 |
| About Bioline | All Journals | Testimonials | Membership | News |
|
||||||
|
||||||
Australasian Biotechnology, Vol. 12, No. 5, Oct-Nov, 2002, pp. 7 From the Editor Martin Playne, Editor Code Number: au02028 Dear Readers Welcome to the October edition. It has been a pleasing couple of months, with a record turn-out at an exciting and comprehensive AusBiotech2002 conference ( which is fully reported in this issue), and some great membership and external feedback on how most of you like this journal! As Editor, it is very satisfying to know that the journal really does have an important place in the new AusBiotech, and is much appreciated. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to get reader feedback to help us produce the sort of balance you want in your journal in terms of articles vs news items vs AusBiotech information, and what other items that you would like us to introduce. Feedback is welcome at any time; however, we are planning a detailed readership survey for our next two issues. I hope you will take 15 minutes then to answer the survey, as it will help us a lot. Biotechnology is certainly at the forefront of news on many fronts: the stem cell debate in parliament; GMOs in foods and on the farms; biofuels to replace petroleum fuels; and the threats of bio-terrorism. It is easy to blame biotechnology, to blame scientists, to blame companies for shortcomings and difficulties which arise when new technologies are introduced. It is easy to expect to live a life where risks are minimal, and where it is always somebody else's fault. However, the reality is that everyone takes risks of a high magnitude every day - crossing the road, smoking a cigarette, running to catch a train, going ski-ing, having sex .... I think we have to ask ourselves: "do we really want to live in a world like that of our cave-men ancestors?" or "do we prefer the benefits (and costs) of electricity and gas supplies to our houses; the ability to drive modern cars and to fly anywhere in the world?" Biotechnology will bring huge benefits to mankind, but there will be difficulties and problems that we have to overcome along the way. Our political masters (actually they are our servants) must not shy away from their responsibility to develop Australia as a modern, compassionate yet advanced technological society. If they do not understand the science behind a particular technology, then it is THEIR duty to find out about it, to learn and explain to their constituents. It is not our duty to shoulder that responsibility solely. I will be trying to produce over the next 12 months, special features on stem cells, GMOs, new traditional bioindustries (fuels, chemicals, enzymes), and, if driven by the course of world events, bioterrorism and biological vigilance. To produce such features does very much depend on your response as readers, and on your willingness to put down on paper your ideas, views and findings for us to publish. I hope that , with your cooperation, we will publish material of general interest to a much wider audience than our current readers - material which will assist politicians and the general public to better understand the new bio technologies. One thing I found most interesting at the recent AusBiotech conference was the view of the Hon. Ian Macfarlane during his dinner speech, saying that it was no time for scientists to be split over the issues of stem cell research, and that we should be speaking as one voice, otherwise the parliamentary debate could well be lost. I can hear where he is coming from, but on the other hand it indicates lack of acceptance of how the creative process works, be it in science or in the arts. Scientists are always challenging each others' ideas, and indeed, the stepwise development of ideas and theories would not occur without such challenge. The public must understand such challenge is a normal part of the scientific process, and must honour and cherish it rather than decry it as some form of disloyalty or uncertainty. For this very reason, I think the GMO debate we have been having is for the most part a healthy thing to happen, and eventually will lead to the best outcomes. I know it is annoying, often costly, and can be twisted and falsified by those with other agendas - but eventually that gets seen through as false. On reflection, I prefer a society where there is uncertainty, where things do go wrong sometimes, and where there is risk, rather than a society which is dull entirely predictable and risk-free. For those readers who knew I had a sixweek break recently, we had a great time in inland and north Queensland learning about fossils and dinosaurs and bilbys and emus (how to avoid them). We discovered that Longreach runs sunset cruises on its river - believe it or not, paddle steamers ply the 14 km billabong every evening, even in a drought year! I also discovered that a biotechnology industry is emerging in north Queensland and that there is now an organisation with a membership of more than 40 called BioNQ. I expect the biotech community will be hearing more from the north in years to come. Copyright 2002 - AusBiotech |
| |||||||||
