WHEN opponents of genetic engineering issue warnings, the world yawns. But when the warning comes from Stephen Hawking, editors-at least in Europe hold the front page. Especially when the misgivings are judged grave enough to support the case for an outright ban and are released with the approval of the British Association for the Advancement of Science-Britain鈥檚 version of the annual AAAS meeting.
One British tabloid even got as far as running the 鈥淗awking slams gene foods鈥� story prominently in its first edition. But then came the awful truth. In a trickle, it emerged that the great man did make some cautionary remarks about genetic engineering, but three years ago in a book. Furthermore, and contrary to what was implied in the press release, Hawking called for tighter controls, not a ban, and even said so in a written statement to Genetics Forum, the campaigning group behind the fiasco.
鈥淏anning genetic engineering would be like banning the steam engine,鈥� Hawking wrote in one sentence that was omitted from the conference press release. Little wonder that the journalists were furious.
Advertisement
Tampering with the words of a scientist, even of a celebrity such as Hawking, might not sound the most heinous of crimes. Indeed, many opponents of biotechnology might say that they are simply fighting fire with fire. After all, the biotechnology industry is not averse to misquoting people when it suits them.
In the end, however, this argument won鈥檛 wash. Like it or not, people expect more honesty from those who claim to be on the side of the environment. And as if dubious press releases weren鈥檛 enough, there was something equally disturbing about the way Greenpeace participated in a high-profile debate on genetically engineered food at the BA-only to disrupt it at the end (see This Week, p 6).
As a counterweight to the interests of big business and government, groups like Greenpeace and Genetics Forum are vital. But no group can be truly effective in exposing the shoddy ethical values and practices of others if its own values and practices look dubious.
