tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post4311785921188433609..comments2024-03-18T09:58:09.828-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Nobel Laureate: Paul BergLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-30502207684187636172007-03-14T17:53:00.000-04:002007-03-14T17:53:00.000-04:00I second the opinion of Paul Berg. He happened to ...I second the opinion of Paul Berg. He happened to be in Toronto when the Nobel Prize was annnounced and he was very kind and gracious to everyone, including reporters. It was exciting to be around someone who had just become a Nobel Laureate.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-23241865206265637192007-03-14T13:52:00.000-04:002007-03-14T13:52:00.000-04:00Back to Berg himself- when I was a grad student at...Back to Berg himself- when I was a grad student at Northwestern back in the late 70s, Berg was one of the distinguished scientists brought in by our department under a foundation-funded program to spend a few days interacting primarily with us students. I remember being impressed that such an august personage turned out to be so kind, gracious and genuinely interested in spending time with the grad students.Steve LaBonnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05315820864846104986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-960905212607347382007-03-14T13:45:00.000-04:002007-03-14T13:45:00.000-04:00The real problem with Asilomar is that people talk...The real problem with Asilomar is that people talked as though there were "issues" when in fact <I>there weren't any.</I> There were only purely hypothetical, far-fetched fears based on elaborate worst-case scenarios, totally unsupported by either evidence or theory (many of the molecular biologists raising the unjustified fears would have done well to talk to talk to some epidemiologists first, who would have been able to calm their nerves.) That by the way is pretty much the opinion that was forcefully articulated many times over the years by Watson, who was involved from the outset just as Berg was and who came to bitterly repent going along with the early alarmism.<BR/><BR/>If scientists would simply refrain from shooting off their mouths about imaginary "risks" that they can't back up with any evidence (while of course being open about genuine risks in which there are solid reasons to believe), then there need be no temptation to try to (wrongly) exclude appropriate public input and oversight.Steve LaBonnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05315820864846104986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-41626361176885869382007-03-14T12:38:00.000-04:002007-03-14T12:38:00.000-04:00Paul Berg made a cogent analysis in an issue I don...Paul Berg made a cogent analysis in an issue I don't know much about.<BR/><BR/>"In other words, the lesson of Asilomar is that when politicians and the general public learn enough about an issue to start forming an opinion, the views of scientists are usually ignored or rejected. It's better to keep them ignorant until you can get some reasonable laws passed."<BR/><BR/>The immediate question becomes better for whom? At the risk of becoming trite, I think that ethical codes and committees should be a continuing effort, involving other interested parties. Perhaps it won't stop politicians interest in meddling, but it would make the cases when they circumvent experts and regular procedure stand out.<BR/><BR/>Other problems would be the conflict in the aspects of wanting to suppress information to the public and the goal of informing, or the risk for undercutting the gained trust Berg discusses. My naive feeling is that it is better not hiding the issues. The public won't be interested in the success of that approach but in discussions about risks, assumption of control and 'scandals' that follows.<BR/><BR/>I think the discussions behind the EU's chemicals regulatory system, REACH, shows why that is so. The public feels powerless against some of the interests driving regulatory issues. (And as usual a compromise was reached that didn't give long-time satisfaction to all parts, guaranteeing that the issue will return to haunt us.)Torbjörn Larssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02022193326058378221noreply@blogger.com