Symposium introduction: What should animal science departments be doing to address contemporary issues?

Davis, Susannah C.

doi:10.2527/1999.772353x

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite views that society no longer believes that science by itself can or should determine the rights and wrongs of such technologies (Davis, 1999;Cooper, 2002), calls for increased public education to support science are common and reasonable (science helps alter beliefs which invariably change, thus it is expected education would contribute), though not always successful (Evans and Durant, 1995). Such an approach tends to oversimplify the complexity of the social understanding of science (Sturgis and Allum, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic modification?

Fisher¹,

Small²,

Roth³

et al. 2005

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An assessment was undertaken of the attitudes of individuals within the science community towards a program to produce genetically modified cattle for altered milk composition, expectantly allowing for research into the treatment of multiple sclerosis in humans. The majority of respondents to an electronic survey expressed favorable attitudes to the program, thought it beneficial, respected individual freedom and was fair and just and disagreed that it was harmful. A passion for science and having a suitable lifestyle were the most important motivating factors for individuals. Finally, there were a wide range of responses to a number of cultural beliefs or myths. Science grouping significantly affected the responses. Compared with Systems and Land groups, Plant and Reproduction groups more strongly agreed with the project, thought it less harmful to interest groups, felt that genetic modification of animals was more morally acceptable, and more strongly agreed with the myth statements. These results indicate a diversity of beliefs and attitudes towards genetic modification amongst those within the science community, and highlight the importance of understanding ethics and myths in dealing with them. It is suggested that the diversity of beliefs could be better used to help shape public policy and understanding of biotechnology.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic modification?

Fisher¹,

Small²,

Roth³

et al. 2005

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Western Coordinating Committee-204 Goals and Why They Are Important to the Future of Animal Production Systems

Cherney

2004

Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are scientists who believe that science is value-free and that social and ethical issues are not their concern. The birth of Dolly, the cloned lamb, greatly increased public and scientific awareness of ethical issues raised by molecular biology as they intersect with human experience. There are many other issues involving animal production systems, including animal welfare, rural community issues, and environmental concerns. Last year Germany became the first European nation to grant animals a constitutional right. Several European nations ban the use of traditional battery cages for laying hens and gestation crates for sows. In the US, 37 states have recently passed animal anticruelty laws. Times are changing, and if animal production systems are to be part of the future, animal scientists must join with society to solve these ethical issues. The Western Coordinating Committee-204 (WCC-204), Animal Bioethics, has as its goals to 1) create a forum in which animal scientists and nonanimal scientists may work together to examine and discuss contentious social issues, 2) provide a means of encouraging the development of research projects dealing with bioethics of the animal sciences, 3) develop mechanisms of outreach that would allow animal scientists to respond directly to consumers and critics, and 4) provide the means for ongoing critical analysis of the animal science professions in the context of their ability to address moral and sociopolitical issues. Animal scientists can no longer ignore social ethics, and by realizing the goals of Western Coordinating Committee-204, we can help maintain the future of animal production systems.

show abstract

Symposium introduction: What should animal science departments be doing to address contemporary issues?

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic modification?

What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic modification?

Western Coordinating Committee-204 Goals and Why They Are Important to the Future of Animal Production Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About