Team:ULB-Brussels/Human/MissionBGF
From 2014.igem.org
m |
|||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
<h1>Biotechnology survey</h1> | <h1>Biotechnology survey</h1> | ||
- | <p> The result of our survey about the knowledge of the public in biotechnology, GMO's and bioindustries revealed some interesting results (54 | + | <p> The result of our survey about the knowledge of the public in biotechnology, GMO's and bioindustries revealed some interesting results (54 respondents, see the <b><a href="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/d/d1/Traduire.pdf">results</a></b>) :</p> |
- 39% of the respondents where in favor of GMOs, 28% against it, and 33% were undecided or thought that a compromise had to be found. We think that this unexpectedly GMO-friendly result comes from the fact that the respondents filled the survey just in front of us and thought we would want them to be in favor of GMOs. And of course, the sample is not random, as it is composed of the kind of people that likes science-themed boardgames...</p> | - 39% of the respondents where in favor of GMOs, 28% against it, and 33% were undecided or thought that a compromise had to be found. We think that this unexpectedly GMO-friendly result comes from the fact that the respondents filled the survey just in front of us and thought we would want them to be in favor of GMOs. And of course, the sample is not random, as it is composed of the kind of people that likes science-themed boardgames...</p> | ||
- One fourth of the respondents did not know that GMOs were used outside of crops (e.g. in research, industry).</p> | - One fourth of the respondents did not know that GMOs were used outside of crops (e.g. in research, industry).</p> | ||
- | - Although 93% of the | + | - Although 93% of the respondents said that they understood what was a GMO, 44% did not recognize "genetically modified microorganisms that would improve the yield of bioreactors" as GMOs. We see how a small change of context (crops to bioreactor, or plants to microorganisms) is sufficient to confuse a significant proportion of the respondents.</p> |
Those three observations taken together, with the assumption that our respondents were a bit above average in their affinity with life sciences (since they were attracted by our biology-themed boardgame), we can safely assume that the general public is indeed neither comfortable nor well informed on the subjet of genetic engineering.</p | Those three observations taken together, with the assumption that our respondents were a bit above average in their affinity with life sciences (since they were attracted by our biology-themed boardgame), we can safely assume that the general public is indeed neither comfortable nor well informed on the subjet of genetic engineering.</p | ||
</section> | </section> |
Revision as of 22:38, 13 October 2014
$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \newcommand{\MyColi}{{\small Mighty\hspace{0.12cm}Coli}} \newcommand{\Stabi}{\small Stabi}$ $\newcommand{\EColi}{\small E.coli} \newcommand{\SCere}{\small S.cerevisae}\\[0cm] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \newcommand{\PI}{\small PI}$ $\newcommand{\Igo}{\Large\mathcal{I}} \newcommand{\Tgo}{\Large\mathcal{T}} \newcommand{\Ogo}{\Large\mathcal{O}} ~$
|
---|