Abstract
Natural and physical sciences are based on determinable facts. What is ethical, as distinct from illegal, is largely a matter of opinion. Scientific and industrial activities related to ancient and modern biotechnologies are among the most critically scrutinised for ethical probity by social activists and journalists. The practices and products of biotechnologies should be judged both deontologically β by motivation and intention, and teleologically β by determinable consequence. Bioethical criteria have been proposed by governments, medical practitioners and philosophers for many centuries. During the past decade, various scientifically competent organisations, national and international, have formulated comprehensive protocols by which to determine effectiveness and safety of novel foods, pharmaceuticals and other biologicals, including those derived from genetically modified organisms. Means and opportunities by which to satisfy the health and nutritional needs of impoverished nations and communities differ significantly from those who enjoy greater affluence. It is distinctly unethical for Europeans and North Americans, whose food and health securities are not at risk, to impose their ethical predilections on poorer nations. Equally reprehensible are the diverse tariff and nonβtariff barriers to equitable international trade, and acts of biopiracy inflicted upon poorer nations. As a wise Asian sage has observed, the planet's resources and scientific ingenuity are sufficient to satisfy everyone's need, but not everyone's greed. Present and predictable worldβwide demand for bioscientists and bioengineers exceeds best estimates of supply. Systematically planned, longβterm investments by governments and bioindustries to generate adequate qualified men and women are urgently needed.
Β© 2002 Society of Chemical Industry.