| |
1st
appeared 25 January 1999
Media Presents Good Information on Genetics,
But Also Inflames Fears
The media have done a good job of informing the public
about genetics, but have also inflamed fears and exaggerated concerns about numerous
genetics issues, according to Charles Epstein, professor of pediatrics and co-director of
the Program in Human Genetics at UCSF.
Epstein spoke at a session on "Genetic Discoveries, the Media, and Public
Anxiety," at the American Association for the Advancement of Science yesterday (Jan.
24).
"I would give the media reasonably good marks on the information score, and in some
cases excellent marks," said Epstein, who is a specialist in the study of genetic
disorders, including Down syndrome. "But on the issues of generating fear and
exaggerating what science has done or can't do, the writers and producers of the media
have not, in my opinion, lived up to their responsibilities. Whether done inadvertently or
deliberately, the raising of fearful specters about genetics has served only to make
rational discussion difficult, if not impossible, and to polarize debates that need
consensus."
Epstein suggested that far too often periodical covers, headlines and graphics prove to be
misleading banners for stories that are actually reasonable and measured in content,
demonstrating his point by using slides of covers, headlines, graphics and comics from
Time magazine, The Economist and The New York Times.
"When it comes to genetics, the tendency very often seems to be to emphasize that
which is dangerous or frightening, especially in the headlines and graphics and, given the
rapidly emerging power of modern genetic technology, fearful prospects are easily
engendered."
To wit, on the cover of Technology Review several years ago, he noted, a DNA helix
replaced the serpent in the Garden of Eden; a cover of The Economist read "The
genetic illusion," and showed man ensnared in fetters composed of DNA helices. The
latter suggested, said Epstein, that there is "something malevolent about DNA, that
genetic knowledge is dangerous; that it will enslave us."
These messages are powerful, said Epstein, and convey troubling views of what genetic
knowledge might portend, "even though they probably go beyond what the articles
actually say. Unfortunately, he added, "their impact is unavoidable."
Epstein did not discount the public's fears, characterizing them as two-fold: first that
it may ultimately become possible to manipulate and create life itself, thereby broaching
the domain traditionally reserved for whatever deity one believes in. And second, that
control of out genetic constitution could lead to the most pronounced misapplication of
genetics -- the eugenics movement.
"Nowhere is this fear so acute at present as in certain elements of the Ashkenazi
Jewish community," he said. "The media have a responsibility to inform and teach
the public about what is being done and to take cognizance of and give expression to
public fears and concerns."
Epstein also emphasized that it is the responsibility of the scientific community to
engage in discussion with the public on genetics issues. "We, as scientists, do both
the public and ourselves a great disservice if we persist in regarding any questioning of
what we are doing or of where our work might lead as being antiscientific and as an
infringement on our rights as scientists and on our academic freedom, if you will. We need
to listen to what is being said and to engage in an honest and meaningful debate."
Scientists themselves bear some of the responsibility for the mistrust of the science of
genetics because of their own hyperbole and inflated claims, he said. He cited a report
prepared several years ago by the Panel to Assess the NIH Investment in Research on Gene
Therapy, the so-called Orkin/Motulsky Committee, in which it was suggested that
"over-zealous representation of clinical gene therapy has obscured the exploratory
nature of the initial studies, colored the manner in which findings are portrayed to the
scientific press and public, and led to the widely held, but mistaken, perception that
clinical gene therapy is already highly successful."
"Such misrepresentation threatens confidence in the field and will inevitably lead to
disappointment in both medical and lay communities," the report continues. "Of
even greater concern is the possibility that patients, their families, and health
providers may make unwise decisions regarding treatment alternatives, holding out for
cures that they mistakenly believe are `just around the corner.'"
Source: Jennifer O'Brien, News
Services |
