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.
Ja sam genetičar biljaka. Proučavam gene koje čine biljke otpornim na bolesti i tolerantnim na stres. Poslednjih godina, milioni ljudi širom sveta počeli su da veruju da postoji nešto zlo u vezi sa genetskom modifikacijom. Danas ću vam pokazati 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?"
Prvo da vam predstavim svog supruga Raula. On uzgaja organsku hranu. Na svojoj farmi uzgaja različite vrste useva. Ovo je jedan od mnogih ekoloških procesa uzgajanja koje on koristi da bi održao farmu zdravom. Zamislite neke od reakcija koje dobijamo: "Zaista? Uzgajivač organske hrane i genetičar biljaka? Možete li se složiti oko bilo čega?"
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, možemo i to lako, zato što imamo isti cilj. Želimo da pomognemo u ishrani populacije koja raste bez daljeg uništavanja sredine. Verujem da je to trenutno najveći izazov našeg doba.
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.
Dakle, genetska modifikacija nije ništa novo; skoro sve što jedemo je genetski modifikovano na neki način. Pokazaću vam nekoliko primera. Sa leve strane je slika pretka današnjeg kukuruza. Možete da vidite jedan red zrnevlja pokriven tvrdom ljuskom. Osim ako nemate čekić, tiosint je neupotrebljiv za pravljenje tortilja. Sada, pogledajte pretka banane. Možete videti veliko semenje. Neukusan briselski brokelj, plavi patlidžan, jako lep.
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.
Sada, da bi dobili ove vrste, uzgajivači koriste razne genetske tehnike već godinama. Neke od njih su prilično kreativne, poput ukrštanja dveju različitih vrsta koristeći proces koji se zove kalemljenje da bi dobili ovu vrstu - pola paradajz, pola krompir. Uzgajivači, takođe, koriste i druge vrste genetskih tehnika, kao što su nasumična mutageneza, koja uključuje nekarakteristične mutacije kod biljaka. Pirinač u žitaricama, kojim mnogi od nas hrane svoje bebe, razvijen je korišćenjem ovog pristupa.
Now, today, breeders have even more options to choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.
U današnje vreme, uzgajivači imaju još veći izbor. Neke opcije su izuzetno 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.
Dala bih vam nekoliko primera iz svog rada. Ja radim na pirinču, koji je osnovna hrana za više od polovinu ljudi na svetu. Svake godine, 40% potencijalne žetve se gubi na štetočine i bolesti. Zbog toga, farmeri uzgajaju različite vrste pirinča koje su genetski otporne na bolesti. Ovaj se metod koristi skoro 100 godina. Ipak, kada sam počela postdiplomske studije, niko nije znao koji su to geni. Tako je bilo do devedesetih kada su naučnici konačno otkrili genetsku osnovu otpornosti. U mojoj smo laboratoriji izolovali gen imun na jako ozbiljne bakterijske bolesti u Aziji i Africi. Otkrili smo da bismo mogli unaprediti gen u konvencijalnu vrstu pirinča koja je normalno podložna i možete videti da su ova dva lista na dnu ovde jako otporna na zarazu.
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.
Sad, istog meseca kada je moja laboratorija objavila naše otkriće o imunom genu pirinča, moj prijatelj i kolega Dejv Mekil je svratio do moje kancelarije. Rekao je: "70 miliona uzgajivača pirinča ima problem sa njegovim uzgajanjem." To je tako zato što su njihova polja potopljena, a ti uzgajivači žive sa manje od 2 dolara na dan. Iako pirinač dobro raste u stajaćoj vodi, većina vrsta pirinča će izumreti ako bude potopljeno više od 3 dana. Očekuje se da poplave budu sve veći problem, kako se klima menja. On mi je rekao da su njegov student Kenong Šu i on lično proučavali staru vrstu pirinča koji ima neverovatnu osobinu. Može da izdrži više od 2 nedelje pod vodom. Pitao me je da li bih pristala da im pomognem i izdvojim gen. Rekla sam "da" - bila sam jako uzbuđena jer sam znala da ako budemo uspešni, mogli bismo da pomognemo milionima uzgajivača u uzgajanju pirinča čak i kada su njihova polja potopljena.
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. A onda je jednog dana rekao: "Dođi da pogledaš ovaj eksperiment. Moraš da ga vidiš." Otišla sam do staklenika i videla sam da je obična vrsta koja je bila potopljena više od 18 dana umrla, ali da je ona vrsta koju smo mi genetski modifikovali sa novim genima koje smo otkrili, pod nazivom Sub1, bila živa. Kenong i ja smo bili očarani i uzbuđeni da bi jedan gen mogao da ima ovako dramatičan efekat. Ali to je bio samo eksperiment u stakleniku. Da li će biti tako i na 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.
Pokazaću vam sada video sniman 4 meseca u Međunarodnom institutu za istraživanje pirinča. Uzgajivači su razvili pirinač koji nosi u sebi Sub1 gen koristeći genetsku tehniku zvanu precizno uzgajanje. Sa leve strane, možete da vidite vrstu koja nosi Sub1, a sa desne, konvencionalnu vrstu. Obema vrstama u početku ide vrlo dobro, ali onda je polje potopljeno na 17 dana. Možete videti da vrsta sa Sub1 genom i dalje raste. Zapravo, proizvodi tri i po puta više pirinča nego konvencionalna vrsta. Obožavam ovaj video, jer pokazuje moć nauke o genetici biljaka kako pomaže farmerima. Poslednje godine, uz pomoć fondacije Bila i Melinde Gejts, 3,5 miliona farmera uzgaja Sub1 pirinač.
(Applause)
(aplauz)
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.
Sada, mnogi ljudi ne obraćaju pažnju na genetsku modifikaciju kada se radi o modifikaciji gena pirinča, gena pirinča u stabljikama pirinča, ili čak kada se govori o ukrštanju vrsta kroz kalemljenje ili nasumičnu mutagenezu. Ali, što se tiče uzimanje gena od virusa i bakterija i njihovog ugrađivanja u biljke, mnogi kažu: "Bljak." Zašto bi to učinili? Razlog je taj što je to ponekad najjeftinija, najbezbednija i najefikasnija metoda za poboljšanje bezbednosti hrane i unapređenje održive poljoprivrede. Daću vam tri primera.
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.
Pogledajte prvo papaju. Izgleda ukusno, zar ne? A pogledajte sada ovu. Ovaj plod je inficiran prstenastim virusom papaje. Pedesetih godina, ovaj je virus zamalo izbrisao celu proizvodnju papaje na ostrvu Oahu na Havajima. Mnogi su mislili da je havajska papaja propala, ali onda je lokalni Havajčanin, patolog biljaka, Denis Gonsalves, odlučio da proba da se izbori sa ovom bolešću koristeći genetski inženjering. Uzeo je komad zaražene DNK i ubacio ga u genom papaje. Ovo je slično kao kada čovek primi vakcinu. Sada, pogledajte video njegovog polja. Možete videti genetski modifikovanu papaju u centru. Imuna je na infekciju. Konvencionalna papaja oko centra je teško inficirana virusom. Denisov pionirski rad je zaslužan za spašavanje industrije papaje. Danas, 20 godina kasnije, i dalje ne postoji drugi metod za kontrolu ove bolesti. Ne postoji organski metod. Ne postoji konvencionalni metod.
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.
Osamdeset posto havajske papaje je genetski modifikovano. Sada, neki su i dalje pomalo uznemireni zbog zaraznog gena u svojoj hrani, ali uzmite u obzir ovo: genetski modifikovana papaja nosi samo trag virusa. Ako načnete organsku ili običnu papaju koja je inficirana virusom,
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.
žvakali biste desetostruko više zaraznog proteina. Pogledajte sada ovu štetočinu kako se hrani plavim patlidžanom. Ovo braon što vidite je izmet, koji izlazi sa zadnjeg kraja insekta. Da bi se kontrolisala ova opasna štetočina, koja može da uništi kompletne useve patlidžana na Bangladešu, farmeri na Bangladešu prskaju insekticide dva do tri puta nedeljno, nekad dva puta dnevno, kada štetočina ima mnogo. Ali mi znamo da su neki insekticidi jako štetni po ljudsko zdravlje, posebno kada farmeri i njihove porodice ne mogu da priušte adekvatnu zaštitu, kao ova deca. U manje razvijenim zemljama, ustanovljeno je da 300.000 ljudi umre svake godine od zloupotrebe insekticida i izlaganju sredstvu. Kornel i bangladeški naučnici su odlučili da se bore sa ovom bolešću koristeći genetsku tehniku koja je zasnovana na organskom pristupu uzgajanja. Organski farmeri poput mog muža Raula koriste insekticid pod nazivom B.T., koji se zasniva na jednoj bakteriji. Posebno se koristi za gusenice, i zapravo, nije otrovan za ljude, ribe i ptice. Manje je toksičan od kuhinjske soli. Ali ovaj pristup nije pogodan za Bangladeš. Tako je zato što su ovi sprejevi teški za nalaženje, skupi, i ne sprečavaju insekte da uđu u biljake. Ovim genetskim pristupom, naučnici uzimaju gen iz bakterije i ugrađuju ga direktno u genom plavog patlidžana. Da li će ovaj način smanjiti prskanje insekticidama u Bangladešu? Definitivno. Prošle sezone, farmeri su uspeli da smanje upotrebu insekticida u velikoj količini, skoro na nulu. Mogu da žanju i sade za narednu 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.
Sada, dala sam vam par primera kako se genetski inženjering da upotrebiti u borbi protiv štetočina i bolesti i kako njime smanjiti količinu insekticida. Moj poslednji primer je primer gde se genetski inženjering može upotrebiti za smanjenje neuhranjenosti. U manje razvijenim zemljama, 500 000 dece oslepi svake godine zbog nedostatka vitamina A. Više od polovine će umreti. Zbog toga, naučnici su, podržani Fondacijom Rokfeler, genetski modifikovali zlatni pirinač koji proizvodi beta-karotin, koji je prethodnik vitamina A. To je isti pigment koji se nalazi u šargarepi. Istraživači su ustanovili da će samo jedna šolja zlatnog pirinča na dan spasiti živote hiljade dece. Ali, zlatnom pirinču su se snažno suprotstavili aktivisti koji su protiv genetske modifikacije. Prošle godine, aktivisti su napali i uništili polje za testiranje na Filipinima. Kada sam čula o razaranju, pitala sam se da li oni znaju da su uništavali mnogo više od naučno-istraživačkog projekta, da su uništavali lekove koji su očajno neophodni deci
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.
da spase svoj vid i svoje živote. Neki od mojih prijatelja i rodbine i dalje brinu: kako znaš da su geni u hrani bezbedni za jelo? Objasnila sam da se genetski inženjering, proces prenošenja gena među vrstama, koristi više od 40 godina u vinima, medicini, biljkama, sirevima. Za sve to vreme, nije bilo ni jednog slučaja štete po ljudsko zdravlje ili sredinu. Ali rekla sam, pazite, ne tražim od vas da mi verujete. Nauka nije sistem verovanja. Moje mišljenje nije bitno. Pogledajmo dokaze. Posle 20 godina pažljivog izučavanja i rigorozne provere od strane hiljade nezavisnih naučnika, svaka veća naučna organizacija u svetu je zaključila da su trenutno usevi na tržištu bezbedni za ishranu i da je proces genetskog inženjeringa ništa više riskantniji od starih metoda genetske modifikacije. To su tačno iste organizacije kojima većina nas veruje kada se govori o drugim bitnim naučnim problemima kao što su globalne klimatske promene ili bezbednost vakcina.
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.
Raul i ja verujemo da, umesto da brinemo o bezbednosti gena u našoj hrani, moramo se fokusirati kako možemo pomoći deci da rastu zdravo. Moramo da se pitamo da li farmeri u ruralnim zajednicama mogu da napreduju i da li svi mogu da priušte hranu. Moramo probati da smanjimo degradaciju sredine. Ono što me najviše plaši o glasnim argumentima i dezinformacijama o genetici biljaka je to što je najsiromašnijim ljudima, kojima je najviše potrebna tehnologija, možda zabranjen pristup zbog nejasnih strahova i predrasuda onih koji imaju dovoljno da jedu.
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.
Imamo veliku izazov pred nama. Hajde da slavimo naučne inovacije i iskoristimo ih. Naša je odgovornost da učinimo sve što možemo da pomognemo u ublažavanju ljudske patnje i zaštitimo sredinu.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)
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.
Kris Anderson: Zaista uverljivo. Ljudima koji se protive GMO, kako sam razumeo, ključni problem su dve stvari. Prvo, kompleksnost i neželjene posledice. Priroda je ova neverovatno kompleksna mašina. Ako izbacimo ove sasvim nove stvorene gene, koje nisu oblikovani kroz godine evolucije, i počnu se mešati sa postojećom prirodom, ne bili to izazavalo neku vrstu kataklizme ili problema, posebno kada uzmemo u obzir finansijski interes pojedinih kompanija za njihovim unosom? Strah je da taj interes znači da odluka nije donešena na čistoj naučnoj bazi, i da čak to bilo tako, imali bismo neželjene posledice. Kako znamo da nema velikog rizika od nekih neželjenih posledica? Često naša intervencija sa prirodom vodi velikim neželjenim posledicama i lančanim reakcijama.
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: Okej, kod komercijalnih aspekata, jedna star koju je jako važno razumeti je, u razvijenom svetu, farmeri u SAD, skoro svi farmeri, bili oni organski ili konvencionalni, kupuju seme od kompanija. Dakle, svakako postoji komercijalni interes za prodaju semena, ali nadajmo se da prodaju semenje koje farmeri žele kupiti. Drugačije je u manje razvijenom svetu. Farmeri ne mogu priuštiti semenje. Semenje se i ne prodaje. To semenje se besplatno deli kroz tradicionalne načine sertifikovanih grupa, tako da je to jako važno da za manje razvijene zemlje semenje bude slobodno dostupno.
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?
KA: Neće li neki aktivisti reći da je to zapravo deo zavere? Da je to poput strategije s heroinom. Zasadiš stvar i ljudi nemaju izbora osim da se navuku na to semenje zauvek?
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: Ima mnogo teorija zavere sigurno, ali to ne funkcioniše tako. Na primer, semenje koje se deli, pirinač tolerantan na poplave, deli se besplatno kroz indijske i bangladeške sertifikovane agencije za semenje, tako da, uopšte nema komercijalnog interesa. Zlatni pirinač je razvijen kroz podršku Fondacije Rokfeler. Ponovo, deli se besplatno. Nema komercijalnih profita u ovom slučaju. A sada da odgovorim na tvoje drugo pitanje o mešanju gena, nema li nekih neželjenih posledica. Svakako, svakog puta kada radimo nešto drugačije postoje neželjene posledice, ali ono što sam želela da objasnim je da ono što radimo biljkama je prilično ludo, mutageneza izazvana zračenjem ili hemijska mutageneza. To izaziva hiljade nekarakterističnih mutacija, a imamo čak i veći rizik od neželjenih posledica nego li mnogih modernih metoda. Stoga, jako je bitno ne koristiti termin GMO, zato što to nema značenja u nauci. Osećam da je jako bitno pričati o specifičnim usevima i posebnim proizvodima i misliti o potrebama korisnika.
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.
KA: Dakle, ono što se ovde delom dešava je mentalni model u ljudima da je priroda - priroda, čista i netaknuta, te je intervenisanje s njom - vandalizam. To je predstavljanje nečeg što je čisto opasnim na neki način i mislim da ono što ti govoriš je da celi model samo ne razume kakva je priroda. Priroda je rezultat mnogih haotičnih međudelovanja genetičkih promena koje se odvijaju 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 tačno i ne postoji ništa poput čiste hrane. Mislim, možete da ne prskate plavi patlidžan insekticidima ili ne modifikovati ga genetski, ali onda bi završili jedući izmet. Tako da, nema čistote u tome.
CA: Pam Ronald, thank you. That was powerfully argued. PR: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. (Applause)
KA: Pam Ronald, hvala ti. To je bilo jako uverljivo. PR: Mnogo hvala. Cenim to. (Aplauz)