Letter: Science at bay

Paul Dawson
Thursday 24 June 1999 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: I agree that individual scientists should not be held in any greater awe than poets (Terence Blacker, 22 June). They are fallible human beings, subject to the same bias and prejudice. That is why the scientific method evolved: it remains the "least worst" method of seeking certain objective truths. As far as any method can, it eliminates from this search the human desire to believe what we want to believe. To this extent, I believe that science (not necessarily scientists) can be trusted.

Genetic engineering, however, is like any other branch of engineering. It uses scientific discoveries to develop saleable products, and companies developing these wish to recoup their development costs and more. There remains the scientific task of discovering whether such products are likely to be of net benefit to mankind. Major difficulties ensue. A single paper (such as Dr Pusztai's effort) is seized upon by the media and proclaimed as truth. Other voices (letter, 22 June) proclaim that organic food is less safe to eat than GM food.

What is the solution? More good science, I'm afraid. It certainly isn't poetry.

PAUL DAWSON

Martlesham, Suffolk

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in