.
Now, today, breeders have even more options to choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.
Danas uzgajivači imaju puno više mogućnosti. Neke od njih su izvanredno precizne.
I want to give you a couple examples from my own work. I work on rice, which is a staple food for more than half the world's people. Each year, 40 percent of the potential harvest is lost to pest and disease. For this reason, farmers plant rice varieties that carry genes for resistance. This approach has been used for nearly 100 years. Yet, when I started graduate school, no one knew what these genes were. It wasn't until the 1990s that scientists finally uncovered the genetic basis of resistance. In my laboratory, we isolated a gene for immunity to a very serious bacterial disease in Asia and Africa. We found we could engineer the gene into a conventional rice variety that's normally susceptible, and you can see the two leaves on the bottom here are highly resistant to infection.
Želim vam dati nekoliko primjera iz vlastitog rada. Radim na riži, koja je osnovna hrana za više od polovice svjetske populacije. Svake godine, 40 posto potencijalnog uroda biva izgubljeno usljed štetnika i bolesti. Iz tog razloga, poljoprivrednici sade sorte riže koje nose gene za otpornost. Ovakav pristup primjenjivan je gotovo 100 godina. Međutim, u vrijeme početka mojeg postdiplomskog studija, uloga ovih gena bila je nepoznata. Tek 1990-ih znanstvenici su konačno otkrili genetsku osnovu otpornosti. U mojem laboratoriju izoliran je gen odgovoran za imunost prema vrlo ozbiljnoj bakterijskoj bolesti u Aziji i Africi. Otkrili smo mogućnost inženjeringa toga gena u konvencionalnu sortu riže inače osjetljivu, te možete uočiti da su dva lista pri dnu visoko-otporna na infekciju.
Now, the same month that my laboratory published our discovery on the rice immunity gene, my friend and colleague Dave Mackill stopped by my office. He said, "Seventy million rice farmers are having trouble growing rice." That's because their fields are flooded, and these rice farmers are living on less than two dollars a day. Although rice grows well in standing water, most rice varieties will die if they're submerged for more than three days. Flooding is expected to be increasingly problematic as the climate changes. He told me that his graduate student Kenong Xu and himself were studying an ancient variety of rice that had an amazing property. It could withstand two weeks of complete submergence. He asked if I would be willing to help them isolate this gene. I said yes -- I was very excited, because I knew if we were successful, we could potentially help millions of farmers grow rice even when their fields were flooded.
Nadalje, istog mjeseca kada je moj laboratorij objavio naše otkriće na genu odgovornom za imunost kod riže, posjetio me moj prijatelj i kolega Dave Mackill. Rekao je, "Sedamdeset milijuna uzgajivača riže ima problem pri uzgoju." Razlog tomu su poplavljena polja, te uzgajivači žive na manje od dva dolara po danu. Iako riža dobro uspijeva u stajaćim vodama, većina sorti ne može preživjeti u submerznim uvjetima više od tri dana. Očekuje se da će plavljenje postati izrazito problematično s klimatskim promjenama. Rekao mi je da je zajedno sa svojim studentom Kenong Xu-om proučavao drevnu sortu riže nevjerojatnog svojstva. Može izdržati dva tjedna u potpuno submerznim uvjetima. Upitao me da li im želim pomoći u izolaciji toga gena. Rekla sam da -- Bila sam vrlo uzbuđena, jer sam znala da ako budemo uspješni, potencijalno možemo pomoći milijunima poljoprivrednika u uzgoju riže, čak i kada su njihova polja poplavljena.
Kenong spent 10 years looking for this gene. Then one day, he said, "Come look at this experiment. You've got to see it." I went to the greenhouse and I saw that the conventional variety that was flooded for 18 days had died, but the rice variety that we had genetically engineered with a new gene we had discovered, called Sub1, was alive. Kenong and I were amazed and excited that a single gene could have this dramatic effect. But this is just a greenhouse experiment. Would this work in the field?
Kenong je proveo 10 godina tražeći ovaj gen. Onda je jednog dana rekao, "Dođi pogledaj ovaj eksperiment. Moraš to vidjeti." Otišla sam u staklenik i vidjela da konvencionalna sorta, poplavljena 18 dana, nije preživjela, dok je genetički modificirana sorta s novootkrivenim genom nazvanim Sub1, preživjela. Kenong i ja smo bili oduševljeni i uzbuđeni činjenicom da jedan gen može imati tako dramatičan učinak. No ovo je samo eksperiment u stakleniku. Bi li ovo funkcioniralo u polju?
Now, I'm going to show you a four-month time lapse video taken at the International Rice Research Institute. Breeders there developed a rice variety carrying the Sub1 gene using another genetic technique called precision breeding. On the left, you can see the Sub1 variety, and on the right is the conventional variety. Both varieties do very well at first, but then the field is flooded for 17 days. You can see the Sub1 variety does great. In fact, it produces three and a half times more grain than the conventional variety. I love this video because it shows the power of plant genetics to help farmers. Last year, with the help of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, three and a half million farmers grew Sub1 rice.
Sada ću vam pokazati ubrzanu snimku četiri mjeseca snimljenu na Međunarodnom institutu za istraživanje riže. Tamošnji uzgajivači razvili su sortu koja nosi Sub1 gen primjenom genetičke tehnike zvane precizna oplodnja. S lijeva možete vidjeti Sub1 sortu, dok je s desna konvencionalna sorta. Obje sorte u početku dobro uspijevaju, no nakon toga polje 17 dana biva poplavljeno. Možete vidjeti da Sub1 sorta odlično uspijeva. Zapravo, ova sorta donosi trostruko veći urod u odnosu na konvencionalnu sortu. Volim ovaj video jer prikazuje koliko biljna genetika može pomoći poljoprivrednicima. Prošle godine, uz pomoć zaklade Bill i Melinda Gates, tri i pol milijuna poljoprivredinka uzgajalo je Sub1 rižu.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)
Thank you.
Hvala.
Now, many people don't mind genetic modification when it comes to moving rice genes around, rice genes in rice plants, or even when it comes to mixing species together through grafting or random mutagenesis. But when it comes to taking genes from viruses and bacteria and putting them into plants, a lot of people say, "Yuck." Why would you do that? The reason is that sometimes it's the cheapest, safest, and most effective technology for enhancing food security and advancing sustainable agriculture. I'm going to give you three examples.
Nadalje, mnogim ljudima ne smeta genetička modifikacija kada je u pitanju prijenos gena riže, geni riže u biljke riže, ili kada je u pitanju križanje vrsta kalemljenjem ili slučajnom mutagenezom. Ali, kada se radi o uzimanju gena iz virusa i bakterija i njihovoj ugradnji u biljke, puno ljudi će reći: "Fuj." Zašto biste to uradili? Zbog toga što je to nekad najjeftinija, najsigurnija i najučinkovitija tehnologija za povećanje sigurnosti ishrane i unaprijeđivanje agrikulturalne održivosti. Dati ću vam tri primjera.
First, take a look at papaya. It's delicious, right? But now, look at this papaya. This papaya is infected with papaya ringspot virus. In the 1950s, this virus nearly wiped out the entire production of papaya on the island of Oahu in Hawaii. Many people thought that the Hawaiian papaya was doomed, but then, a local Hawaiian, a plant pathologist named Dennis Gonsalves, decided to try to fight this disease using genetic engineering. He took a snippet of viral DNA and he inserted it into the papaya genome. This is kind of like a human getting a vaccination. Now, take a look at his field trial. You can see the genetically engineered papaya in the center. It's immune to infection. The conventional papaya around the outside is severely infected with the virus. Dennis' pioneering work is credited with rescuing the papaya industry. Today, 20 years later, there's still no other method to control this disease. There's no organic method. There's no conventional method. Eighty percent of Hawaiian papaya is genetically engineered.
Prvo, pogledajmo papaju. Ukusna je, zar ne? No, sada pogledajte ovu papaju. Zaražena je "Papaya ringspot" virusom. 1950-ih ovaj virus je gotovo uništio cijelu proizvodnju papaje na otoku Oahu na Havajima. Ljudi su mislili da je havajanska papaja ukleta, no tada se, lokalni stanovnik Havaja, biljni patolog Dennis Gonslaves, odlučio primjenom genetičkog inženjeringa boriti protiv ove bolesti. Uzeo je odsječak viralne DNA i umetnuo ga u genom papaje. Nešto poput cijepljenja kod ljudi. Pogledajte sada poljski pokus. Možete vidjeti genetički modificiranu papaju u sredini. Imuna je na infekciju. Konvencionalna papaja koja je okružuje teško je inficirana virusom. Dennisovom pionirskom radu pripisano je spašavanje industrije papaje. Danas, 20 godina kasnije, ne postoji druga metoda za kontrolu ove bolesti. Ne postoji organska kao ni konvencionalna metoda. Osamdeset posto havajanske papaje genetički je modificirano.
Now, some of you may still feel a little queasy about viral genes in your food, but consider this: The genetically engineered papaya carries just a trace amount of the virus. If you bite into an organic or conventional papaya that is infected with the virus, you will be chewing on tenfold more viral protein.
Neki od vas su još uvijek osjetljivi na viralne gene u hrani, no razmislite: genetički modificirana papaja nosi samo tračak virusa. Ako zagrizete u organsku ili konvencionalnu papaju zaraženu virusom, žvakati ćete deseterostruko više viralnog proteina.
Now, take a look at this pest feasting on an eggplant. The brown you see is frass, what comes out the back end of the insect. To control this serious pest, which can devastate the entire eggplant crop in Bangladesh, Bangladeshi farmers spray insecticides two to three times a week, sometimes twice a day, when pest pressure is high. But we know that some insecticides are very harmful to human health, especially when farmers and their families cannot afford proper protection, like these children. In less developed countries, it's estimated that 300,000 people die every year because of insecticide misuse and exposure. Cornell and Bangladeshi scientists decided to fight this disease using a genetic technique that builds on an organic farming approach. Organic farmers like my husband Raoul spray an insecticide called B.T., which is based on a bacteria. This pesticide is very specific to caterpillar pests, and in fact, it's nontoxic to humans, fish and birds. It's less toxic than table salt. But this approach does not work well in Bangladesh. That's because these insecticide sprays are difficult to find, they're expensive, and they don't prevent the insect from getting inside the plants. In the genetic approach, scientists cut the gene out of the bacteria and insert it directly into the eggplant genome. Will this work to reduce insecticide sprays in Bangladesh? Definitely. Last season, farmers reported they were able to reduce their insecticide use by a huge amount, almost down to zero. They're able to harvest and replant for the next season.
Pogledajte sada ovu gozbu štetnika na patlidžanu. Smeđe mrlje su izmet, koji se izlučuje iz stražnjeg dijela kukca. Kako bi kontrolirali ovog štetnika, koji može uništiti cijeli usjev patlidžana u Bangladešu, tamošnju poljoprivrednici prskaju insekticidima, dva do tri puta tjedno, a ponekad i dva puta dnevno, kada je zahvaćenost štetnicima visoka. No znamo da su neki insekticidi vrlo štetni za ljudsko zdravlje, osobito kada si poljoprivrednici i njihove obitelji ne mogu priuštiti odgovarajuću zaštitu, poput ove djece. Procijenjeno je da, u manje razvijenim zemljama, 300 000 ljudi umire svake godine uslijed lošeg postupanja i izloženosti insekticidima. Sveučilište Cornell i znantvenici iz Bangladeša odlučili su suzbiti ovu bolest primjenom genetičkih tehnika temeljenih na organskoj poljoprivredi. Poljoprivrednici poput mog muža Roula, koriste insekticid B.T. temeljen na bakterijama. Ovaj pesticid je vrlo specifičan za nametničke gusjenice i zapravo, nije toksičan za ljude, ribe i ptice. Manje je toksičan od kuhinjske soli. No ovaj pristup ne funkcionira u Bangladešu. Ovakvi insekticidni sprejevi teško su dostupni i skupi, te ne djeluju na spriječavanje ulaska insekta u biljku. Kod genetičkog pristupa, znanstvenici izrežu gen iz bakterije i umetnu ga izravo u genom patlidžana. Da li bi ovo smanjilo upotrebu insekticida u Bangladešu? Svakako. Poljoprivrednici su izvjestili da su prošle sezone značajno smanjili upotrebu insekticida, gotovo u potpunosti. Bili su u mogućnosti žeti i ponovno sijati za slijedeću sezonu.
Now, I've given you a couple examples of how genetic engineering can be used to fight pests and disease and to reduce the amount of insecticides. My final example is an example where genetic engineering can be used to reduce malnutrition. In less developed countries, 500,000 children go blind every year because of lack of Vitamin A. More than half will die. For this reason, scientists supported by the Rockefeller Foundation genetically engineered a golden rice to produce beta-carotene, which is the precursor of Vitamin A. This is the same pigment that we find in carrots. Researchers estimate that just one cup of golden rice per day will save the lives of thousands of children. But golden rice is virulently opposed by activists who are against genetic modification. Just last year, activists invaded and destroyed a field trial in the Philippines. When I heard about the destruction, I wondered if they knew that they were destroying much more than a scientific research project, that they were destroying medicines that children desperately needed to save their sight and their lives.
Pokazala sam vam nekoliko primjera kako se genetički inženjering koristi u borbi protiv nametnika i bolesti te da bi se smanjila učestalost korištenja insekticida. Kao zadnji primjer navesti ću primjenu genetičkog inženjeringa u smanjenju pothranjenosti. U slabije razvijenim zemljama 500,000 djece godišnje oslijepi uslijed nedostatka vitamina A. Više od polovice će umrijeti. Iz tog razloga, znanstvenici podržani od strane Rockefeller zaklade genetički su modificirali zlatnu rižu kako bi proizveli beta-karoten, prekursor vitamina A. Beta-karoten je pigment koji nalazimo i u mrkvi. Istraživači procjenjuju da samo jedna šalica zlatne riže dnevno može spasiti na tisuće djece. No zlatna riža se virulentno negira od strane aktivista koji se protive genetičkom inženjeringu. Samo prošle godine aktivisti su provalili i uništili poljski pokus na Filipinima. Kada sam saznala za uništavanje, zapitala sam se znaju li da uništavaju mnogo više od znanstveno-istraživačkog projekta, da uništavaju lijekove koje djeca očajno trebaju kako bi sačuvali svoj vid i živote.
Some of my friends and family still worry: How do you know genes in the food are safe to eat? I explained the genetic engineering, the process of moving genes between species, has been used for more than 40 years in wines, in medicine, in plants, in cheeses. In all that time, there hasn't been a single case of harm to human health or the environment. But I say, look, I'm not asking you to believe me. Science is not a belief system. My opinion doesn't matter. Let's look at the evidence. After 20 years of careful study and rigorous peer review by thousands of independent scientists, every major scientific organization in the world has concluded that the crops currently on the market are safe to eat and that the process of genetic engineering is no more risky than older methods of genetic modification. These are precisely the same organizations that most of us trust when it comes to other important scientific issues such as global climate change or the safety of vaccines.
Moji prijatelji i obitelj su zabrinuti "Kako znaš da su geni u hrani sigurni za jesti? Genetički inženjering, proces premještanja gena među vrstama, koristi se više od 40 godina u proizvodnji vina, medicini, botanici i proizvodnji sireva. Za sve to vrijeme ne postoji niti jedan slučaj povrede ljudskog zdravlja ili okoliša. Ali ja ne tražim da mi vjerujete. Znanost se ne temelji na vjerovanju. Ni moje mišljenje nije važno. Samo pogledajmo dokaze. Nakon 20 godina pomnih studija i strogih stručnih recenzija od strane tisuće neovisnih znanstvenika, svaka velika znanstvena organizacija u svijetu donijela je zaključak da su trenutni usjevi na tržištu sigurni za konzumaciju te da proces genetičkog inženjeringa nije riskantniji od drugih starijih metoda genetičke modifikacije. Točnije, ovo su iste one organizacije kojima većina nas vjeruje kada su u pitanju važni znanstveni problemi poput globalnih klimatskih promjena ili sigurnosti cjepiva.
Raoul and I believe that, instead of worrying about the genes in our food, we must focus on how we can help children grow up healthy. We must ask if farmers in rural communities can thrive, and if everyone can afford the food. We must try to minimize environmental degradation. What scares me most about the loud arguments and misinformation about plant genetics is that the poorest people who most need the technology may be denied access because of the vague fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat.
Roul i ja vjerujemo da, umjesto zabrinutosti o genima u našoj hrani, moramo biti usredotočeni na zdraviji rast i razvoj djece. Trebamo se zapitati mogu li ruralni poljoprivrednici napredovati i može li si svatko priuštiti hranu. Moramo nastojati umanjiti propadanje okoliša. Ono što me najviše plaši po pitanju glasnih argumenata i dezinformacija o biljnoj genetici, je da oni najsiromašniji, kojima najviše treba ova tehnologija, nemaju pristup zbog nejasnih strahova i predrasuda onih koji imaju dovoljno hrane.
We have a huge challenge in front of us. Let's celebrate scientific innovation and use it. It's our responsibility to do everything we can to help alleviate human suffering and safeguard the environment.
Ogroman je izazov pred nama. Slavimo znanstvenu inovaciju i primjenimo je. Naša je odgovornost učiniti sve što možemo da ublažimo ljudsku patnju i zaštitimo okoliš.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)
Thank you.
Hvala.
Chris Anderson: Powerfully argued. The people who argue against GMOs, as I understand it, the core piece comes from two things. One, complexity and unintended consequence. Nature is this incredibly complex machine. If we put out these brand new genes that we've created, that haven't been challenged by years of evolution, and they started mixing up with the rest of what's going on, couldn't that trigger some kind of cataclysm or problem, especially when you add in the commercial incentive that some companies have to put them out there? The fear is that those incentives mean that the decision is not made on purely scientific grounds, and even if it was, that there would be unintended consequences. How do we know that there isn't a big risk of some unintended consequence? Often our tinkerings with nature do lead to big, unintended consequences and chain reactions.
Chris Anderson: Zaista uvjerljivo. Onima koji se protive GMO, koliko sam shvatio, ključni problem su dvije stvari. Prvo, kompleksnost i neželjene posljedice. Priroda je nevjerojatno kompleksan stroj. Ako unesemo potpuno nove te novo stvorene gene, koji nisu oblikovani kroz godine evolucije, te se počnu miješati s postojećom prirodom, ne bi li to izazvalo neku vrstu kataklizme ili problema, osobito kada uzmemo u obzir komercijalni interes pojedinih tvrtki za njihovim unosom? Strah od takvih inicijativa znači da odluka nije izgrađena na znanstvenima temeljima, a sve i da je, bilo bi neželjenih posljedica. Kako možemo znati da ne postoji velika opasnost od neželjenih posljedica? Naše intervencije u prirodi često vode do neželjenih posljedica i lančanih reakcija.
Pamela Ronald: Okay, so on the commercial aspects, one thing that's really important to understand is that, in the developed world, farmers in the United States, almost all farmers, whether they're organic or conventional, they buy seed produced by seed companies. So there's definitely a commercial interest to sell a lot of seed, but hopefully they're selling seed that the farmers want to buy. It's different in the less developed world. Farmers there cannot afford the seed. These seeds are not being sold. These seeds are being distributed freely through traditional kinds of certification groups, so it is very important in less developed countries that the seed be freely available.
Pamela Ronald: Dobro, kod komercijalnih aspekata, ono što je vrlo važno za razumjeti je da u razvijenom svijetu, poljoprivrednici u SAD-u, gotovo svi, bilo organska ili konvencionalna poljoprivreda, kupuju sjeme od proizvođača. Dakle, svakako postoji komercijalni interes za prodaju sjemena, no nadam se da prodaju sjeme koje poljoprivrednici žele kupiti. Priča je drugačija u slabije razvijenim zemljama. Poljoprivrednici si ne mogu priuštiti sjeme. To sjeme nije na prodaju. To sjeme je slobodno distribuirano na tradicionalne načine certificiranih grupa. Stoga je vrlo važno da u slabije razvijenim zemljama sjeme bude besplatno.
CA: Wouldn't some activists say that this is actually part of the conspiracy? This is the heroin strategy. You seed the stuff, and people have no choice but to be hooked on these seeds forever?
CA: Ne bi li neki aktivisti mogli reći da je ovo zapravo dio zavjere? Ovo je herojska strategija. Posijete nešto, a ljudi nemaju izbora nego ostati na tome sjemenu zauvijek?
PR: There are a lot of conspiracy theories for sure, but it doesn't work that way. For example, the seed that's being distributed, the flood-tolerant rice, this is distributed freely through Indian and Bangladeshi seed certification agencies, so there's no commercial interest at all. The golden rice was developed through support of the Rockefeller Foundation. Again, it's being freely distributed. There are no commercial profits in this situation. And now to address your other question about, well, mixing genes, aren't there some unintended consequences? Absolutely -- every time we do something different, there's an unintended consequence, but one of the points I was trying to make is that we've been doing kind of crazy things to our plants, mutagenesis using radiation or chemical mutagenesis. This induces thousands of uncharacterized mutations, and this is even a higher risk of unintended consequence than many of the modern methods. And so it's really important not to use the term GMO because it's scientifically meaningless. I feel it's very important to talk about a specific crop and a specific product, and think about the needs of the consumer.
PR: Zasigurno je mnogo teorija zavjere, no ovo ne funkcionira tako. Primjerice, sjeme koje je distribuirano, riža otporna na plavljenje, distribuirano je slobodno putem certificiranih agencija u Indiji i Bangladešu. Dakle, tu uopće nema komercijalnih interesa. Zlatna riža razvijena je kroz potporu Rockefeller zaklade. Opet, slobodno je distribuirana. Nema komercijalnih dobiti u ovoj situaciji. A sada da odgovorim na vaše drugo pitanje o miješanju gena i postoje li neželjene posljedice? U potpunosti -- uvijek kada napravimo nešto drugačije, imamo neželjenu posljedicu, no htjela sam naglasiti jednu stvar, a to je da je prilično ludo ono što radimo našim biljkama, mutageneza izazvana zračenjem ili kemijskim agensima. To uzrokuje na tisuće nekarakterističnih mutacija, a tu je opasnost od neželjenih posljedica još veći nego od mnogih modernih metoda. Stoga je vrlo važno ne koristiti termin GMO jer je znanstveno beznačajan. Smatram da je važno usredotočiti se na pojedine usjeve i specifične proizvode, te misliti na potrebe potrošača.
CA: So part of what's happening here is that there's a mental model in a lot of people that nature is nature, and it's pure and pristine, and to tinker with it is Frankensteinian. It's making something that's pure dangerous in some way, and I think you're saying that that whole model just misunderstands how nature is. Nature is a much more chaotic interplay of genetic changes that have been happening all the time anyway.
CA: Ono što se ovdje djelomično događa je mentalni model u ljudima da je priroda - priroda, čista i netaknuta, te je interveniranje u nju - vandalizam. Stvaranje nečega što je čisto, opasnim na određeni način, i mislim da želite reći da cijeli taj model zapravo pogrešno shvaća prirodu. Priroda je rezultat puno kaotičnijeg međudjelovanja genetičkih promjena koje su održavane od početka vremena.
PR: That's absolutely true, and there's no such thing as pure food. I mean, you could not spray eggplant with insecticides or not genetically engineer it, but then you'd be stuck eating frass. So there's no purity there.
PR: To je u potpunosti točno, i ne postoji čista hrana. Mislim, ne možete prskati patlidžane insekticidima ili ih ne modificirati, jer ćete onda imati izmet. Stoga, nema čistoće u tome.
CA: Pam Ronald, thank you. That was powerfully argued. PR: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. (Applause)
CA: Pam Ronald, hvala. To je bilo doista uvjerljivo. PR: Puno hvala. Cijenim to. (Pljesak)