Communicating Biotech: Taking the less travelled path

Communicating science is a challenging task. Who is interested to know more about nanotechnology, genetic engineering, tissue culture or marker assisted selection among the general public? Who would take time to read about these technologies? Science has to be taught in a very innovative way that will raise the students’ or the audience’s inquisitiveness. Many abhorred science in schools but are hooked up to CSI, Discovery Channel and other science programmes on TV. So, when I was brainstorming with my colleagues on an event to commemorate MABIC’s 10th anniversary, we wanted to take the less travelled path…The event had to reflect MABIC’s role, the various stakeholders we have been working with over the years, our objectives, and be able to reach out to a wide range of audience and attract media coverage. We also wanted to teach biotech to the general public without them realizing that they are being taught. And it has to be innovative. That is how Biotechnology Carnival was conceived.

Block your diary now: 18-26 Sept, National Science Centre, Kuala Lumpur. The carnival is jointly organized with the Malaysian Biotechnology Corporation (BiotechCorp) and National Science Centre (NSC).

So, why did I say we are taking the less travelled path? Because you will see Malaysia’s leading fashion designers there: Keith Kee, Karl Ng, Shegar Chandran, Rahman Saif and Karen Liew. And also Miss Universe Malaysia 2009, Joannabelle Ng and first runner up Miss World Malaysia, Stephanie Chua. What are they doing at a biotechnology event, you may ask.

The designers are now busy designing their creations based on biotech motifs and I trust they must all be doing some research on biotechnology. And the two beauties are going to parade the designers’ creations along with other models. As the models do their catwalk, the audience will listen to the description of the design and enrich their knowledge on biotech. I am also eager to see how biotech can be translated into art… We are also organizing a fashion designing competition among students from fashion design schools, again based on biotech.

The following are the other activities planned for the carnival (all topics and themes will be based in biotech):

- Debates for schools
- Inter-school biotech quiz
- Writing competition for students
- Poster drawing competition for students
- Colouring competition
- Pop quizzes for all audience
- Debates for undergraduates
- Business plan writing competition
- Games
- Demonstration of DNA extraction
- Seminar on science communication
- Talks on career opportunities for life science graduates
- Talks on bioentrepreneurship
- Exhibition by universities, industry, and research institutes

Lots of goodies, prizes, freebies and more importantly FUN and KNOWLEDGE waiting to be given out during the carnival.

To keep yourself updated, visit our website.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

The Fairer Sex in the World of Science

Girls do better than boys in primary and secondary schools. Even at tertiary level, there are more girls than boys in most universities. But where do they go after that? Why do we see most top positions, head of departments, chief scientists, and executives at decision making levels are occupied by men?

I would like to share a riddle with the readers. Here it goes:
One day, a father and son went for a leisure driving outing. Unfortunately, the car crashed and the boy was in a serious condition. The father took him to a hospital and the examining doctor said that the boy must go for an immediate surgery. The surgeon, upon seeing the boy, screamed, “Oh, my God. What happened to my son?” The question: who is the surgeon?

Most people would have their mind wandering about the legitimacy of the boy’s birth. And none would have thought that the surgeon is the boy’s mother... Our mind often perceives surgeons to be men. What more scientists.

It is ironic that we always fail to see women as superstar scientists and put them in the same category as Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Alexander Graham Bell and their likes.

There are a number of women scientists who revolutionized the world in the past and there still a large number working hard in the laboratories around the world.

I recently read an interesting article on the internet on “15 Female scientists who changed the world” and would like to share the link: http://www.ekgclasses.org/15-female-scientists-who-changed-the-world/

In every part of the world, we need to address the constraints faced by women in excelling in the field of science, in spite of their academic achievements. These constraints could be family commitments, existence of glass-ceiling, lack of support from family and husbands, lack of support from bosses and top management, lack of confidence, access to grants, lack of equal opportunities, etc. These constraints are predominant in less developed countries. But developed countries are not spared as well.

These barriers need to be broken.

By
Mahaletchumy Arujanan

Phytase Corn: Breakthrough by Chinese Scientists to Improve Feed and Reduce Pollution

Chinese scientists at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) have successfully developed a genetically modified (GM) corn that could help enhance the nutritional value of livestock feed and reduce environmental footprints caused by the livestock industry.

This corn called the “Phytase Corn” is a result of the insertion of a gene from a fungus, Aspergillus. It is a known fact that 80% of the phosphorus in corn is in the form of phytate which can easily chelate with minerals and protein to form phytin. Phytate or phytic acid is the main form of phosphorus in plant-based animal feed. But due to lack of phytase (an enzyme capable of digesting phytic acid) in animals, phosphorus in the feed is poorly available to the animals. This deprives the animals of phosphorus which is essential for growth. Furthermore, fecal phosphorus leads to major environmental pollution. Fertilizers produced from animal manure also contribute to environmental pollution due to excessive amount of phytic acid.

China alone produces 2.5 million tons of fecal phosphorus annually. Phytase corn will decrease the excretion of phosphorus in the feces by 40%. This will reduce phosphorus pollution greatly. Phosphorus pollution has caused a widespread of algal bloom in Chinese lakes. Currently it is mandatory to use phytase as an additive for animal feed in countries like Europe, Southeast Asia, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan for environmental purposes. With the introduction of phytase corn, livestock players will not have to buy corn and phytase separately. It is reported that Chinese farmers could save up to US$60 million per year in buying industrial phytase. The worldwide phytase potential market size is US$500 million. It is anticipated that farmers can save time, machinery, and labour cost as phytase corn will eliminate the need for mixing phytase and corn together.

Phytase corn was developed by CAAS after seven years of study and the Ministry of Agriculture has evaluated it for safety and has awarded the Biosafety Certificate to Origin Agritech Limited, a Chinese company located in Beijing. CAAS will license the technology to Origin Agritech Limited for the corn to be commercialised.

CAAS is expecting the product to hit the market in five years time. Will this product be spared of activists' criticism and opposition since it will hugely contribute in reducing negative impact on the environment? Time will tell.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

I spoke at the EU parliament...

I just returned from Brussels after a seminar at EU parliament on “The impact of EU GMO-regulations on biotechnology research for the public good”. I had very little time to indulge in Belgian chocolates but listening to the experienced and prominent speakers made up for it. What more, when given an opportunity to make an intervention... When did I ever imagine that I would speak at the EU parliament?

This seminar was organized by the Public Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI) and the Science and Technology Options Assessment Panel (STOA) of the EU Parliament to address the constraints the public research sector face due to the stringent regulatory situation in many countries, particularly in the EU. The seminar discussed how current regulations and policies impact the potential for the public biotechnology sector. It was chaired by Prof. Antonio Correia de Campos, who is the STOA Vice-Chairman and a Member of European Parliament (MEP), jointly with Prof. Marc Baron van Montagu, the chairman of PRRI. Prof. Dr. El-Beltagy, Chair Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) gave a very comprehensive account of climate change and how green biotechnology can help in producing plants and crops that can survive the adverse effects of the climate change.

Ms. Maive Rute, Director for the Biotechnology, Agriculture and Fisheries and Food Directorate, European Commission (EC) gave a very positive account on how biotechnology, especially GM technology can benefit Europe. Dr. Emilio Rodriguez from EC’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) and Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) presented the experiences with GM crops in Europe, its economic and productivity impact. Dr. Piero Morandini from University of Milan gave a very emotional and passionate presentation on the many case studies where potential research is halted at the laboratory level due to restrictions on field trials in Europe. He presented the difficult experiences being faced by European public researchers due to the GMO regulation in Europe.

I commented on the need for EU to be mindful with the regulations and policies on GMOs as the rest of the world, especially emerging economies perceive EU as a role model when drafting their own regulations, Acts, and policies. Debates and decisions made in EU parliament is echoed in many part of the world, thus, EU should lead in the right direction based on scientific consensus. It was heartening when Dr. Beltagy acknowledged my views and further strengthened the points made. NGOs made intervention on why they oppose GMOs, but the speakers and chairpersons were quick to rebut their negative comments with facts and data. An activist from a well-known NGO said that they oppose GMOs as these are monopolised by MNCs. The strange thing is that the same NGOs press governments for heavy penalties and stringent law that only MNCs with deep pocket could effort, leaving the public sector researchers out of the game. How then, the public sector could compete with MNCs and break the monopoly? What are their genuine reasons for opposing GMOs... only they know!

The seminar was attended by industry representatives, MEPs, NGOs, scientists, and regulators. The STOA committee members who are also MEPs and European Commission representatives made presented very balanced views on GMOs based on scientific facts and evidence. PRRI certainly created a milestone in EU with this seminar. Hope we see wind of change.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

New wave of adoption of GM crops

GM crops once again proved to be the fastest adopted crop technology with an 80-fold increase in hectarage from 1999 to 2009. 134 million hectares of GM crops were planted around the world compared to 125 million hectares in 2008. The number of countries growing GM crops remained the same at 25, with Costa Rica joining in and Germany discontinuing the planting of GM corn. Whereas, the number of farmers growing GM crops continued to grow with 14 million farmers around the globe in 2009. Out of this, 13 million are from developing countries. This proves the notion that GM crops only benefits the rich nations wrong.

A landmark decision was made by the Chinese government in approving biosafety certificates for insect-resistant Bt rice and phytase corn. It is worth mentioning here that both these crops are entirely products of public sectors. The decision will have great impact not only in China, but the rest of the world as rice is the most important food crop in globally. Phytase corn allows efficient meat production as livestock animals will be able to digest the phosphorus in this corn easily. This would also mean reduction in the pollution level as there will be lower phosphate waste from the livestock industry.

The highlights of the new ISAAA report:

- More than three quarters of the 90 million hectares of soybean grown globally were GM.

- Almost half of the cotton grown globally was GM.

- More than a quarter of the 158 million hectares of corn grown globally was GM varieties.

- 21 percent of the 31 million hectares of canola were GM.

The countries that grow GM crops in descending order are: US, Brazil, Argentina, India, Canada, China, Paraguay, South Africa, Uruguay, Bolivia, Philippines, Australia, Burkina Faso, Spain, Mexico, Chile, Colombia, Honduras, Czech Republic, Portugal, Romania, Poland, Costa Rica, Egypt, and Slovakia.

For detailed information visit: http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/41/default.asp

The international Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) publishes this report yearly and this is one of the most cited publication in the field of plant biotechnology.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

Do our scientists communicate?

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak launched Malaysia Inovatif 2010 last week. Former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi launched the National Biotechnology Policy in 2005. Another former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohammad championed science and technology and aspired to have one Nobel Laureate by 2020. Lots of incentives and fund are channelled to promote science and technology in Malaysia and various policies ranging from agriculture, biotechnology to ICT has been in place. But how much effort is taken to communicate science to the public and to create a well-informed society who is science literate? Who champions this effort?

According to UNICEF, our literacy level stands at 98%. It is something to be proud of, since I am sure being literate in our country does not just mean the person is able to write his or her name. This is the definition of literate in some countries. However, we are lucky to have higher standards. Nevertheless, we should take one step ahead and strive for science literacy. How literate is our population in terms of science? There are various studies done in UK and US to gauge their science literacy level decades ago. The House of Lords in UK has come out with reports like the Bodmer report on “Public Understanding of Science” and suggested strategies to improve science communication in as early as 1985. This was done because a science-ignorant public might fear and disfavour science. Ten years later, in 1995, the Wolfendale report strongly recommended that scientists should specify their communication activities with the public in their research proposal to get public funds. And in year 2000, again the House of Lords continued to call for more dialogue, discussion and debate between scientists and the public. These initiatives have led more than half of UK scientists to communicate with the public on their research activities.

How many of our scientists in the public sector communicate with the public? How many of us have heard a scientist talk about his or her work? Are there any special grants for public awareness allocated to the scientists? Is there any special institute assigned to champion this effort? It must be acknowledged that there are pockets of activities carried out by various agencies such as MOSTI and its agencies, and various research institutes and universities. However, these activities are sporadic and the impact might not be great. There should be a bigger roadmap for this with clear indicators.

Scientists generally do not see the need to communicate to the public. This is coupled with the fact that they are not the best communicators to start with. The public does not understand their mumbo-jumbo language laden with scientific jargons and most often scientists fail to repackage their research news into stories that are appealing and relevant to the public. Nevertheless, there are a hand full of scientists who are interested to reach out to the public, however other constraints such as time, grants, and approval by the institute hinders their efforts. It must be accepted that the scientists have duty to inform the public on their research activities and how public fund is spent. The public has all the rights to know that funds allocated to R&D are spent on research work that brings benefits to them and the country. This is one way to gain trust from the public and their acceptance of new technology.

Public understanding of science is crucial for developing countries like Malaysia and efforts in this area should not be taken lightly. High level involvement is important to ensure we reap the benefits of all the science policies that are in place.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan