Is press largely responsible for public perception of biotechnology?

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

The human population is expected to reach nine billion by 2050. There are pressing questions about how to ensure a healthy diet for everyone . . . Biotechnology could contribute to achieving sustainability but public perception of it is often linked only with exploitation potential. Could greater visibility of biotech’s green potential effectively communicate the more complex picture and how would this influence attitudes?

We use biotechnology to produce medicines. . . It is said to be an answer to many worldwide issues, such as high carbon emissions, bird flu and dengue fever. If so, why do the public still mainly associate it with GM and hence some find it hard to swallow? . . . .

. . . .

Related on the SLP

Viewpoint: The U.S. Congress needs to dramatically and quickly overhaul its regulation of agricultural biotechnology Owen Paterson: ‘Anti-GMO stance of Green Blob, Greenpeace condemn poor to starvation, death

Viewpoint: Dubious environmental fears: Why the AI buildout is critical to America’s ecological future

Vitamin D, omega-3 fish oil and glucosamine supplements could cause brain damage 

Child-monitoring apps: When the cure is worse than the harm—and how the technology could be tweaked

. . .[W]hat is the biggest barrier to generating a positive public perception and how could we overcome it? “The press have had a huge impact on the public’s perception of genetic engineering”, explained [Dr Donald Bruce (Edinethics Ltd)]. “For example, during the GM debate there were scandals being reported every day which contributed to the public’s loss of trust in the UK regulatory system. . . .”

Read full, original post: Can we give new biotech the green light?