6. Possible Risks In Genetic Engineering


6.1 Amount of Risk
6.2 A Culture of Worry?
6.3 The Structure of Opinion on Risk
6.4 Social Differences in Perceptions of Risk
6.5 Summary: Risks


6.1 Amount of Risk

The ISSS survey asked about a number of possible risks associated with genetic engineering, focusing on the worries that seem to have come up often in previous research. The questions were:

 


5.  Genetic engineering might have some risks as well as benefits. 
Here are some possible worries, things that some people think 
might happen...
a. That medical genetic engineering accidentally create a new disease, 
something that might escape from the laboratory -- a worry
        HUGE worry: terrible and very likely to happen  32
        Very big worry                                  24
        A big worry                                     24
        A small worry                                   18
        No worry at all                                  2
                                                        ---
                                                        100% (mean=66)


b. That genetically engineered plants might get out of hand and 
spread on their own?
        HUGE worry: terrible and very likely to happen  22
        Very big worry                                  23
        A big worry                                     26
        A small worry                                   25
        No worry at all                                  5
                                                        ---
                                                        100% (mean=58)


c. That genetically engineered food plants might be a long run danger to 
human health, if people ate them for years?
        HUGE worry: terrible and very likely to happen  23
        Very big worry                                  22
        A big worry                                     26
        A small worry                                   24
        No worry at all                                  5
                                                        ---
                                                       100% (mean=59)

The worry that is uppermost in the public's mind is "That medical genetic engineering could accidentally create a new disease, something that might escape from the laboratory". 32% say that is a huge worry, 24% say it is a very big worry, and another 24% say it is a big worry. 18% say it is just a small worry and only 2% that it is no worry at all. The average Australian thinks this risk is somewhere between a 'very big' worry and a 'big' worry, rating it 66 points out of 100.

A little less worrying, scoring 58 or 59 points out of 100, are:

6.2 A Culture of Worry?

To put genetic engineering in perspective, the survey also asked about other worries:


d. Do you worry about chemical pesticides used in farming?

        HUGE worry: terrible and very likely to happen  28
        Very big worry                                  28
        A big worry                                     23
        A small worry                                   18
        No worry at all                                  3
                                                        ---
                                                        100% (mean= 65)


e. Fluorides are added to the drinking water in most parts of Australia 
to reduce tooth decay. Do you worry that they might be dangerous to 
people's health in the long run?

        HUGE worry: terrible and very likely to happen  13
        Very big worry                                  18
        A big worry                                     21
        A small worry                                   32
        No worry at all                                 17
                                                        ---
                                                        100% (mean= 45)

Australians were just as worried about chemical pesticides as about genetic engineering, giving it 65 points on average. 28% said it was a huge worry and another 28% said it was a very big worry. 23% said it was a big worry, 18% a small worry, and only 3% said chemical pesticides were no worry at all.

Australians also worry a fair bit about some widely accepted practices. Fluoridation of drinking water to reduce tooth decay is a well established public health measure used for decades in Australia and many other countries without any evidence of danger to people's health. But when asked about it, the public nonetheless give it fully 45 points out of 100 on the worry scale. 13% said it was a huge worry, 18% a very big worry, 20% a big worry, 32% a small worry and only 17% said fluorides were no worry at all.

This level of worry in the face of overwhelming scientific support, over a period of decades, and in many nations, suggests there is a culture of worry in Australia (and possibly in other rich nations) -- a tendency to hold irrational fears. While there are surely many genuine , rational fears about genetic engineering, this suggests that a substantial proportion of the fears are irrational. It also suggests that even if experience over the next few decades shows genetically engineered products to be entirely safe, the public will nonetheless continue to have a substantial level of unease.

Thus the real-world baseline for an entirely safe food technology is not a public perception that it is without risk. Instead even something without real risk will be seen by the public as a "big worry"!

6.3 The Structure of Opinion on Risk

Factor analysis shows that opinions on the various risks of genetic engineering all very much go together, with those who worry about one kind of risk also worrying about the others. So it is reasonable to combine them into a single measure of perceived risk:

[Definition] Perceived risk of genetic engineering = mean( Worry about new disease, worry about plants spreading on their own, worry about danger to health )

The worries about chemical pesticides and fluorides in drinking water are correlated with perceived risk, and with each other, but the pattern of correlations is not consistent with their being part of the same factor. Rather there seem to be three separate, albeit correlated risk factors: perceived risks of genetic engineering, perceived risk of chemical pesticides, and perceived risk of fluorides:

[Definition] Perceived risk of chemical pesticides = Single item on worries about chemical pesticides )

[Definition] Perceived risk of fluoridation = Single item on worries about fluoridation of drinking water )

6.4 Social Differences in Perceptions of Risk

6.4.1 Perceived Risk of Genetic Engineering

Perceived risks of genetic engineering are fairly broadly spread throughout the population. Old and young, the well educated and the poorly educated, high status and low, supporters of Labor and Coalition supporters, Catholic and Protestant, devout and atheist, all have similar levels of worry. But men are substantially less worried than women (beta= -.10).

Neither knowledge of science in general, nor of genetic engineering in particular, makes any difference. This may be because knowledge has offsetting effects, decreasing some simple "Frankenstein monster" type fears while at the same time increasing awareness of the myriad possibilities for things going wrong.

The strongest difference is that those who are generally fearful of spiders, car accidents and the like -- people with an inclination to worry about all sorts of risks -- are much more worried about genetic engineering (beta= .17).

Environmentalists are also substantially more worried than other people (beta=.12).

6.4.2 Perceived Risk of Chemical Pesticides

Perceptions of the risks associated with chemical pesticides shows a similar pattern. There are no appreciable demographic differences, except that men are less worried than women (beta= -.11). Those who are generally fearful of spiders, car accidents and the like are much more worried about chemicals (beta =.20). And, most strikingly, environmentalists are very much more worried than others (beta= .29).

6.4.3 Perceived Risk of Fluoridation

Perceptions of the risks of fluoridating drinking water also shows a similar pattern. There are no important demographic differences. Labor supporters are less worried than supporters of other parties (beta=-.13), for reasons that are not clear. Environmentalists are substantially more worried (beta= .11).

Most strikingly, those who are generally fearful of spiders, car accidents and the like are much more worried about fluoridation (beta =.21).

6.5 Summary: Risks

The survey also asked about the potential risks associated with genetic engineering. The results can be expressed in the form of a worry scale, from zero ("No worry") to 100 ("Huge worry, terrible and very likely to happen"). The results showed Australians to be a worrying lot, even when the observed risks are quite low: fluorides -- which are added to drinking water to reduce tooth decay in most parts of Australia -- elicited 45 points on the worry scale. At the other extreme, concern with the use of chemical pesticides in farming elicited 65 points on the worry scale.

Concern that genetic engineering could accidentally create a new disease which could escape from the laboratory (67) points was about as high as concern with chemical pesticides. Concerns about the possible long-term risks of eating genetically engineered food (59 points) and fears that genetically engineered plants might escape into the environment and become weeds (58) were lower.

Even people most concerned with potential risks generally believe that the benefits of genetic engineering will outweigh the risks in the long run (as shown below in section 10.2). The results suggest that Australians have a balanced view about genetic engineering: they recognize that with any new technology there will always be risks but that these risks need to be, and can be, balanced against the prospective benefits. 


To top of page
To next Chapter
Table of Contents