body{font-family:'Open Sans',sans-serif;font-size:13px}header{box-shadow:0 6px 6px rgba(0,0,0,.3)}header .container{height:80px}header .logo{padding:10px 0 10px 80px}header .igem{position:absolute;top:20px;right:-50px;z-index:100}header .igem img{width:40px;height:40px}header ul{float:right;list-style:none}header ul li{display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap}header ul li a{display:block;padding:0 15px;height:80px;line-height:80px;color:#000;text-decoration:none!important;transition:background-color .2s linear}header ul li a:active,header ul li a:hover,header ul li a:visited{background-color:#ecffeb;text-decoration:none!important;color:#000}header ul.dropdown-menu li{display:block}header ul.dropdown-menu li a{height:auto;padding:6px 20px;text-decoration:none}section{padding:50px 0}section h1{font-weight:300;font-size:48px;padding:0 0 50px}.dropdown-menu{margin:0}ul.menu li.dropdown:hover>ul.dropdown-menu{display:block}.bx-wrapper img{display:block;max-width:100%;min-width:970px;margin:0 auto}.welcome{padding:80px 0;background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/0/06/Uea_header-bg.png)}.about{background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/d/d7/Uea_body-bg.png)}.about h2{font-size:18px;font-weight:700}.about p.project{font-size:14px;padding:10px}.about p.project:last-of-type{padding-bottom:40px}.about .row:first-of-type{margin-bottom:40px}.about .col-md-4 i{transition:color .2s linear}.about .col-md-4:hover i{color:#2ECC71}.team{background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/d/d7/Uea_body-bg.png);transition:all .3s linear;padding:0 0 40px}.team .img-responsive{border-radius:20em;-webkit-border-radius:20em;-moz-border-radius:20em;-webkit-filter:grayscale(100%);-moz-filter:grayscale(100%);-ms-filter:grayscale(100%);filter:grayscale(100%);filter:gray;transition:all .3s linear;max-width:200px;margin:0 auto}.team .col-md-4:hover .img-responsive{-webkit-filter:none;-moz-filter:none;-ms-filter:none;filter:none}.team .row:first-of-type{margin-bottom:40px}.team h2{font-size:18px;font-weight:700;color:#019875}.team h3{font-size:13px;font-weight:700;color:#019875}.team .col-md-3{padding:0 30px}.team .meetourteam{margin-bottom:60px}.social{background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/d/d7/Uea_body-bg.png)}.sponsors .col-md-2{display:table;height:90px}.sponsors .middle{display:table-cell;vertical-align:middle}.sponsors .row:first-of-type{margin-bottom:40px}.general{padding-top:0;background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/d/d7/Uea_body-bg.png)}.title{background:url(https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/0/06/Uea_header-bg.png)}.title h1,.title h2{text-align:center}.title h1{margin-top:0;padding:40px 0;margin-bottom:40px}.title h2{font-size:18px;color:#999;margin:0 0 50px;padding-bottom:40px}.general p{margin:0 0 40px}.fa-8x{font-size:8em;color:#019875}.row .boxed-headline{width:100%;height:200px;background-color:#90C695}.container .overview{padding-bottom:40px}footer{color:#444;background-color:#FFFFF;padding:50px 0}footer ul.sponsors{float:left;width:100%;padding:0;margin:20px 0 0;list-style-type:none}footer ul.sponsors li{display:inline;padding:0 20px}footer ul.sponsors li img{width:90px}#top-section{border:0;height:14px;z-index:100;top:0;position:fixed;width:975px;left:50%;margin-left:-487px;background-color:transparent}#content,#globalWrapper{width:100%;height:100%;border:0;background-color:transparent;margin:0;padding:0;font-size:100%}#catlinks,#contentSub,#footer-box,#p-logo,#search-controls,#sitesub,.firstHeading,.printfooter,.visualClear{display:none}h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6{border-bottom:none}#bodyContent h1,#bodyContent h2{margin-bottom:40px}

                   <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:NRP-UEA-Norwich/HP_Science-Cafe">Science Cafe</a></li>

On the 18th of September 2014 we once again ventured out to The Cut in Halesworth; this time to facilitate a more in-depth discussion in a ‘Science Café’ style debate on the topics surrounding our project, which included: genetic modification of plants and other organisms, crop disease, food security, the ethics behind scientific discovery, and the way scientists conduct themselves. This was also a great opportunity to build on the feedback on our project from the last event, as well as presenting our project to new audiences.  

There was a good turnout for this type event, with the audience of about 30 people being a good mix of attendees from the previous event and new members, representing various professions and walks of life. The night started with Steven presenting the team’s project and motives to the audience, which then lead into a natural debate and discussion on the project and its surrounding topics with Steven, Jack and Richard answering questions from the audience.

The discussion highlighted a number of points that were of interest to our project. Wherever possible, straightforward, clear answers to the questions were provided, but many of the discussion points were open-ended with no single answer. Here are some of the more interesting points and questions that were raised during the debate:

 

<li>The idea of having rainbow indicators so an indicator plant that could detect more than one disease and indicate the disease it was detecting was thought to be valuable.</li>

<li>Would it affect other animals if they decided to eat it? How would it be made unattractive to other animals who might want or fancy eating it?</li>

On a general note the audience had real concerns about the idea and philosophy of having technology that was freely available to be used by anyone anywhere. They saw the potential that ‘big business’ could swoop in take on the ideas being produced by the iGEM teams and using it for ‘big business’ ends and means, which involved profit and also science and scientific practices that may be neither ethical or acceptable to the public. There was a clear suspicion of big business in this regard.

The audience was also concerned that the iGEM Foundation/teams were not taking enough responsibility when it came to these concerns. They wanted to know what iGEM was doing to stop any of the scientific advances that have emerged from the programme to be used in potentially unethical or dangerous ways? Was iGEM taking no regulatory role in this at all? Were they really that naïve or was it a money thing where there is no money to look after this aspect and to evaluate the long-term impact of the competition within the scientific community or was it an optimism and a utopian vision that science is always for the good. Our audience felt this was not an acceptable standpoint and the iGEM committee needed to think about its role as guardian for the common good.

This debate produced some really interesting points and ideas regarding our project and the way scientists and iGEM conducts itself in the wider community interacting with members of the general public.  

The event was such a success, that the Science Cafes will continue at The Cut on a regular basis in the future, discussing a wide variety of scientific subjects.