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.
我是一个植物遗传学家。 我研究一些能使植物抵抗疾病 和耐抗压的基因。 在最近几年来, 世界上成千上万的人相信 转基因改造存在灾害性。 今天,我将要提出一个不同的观点。
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?"
首先,让我介绍我的丈夫,拉乌尔。 他是一个有机农民。 在他的农田里,他种着各种不同的农作物。 这是许多生态农业试验的其中一个 用来保持他的农田健康的实践。 试想一些我们会得到的反应: “真的吗?一个有机农民和一个植物遗传学家? 你们能达成什么共识?“
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.
嗯,我们可以,而且这并不困难, 因为我们有共同的目标。 我们想帮助滋养不断增长的人口 而不进一步破坏环境。 我相信这是我们时代的巨大挑战。
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.
如今,基因改造不是新事物, 事实上我们吃的所有食物都在一定程度上 被基因改造了。 让我来给你举几个例子。 左边的图片是 现代玉米的古老祖先。 你看到一行覆盖着硬壳的玉米粒。 除非你有一个锤子, 墨西哥类蜀黍不适用于制作墨西哥饼。 现在,看一下古老的香蕉祖先。 你能看到巨大的种子。 和引不起食欲的芽甘蓝, 和茄子,如此美丽。
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.
如今,为了创造这些变种, 多年来培育者已经用了很多不同的基因技术。 其中一些是相当有创造性的, 例如利用一个叫嫁接的程序 把两种不同的品种结合在一起 来创造一个一半是蕃茄 和一半是土豆的品种。 培育者还使用其它种类的基因技术, 例如随机突变, 能让植物产生非典型的 突变基因。 许多人用来喂婴儿的谷物大米, 就是用上述的方法改进的。
Now, today, breeders have even more options to choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.
现在,今天,培育者甚至有更多的选择。 其中很多是非常精确的。
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.
我想从我的工作中给大家举几个例子。 我研究大米, 这是多于全世界一半人口的主粮。 每一年,有40%的潜在粮食产量 都损失于虫害和疾病。 为此,农民种植携带耐抗性基因的 大米品种。 这种方法已经被用了将近100年。 但是,当我开始在研究院时, 还没有人知道这些基因是什么。 直到90年代才有科学家最终发现 耐抗性的基因基础。 在我的实验室里, 为了免疫一种在亚非都很严重的细菌性疾病 我们分离了一个基因。 我们发现我们可以把这个基因 移到一种通常容易染病的 传统大米品种, 而且你可以看到底下的两片叶子 都很好地抵抗了感染。
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.
现在,同一个月里我的研究室发布了 我们对大米免疫基因的发现, 我的朋友和同事 Dave Mackill 探访了我的办公室。 他说:“七千万的大米农民正有种植大米的困难。” 那是因为他们的农田都被洪水淹没了, 那些农民每天靠着不够2美元来生活。 虽然大米能很好地在积水里生长, 但是如果它们被淹3天以上, 大部分的大米品种都会死掉。 随着天气的改变, 洪灾的发生越来越不确定。 他告诉我他的研究生 Kenong Xu 和他自己 正在研究一种拥有惊人性能的古老大米品种, 它能够在被完全淹没的情况下生存两周。 他问我是否愿意帮他们分离这个基因。 我答应了他,我非常激动, 因为我知道如果我们能成功, 我们可能可以帮助无数的农民种植大米, 即使他们的农田被淹没。
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 花了10年来寻找这个基因。 然后有一天,他说: ”请来看看这个实验。你一定要来看。“ 我去到温室看到 传统品种被淹18天后死了, 但是被我们通过基因改造 植入之前发现的叫 Sub 1的新基因的大米品种存活了。 Kenong 和我都很惊讶和兴奋, 一个基因能够有如此巨大的影响。 但是这只是一个温室实验。 这在田地中是否也能成功呢?
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.
现在,我将要给大家展示一个在国际大米研究所拍摄的 时长4个月定时拍摄的视频。 那里的培育者利用另一种叫精准培育的基因技术 培育了一种携带 Sub 1 基因的大米品种。 在左边,你可以看到 Sub 1 品种, 在右边的是传统品种。 两个品种开始都长得很好, 但是接下来农田被淹了17天。 你可以看到 Sub 1 品种长得极好。 实际上,它还可以生产比传统品种多 3.5倍的谷物。 我很喜欢这个视频 因为它展示了植物遗传学帮助农民的力量。 上一年, 在比尔和梅林达盖茨基金会的帮助下, 三百五十万农民种植了 Sub 1 大米。
(Applause)
(鼓掌)
Thank you.
谢谢。
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.
现在, 当我们在别处使用大米基因, 把大米基因用在大米农作物上, 或者甚至通过移植 或随机突变把它和其它品种结合起来, 很多人都不会反对基因改造。 但是当我们从病毒或者细菌上提取基因 然后植入到农作物上, 许多人都说:”不好。“ 大家为什么会这样呢? 原因是有时候就是最便宜,最安全, 和最有效率的科技 才能提高食物的安全性和改进可持续农业。 我会给大家三个例子。
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.
首先,看一下木瓜。很美味,是吗? 但是现在,看一下这个木瓜。 这个木瓜被感染了木瓜环斑病病毒。 50年代,这种病毒几乎感染了夏威夷欧胡岛 的全部木瓜作物。 许多人认为夏威夷木瓜肯定完了, 然而,一个本地夏威夷人, 一个叫丹尼斯·贡萨斐斯的植物病理学家, 决定尝试利用基因工程来对抗这种疾病。 他提取了一小片病毒DNA 然后把它插入木瓜的基因组中。 这就像人类接种疫苗。 现在,看一下他的农场试验。 你可以看到被基因改造了的木瓜在中间。 它不受感染的影响。 环绕在外的传统木瓜则被病毒严重感染了。 丹尼斯的先驱性工作援救了木瓜行业 而受到赞扬。 今天,20年之后, 我们仍然没有其它方法控制这种病毒。 没有有机的方法。也没有传统的方法。 80%的夏威夷木瓜都是基因改造过的。
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.
如今,可能有些人 还为食物中有病毒基因而感到一点不安, 但想一想: 被基因改造的木瓜只是携带了微量的病毒。 如果你咬一口被病毒感染的 有机的或传统木瓜, 你会嚼着多于十倍的病毒蛋白质。
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.
现在,看一下这只正在吃着茄子的害虫。 你看到的棕色物质是虫粪, 它是从害虫子的后端出来的。 为了控制这种可以摧毁 孟加拉国所有茄子作物的严重害虫, 孟加拉国的农民每个星期喷射 两至三次的杀虫剂, 有时候当虫害严重时一天两次。 但是我们知道 一些杀虫剂对人体健康有很大害处, 尤其当农民和他们的家人 负担不起恰当的安全措施,就如这些孩子。 在欠发达国家里,据估计每年有30万人 死于杀虫剂的滥用和暴露。 康奈尔和孟加拉国的科学家决定使用一种 建立在有机农业方法上的基因技术 来对抗这场疾病。 有机农民,如我的丈夫乌拉尔, 喷洒一种以细菌为基础的 叫 B.T. 的杀虫剂。 这种杀虫剂对毛虫很特别, 实际上,它对人类,鱼和鸟都没有毒性。 它比食盐的毒性更小。 但这种方法在孟加拉国作用不大, 因为这种杀虫剂 很难得到,它们很贵, 而且它们不能阻止害虫进入植物里。 在基因方法里,科学家从细菌里切出一个基因 然后把它直接放进茄子的基因组里。 这个方法能不能够减低杀虫剂在孟加拉国的使用呢? 当然可以。 上一个季节,农民回应他们已经可以 大大地减少杀虫剂的使用,几乎不需要使用。 他们能够收割庄稼和为下一季度重新种植。
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.
现在,我已经给大家举了几个例子 关于基因工程 如何能够用来抵抗害虫和疾病 和用来减少杀虫剂的使用量。 我最后的例子是关于 基因工程在哪里能够被用来减低营养不良。 在欠发达国家, 每年有50万儿童因缺乏维生素A而失明。 一半以上会死亡。 基于这个原因,科学家在洛克菲勒基金的支持下, 从基因上设计了一种能够生产 β-胡萝卜素的 维生素A先驱的黄金大米。 这是我们在胡萝卜里找到的同样色素。 研究人员估计每天只要一杯黄金大米 就可以拯救上千的儿童。 但是黄金大米被反对基因工程的积极份子 大力反对。 就在上一年, 积极份子们侵入和毁坏了在菲律宾的一片试验田。 当我听到试验田被毁坏时, 我在想他们是否知道他们毁坏的 不止是一个科学研究项目, 他们毁坏的是孩子们迫切需要的 用来挽救他们视力和生命的药物。
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.
我的一些朋友和家人仍然很担心: 你怎么知道食物里的基因是安全可吃的? 我解释了基因工程, 在物种间移取基因的方法已经 在酒中,在药物中,在植物中,在芝士中 被运用了40多年。 一直以来,都没有一个对人类健康或者环境 造成伤害的个案。 但是我并不是要求你要相信我。 科学不是一个信仰体系。 我的观点不重要。 我们相信的是证据。 经过20多年由成千上万独立的科学家 谨慎的研究和严格的同业互查, 世界上每一个主要的科学机构已经断定 市场上的所有庄稼都是可安全食用的 而且转基因的方法 没有比传统基因改造方法更危险。 这些机构恰好是大部份人在其它重要科学问题上, 例如全球气候改变或者疫苗安全问题上 都会相信的同样的机构
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.
乌拉尔和我相信,与其担心食物中的基因, 我们更需要关注如何帮助儿童健康成长。 我们必需问一问农村社区的农民是否能够营生, 和每个人是否都能买得起食物。 我们必需努力将环境退化最小化。 关于对植物基因激烈的争论和错误的信息 最令我害怕的是 那些最需要这种科技的最贫穷的人 可能失去食物 正是因为一些有足够 食物的人的不明确的忧虑和偏见。
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.
在我们前面有着巨大的挑战。 让我们庆祝和利用科学的创新。 这是我们的责任 去做任何我们可以做的事情 来帮助减轻人类遭受的磨难和保卫环境。
Thank you.
谢谢!
(Applause)
(掌声)
Thank you.
谢谢!
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.
克里斯·安德森:热烈地争论了。 反对转基因生物的人, 就我理解而言,主要的批评来自于两点。 一点是复杂性和不可预料的结果。 大自然是这样一个非常复杂的机器。 如果我们拿出这些我们所创造的崭新的 没有经过长年进化演变的基因, 然后让它们和现有的基因开始的混合一起, 难道不会引发一些大变动或者问题吗? 尤其当你加进 由一些企业已经摆出的商业动机。 这些忧虑是那些动机 意味着作出的决定不是基于纯粹的科学依据, 就算是,那也会有不可预料的后果。 我们怎么知道没有不可预计的后果的大风险呢? 往往地我们对大自然的小修改 会导致很大的,不可预知的后果 和连锁反应。
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.
帕梅拉·罗纳德:好,那么在商业影响下, 有一点非常值得理解的是, 在发达国家,在美国的农民, 几乎所有的农民, 不论他们是有机的还是传统的, 他们买种子公司生产的种子。 所以这里当然有商业利益去卖许多的种子, 但是希望他们卖的是农民想买的种子。 在欠发达世界就不同了。 那里的农民买不起的某些种子 那些种子就不会被销售。 这些种子通过传统的 有资格认证的团体被自由分配, 因此,在欠发达国家 种子能不受限制地被使用是很重要的。
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: 会不会有一些积极分子会说 这实际上是阴谋的一部份呢? 这是海洛因策略。 你种植东西,人们没有选择 却永远沉溺于这些东西?
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: 确实有很多阴谋论,但这是不一样的。 例如,被分配的种子,耐渍型大米, 通过印度和孟加拉国 种子认定机构被自由分配, 这样就没有了商业利益。 黄金大米是在洛克菲勒基金的支持下发展的。 同样地,也是被自由分发的。 在这种情况下 没有商业利益。 现在来讨论一下其它问题,嗯,关于混合基因, 这会有什么不可预料的结果吗? 当然 -- 每次我们做不一样的事情 都会有想像不到的后果, 但是我想说的其中一点是 我们一直对我们植物做的看似疯狂的事情, 用辐射或化学诱变产生基因变异。 这包含上千个不确定的突变, 而且这比起许多现代方法有着 甚至更高的的不确定后果风险。 因此十分重要的不能使用基因改造生物 因为在科学上是没意义的。 我认为讨论关于特定的农作物 和特定的产品,和考虑消费者的需要是很重要的。
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: 在很多人中有一种思维模式, 就是天然就是天然,它是纯粹的和原始的 若是稍作修改就是作法自毙。 这种想法在一定程度上很危险, 而且我想你指的是那整个模式 是误会了自然的本质。 在自然中,基因改变的相互作用更混乱得多, 而且是无论如何一直在发生着的。
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:没错, 而且这里没有一种东西是纯正的食物。 我的意思是,如果你不可以喷洒杀虫剂 或者改造基因,那你就只能吃虫粪了。 因此是没有纯粹的东西的。
CA: Pam Ronald, thank you. That was powerfully argued. PR: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. (Applause)
CA:帕姆·罗纳德,谢谢。很有说服力的演说。 PR:非常感谢!我很感激! (掌声)