TOP Dunedin candidate: Genetic editing safer than 'organic'

 

Made with the support of NZ On Air 

  nzonair_rgb-positive_2015.png

 

Dunedin North was one of the The Opportunities Party's best performing electorates in the 2017 election.

Dr Ben Peters hopes to build on that performance in the freshly redrawn Dunedin electorate at this year's election.

Dr Peters, a biochemist, has a niche market in the political landscape as his party’s gene editing spokesman.

As well as a science-based approach towards genetic engineering, Dr Peters also supports his party's calls for a universal basic income. 

For the full interview watch the video above or for more video content from the Otago Daily Times and The South Today click here.

 

Comments

While I totally think politicians should listen to the science, they need to ignore those scientists who work for industry.
Scientists have a focused and narrow view of one tiny area of life, and they have been responsible for so many of the real disasters on Earth that I totally oppose them being given any power. Every toxic waste and chemical disaster on Earth was created by scientists. Every Nuclear disaster was created by scientists. And every problem caused by genetic manipulation, was / will be, caused by scientists.
Do you want a politician who works for the welfare of the community, or a politician pushing another mad science experiment because that's where they earn their money?

"Every chemical, nuclear, toxic disaster" !? Really Grizz. Can you give an example? One caused by scientists. Not one caused by later use of discoveries. Are you saying Rutherford's discovery of the structure of the atom makes him responsible for the USA dropping 2 nukes on Japan, or perhaps the Chernobyl Disaster?
We've been manipulating genes since we started breeding plants and animals for specific traits - thousands of years of random mixes and mutations. GE is just a more precise way to do it.
To say scientists have a narrow view of one tiny area of life ignores the depth and spread of the research that is being done. And to say they will push for mad science experiments because that's how they earn their money does not fit with what I understand to be the usual funding process for research.

Ahhhh yes, that hard working industry scientist who actually works for the University of Otago as a Professional Practice Fellow.

I'm confused by your claims that scientists are responsible for disasters, are you saying that the scientists (and engineers) that created the ability to generate electricity from nuclear are to blame for nuclear disasters that they had no direct involvement with? You should be more concerned with the implementation and oversight of activities that knowledge brings, not knowledge itself. You also seem to be forgetting every single advancement by scientists with has benefited society immensely.

I for one, would to see someone with the critical analyses background of a scientist involoved in politics

That’s exactly how I feel about climate scientists.
The big difference is they suck from the public purse, getting their funding from political groups that push fear to garnish public support rather than the pursuing direct benefits for humanity.
His support for universal basic income has no basis in science which shows he’s just another academic lefty.

The problem is, science (like history) isn't an exact science.