Literature DB >> 21955738

Scientists and public involvement: a consultation on the relation between malaria, vector control and transgenic mosquitoes.

Christophe Boëte1.   

Abstract

Among the hopes for vector-based malaria control, the use of transgenic mosquitoes able to kill malaria parasites is seen as a potential way to interrupt malaria transmission. While this potential solution is gaining some support, the ethical and social aspects related to this high-tech method remain largely unexplored and underestimated. Related to those latter points, the aim of the present survey is to determine how scientists working on malaria and its vector mosquitoes perceive public opinion and how they evaluate public consultations on their research. This study has been performed through a questionnaire addressing questions related to the type of research, the location, the nationality and the perception of the public involvement by scientists. The results suggest that even if malaria researchers agree to interact with a non-scientific audience, they (especially the ones from the global North) remain quite reluctant to have their research project submitted in a jargon-free version to the evaluation and the prior-agreement by a group of non-specialists. The study, by interrogating the links between the scientific community and the public from the perspective of the scientists, reveals the importance of fostering structures and processes that could lead to a better involvement of a non specialist public in the actual debates linking scientific, technological and public health issues in Africa.
Copyright © 2011 Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21955738     DOI: 10.1016/j.trstmh.2011.08.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg        ISSN: 0035-9203            Impact factor:   2.184


  7 in total

1.  The ethics of genome editing in non-human animals: a systematic review of reasons reported in the academic literature.

Authors:  Nienke de Graeff; Karin R Jongsma; Josephine Johnston; Sarah Hartley; Annelien L Bredenoord
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Perceptions and recommendations by scientists for a potential release of genetically modified mosquitoes in Nigeria.

Authors:  Patricia N Okorie; John M Marshall; Onoja M Akpa; Olusegun G Ademowo
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 2.979

3.  Engineered mosquitoes to fight mosquito borne diseases: not a merely technical issue.

Authors:  Guido Favia
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 3.269

4.  Awareness and support of release of genetically modified "sterile" mosquitoes, Key West, Florida, USA.

Authors:  Kacey C Ernst; Steven Haenchen; Katherine Dickinson; Michael S Doyle; Kathleen Walker; Andrew J Monaghan; Mary H Hayden
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 6.883

5.  Synthetic livestock vaccines as risky interference with nature? Lay and expert arguments and understandings of "naturalness".

Authors:  Kia Ditlevsen; Cecilie Glerup; Peter Sandøe; Jesper Lassen
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2020-02-19

6.  Engaging scientists: An online survey exploring the experience of innovative biotechnological approaches to controlling vector-borne diseases.

Authors:  Christophe Boëte; Uli Beisel; Luísa Reis Castro; Nicolas Césard; R Guy Reeves
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 3.876

Review 7.  A regulatory structure for working with genetically modified mosquitoes: lessons from Mexico.

Authors:  Janine M Ramsey; J Guillermo Bond; Maria Elena Macotela; Luca Facchinelli; Laura Valerio; David M Brown; Thomas W Scott; Anthony A James
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2014-03-13
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.