Terry Etherton

Educating the public about the benefits of biotechnology, and the need for investing in research to discover the next generation of science-based products is challenging. Many in the scientific research community have as a top priority to conduct research and publish their findings in a scientific journal. Doing a lot of this is important in order to get the next grant funded so that the scientist can do more research, leading to more publications. It is an interesting cycle: get the research grant funded (which is hard to do), conduct the research, and publish the findings in papers published in peer-reviewed science journals. This creates visibility for the scientist (enhances their brand name) with the goal being to get more grants funded – an important objective for many scientists is to have a LOT of research funding. And then onward to fame! Never mind that a lot of the research conducted is never explained to the taxpayers so they can understand and appreciate what is going on, and why it is important. By the way, taxpayers are footing the bill for all the research supported by federal agencies such as the United States Department of Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation, among others.

My observation is that not many scientists are keenly interested in conveying the significance of their findings to the public in an understandable manner. This is unfortunate. Beyond the complexities of translating science “jargon” to easy-to-understand language is the reality that you can not educate the public about biotechnology in a 30-second sound bite. Of course, as the opponents of biotechnology have realized, you can scare folks in 30 seconds.

For those scientists interested in public education about biotechnology, both biomedical and agricultural, a major obstacle is that most Americans are not very well informed about science and technology, making it even more difficult to communicate the science, and it’s relevance. Also, I don’t think many Americans spend their dinner talking about science or how to engineer a gene. So, for many, science is not a high priority in their life. This lack of excitement reflects many things, I suspect. One of which is that many folks have had a bad experience (i.e., grade) with a science course(s) that in many instances leaves a life-long impression … and, not a good one.

How bad is the public’s understanding of basic science facts? I encourage you to read Science and Engineering Indicators 2006, a National Science Foundation (NSF) Report to get an in-depth perspective. Chapter 7, “Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding” presents many germane and revealing findings from a survey of science literacy. In the last survey conducted in 2004, 22% of the 2,010 respondents missed the answer to the question: The center of the Earth is very hot (the answer is True). Amazing!! Only 54% answered the question correctly: Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria (the answer is False). The question that was the hardest was: The universe began with a huge explosion (the answer is True) – only 35% answered this correctly.

The “take home” message is that a substantial number of people are unable to correctly answer simple, science-related questions. There are far-reaching consequences. Knowledge of how science works, how ideas are investigated and what the findings mean are important for people to understand. This knowledge helps people evaluate the validity of various claims about products, science and biotechnology that they encounter in daily life. The public discussion about rbST-free milk in Terry Etherton’s Blog on Biotechnology is a great illustration of the problems that arise when consumers don’t understand the science.

One might ask, “What is the solution to the lack of science knowledge in America?” There are no easy answers or quick fixes. The solution is a generational one that includes exposing children to exciting and informative science classes in middle school as well as high school, increasing funding for science education programs for the public, and encouraging faculty in academia to participate in developing and implementing programs that effectively communicate the need for and value of the research they are conducting to the public.