Does consensus messaging about contested science issues influence perceptions of consensus and/or personal beliefs? This question remains open, particularly for topics other than climate change and samples outside the United States. In a Spanish national sample (N = 5087), we use preregistered survey experiments to examine differential efficacy of variations in consensus messaging for vaccines and genetically modified organisms. We find that no variation of consensus messaging influences vaccine beliefs. For genetically modified organisms, about which misperceptions are particularly prevalent in our sample, we find that scientific consensus messaging increases perception of consensus and personal belief that genetically modified organisms are safe, and decreases support for a ban. Increasing degree of consensus did not have consistent effects. Although individual differences (e.g. a conspiratorial worldview) predict these genetically modified organism beliefs, they do not undercut consensus message effects. While we observe relatively modest effect sizes, consensus messaging may be able to improve the accuracy of beliefs about some contentious topics.

BACKGROUND: Various databases on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) exist, all with their specific focus to facilitate access to information needed for, e. g., the assistance in risk assessment, the development of detection and identification strategies or inspection and control activities. Each database has its unique approach towards the subject. Often these databases use different terminology to describe the GMOs. For adequate GMO addressing and identification and exchange of GMO-related information it is necessary to use commonly agreed upon concepts and terminology.
RESULTS: A hierarchically structured controlled vocabulary describing the genetic elements inserted into conventional GMOs, and GMOs developed by the use of gen(om)e-editing is presented: the GMO genetic element thesaurus (GMO-GET). GMO-GET can be used for GMO-related documentation, including GMO-related databases. It has initially been developed on the basis of two GMO databases, i.e. the Biosafety Clearing-House and the EUginius database.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of GMO-GET will enable consistent and compatible information (harmonisation), also allowing an accurate exchange of information between the different data systems and thereby facilitating their interoperability. GMO-GET can also be used to describe genetic elements that are altered in organisms obtained through current targeted genome-editing techniques.

暂无摘要。

Two conditions are stated that must be fulfilled to make sure that the negative effects of environmental pollution and risks stemming from the spread of free markets and technology do not outweigh the beneficial effects of this development. (1) For all activities, all those who may experience the negative effects of the activities must have given their consent to the activities and the conditions under which they are performed. (2) Those who engage in activities without this consent must be held to unlimited and unconditional liability for the negative effects that the activities may cause for those who did not give their consent. These conditions are necessary principles for the responsible management of environmental harm and risks. If the conditions are not satisfied, then the belief that the global spread of free markets and technology is beneficial for all, or does not harm anyone, cannot be justified. Neither of the conditions is fulfilled at present. This is illustrated using examples drawn from international legislation regarding liability for oil transportation, energy production, genetically modified organisms and chemicals in the environment. Directions for improving existing liability legislation are identified. The relationship between the conditions and the precautionary principle is explained.

暂无摘要。