Interview of Beatrice Pellegrini

Our analysis and commentary


We did it by themes.

 The genetic engineering concerns the politic in three points. First the genetic manipulations bring stakes society which bring the citizens to choose between different inovative technics. Besides, it's necessary to see that some commercial interests draw themself behind the sale of transgenic seeds. Third, the swiss people had already the choice to vote on the topic at various resumptions.
 The journalist that everybody can vote without precise scientific knowledge. Indeed the arguments of the political debate are relative to the economy and the society. Finally, this kind of vote is interesting with the point of view of the scientific culture diffusion, because it forces citizens to acquire some precise knowledges.

Laws and controls
 Laws that regulate the genetic engineering are under writing. According to Mrs. Pellegrini, commissions of specialists are quite capable to their task, to know to help the federal deputies to write laws,; besides objectors as partisans are represented paritairements. On the other hand, the problem is to find a legislation that reflects the diversity of the technology and his/her/its applications ". indeed, some plants can be interesting but others are very dangerous, it is why " it is necessary to reason to the case by case " in view to compose these texts.
 But the national parliament is in measure to vote these laws in spite of the help of scientists? - Was the Swiss people competent to vote the initiative? ... It is not necessary to belittle the citizen to someone of incompetent, bus otherwise the decision comes back to people small group that can manipulate maybe.
 These laws are respected in part. One doesn't discover appropriate in illegal OGM field, because malefactors would risk very thick whereas a lot of things are already permitted. However, foods containing some OGMS are not sometimes labeled consequently. Indeed, some processes " cut up the DNA like that happens in our stomach ", and the added genes are not more detectable. He/it appears interesting to mention the parallel with subjects of Guy-Olivier Segond, that pretends that such a fraud will be discovered " two or three days after his/her/its stake on the market ".
 Societies that interest himself to the agrobusiness are very often the multinational. According to the searcher, these last respect laws in Switzerland, as in the other countries. But by their definition of multinational, they become implanted in countries where the legislation is very laxiste.
 Besides, we surrender very account that lesdites agroalimentary boxes make the untrue advertisement when they speak about saving the humanity of the hunger. But this advantage put is forward scientifically possible, and B. Pellegrini shows good that their goal is by lucrative définiton: [Them] have shareholders behind them for that: [them] must win money ".

Consumers and their security
Consumers have fears facing the genetic egineering, which are not allways justified. We often think that when we eat foods decended of GMO's, our own genetic inheritance can alter. To this questionning, Mrs. Pellegrini precises that they're purposes which we must make endavours to deny them, because, scientifically talking, « the fact to add a gene is not a problem, it's the product of the gene that we had which ask problems. We must ask hitself the question case by case, according to what product is synthesized by a gene. »  The DNA is a very important element of our body and unfortunately very bad known : it's at the bases of these questions. »
 For the consumers' security in Switzerland, it's difficult to protect them  in deed the system of direct democraty allowd the swiss citizens to refuse the initiative of the 7th June, which notably aimed to their security. But the committee of initiative « is a little himself coup of assensments by topic means » while playing the map of the mixture of the very various application of the genetic eginning. After this initiative, we can yet look to securize the consummer facing the technologie by the discussion, by the media debate. After the writing of laws, « it will be necessary that the concerned surounding remobilize themself. ». If the States is in this case not impotent to securize the consumers, the associations of consumers detains a not negligeable power, as well as the big agrofood companies like the Coop or the Migros, which « haven't got reasons to oppose to the GMO's, but which will brake [the arrival of the genetic egeeniring in the feeding] so much that the consumer will brake ».

Medias and the genetic engineering
 Manipulations represent a topic whose medias treated a lot, at the time of vote especially in june 1998. The role of the « good journalist very zealous is to inform » But, while the debate arround the votation even the journalist were obliged to take parti. Medias have relatively leaned out the discussion, while using at the end of the campaign « an emotional register [...] a little bit exaggerated ».
Ethical and future
 According to Béatrice Pellegrini, the problems of ethic have an uncertain future. In the next year, « the quality of life will have a lot of important, but will we have enough money to offer ourself the Bio fashion ? ». It remains a question that only the future will be able to solve. These questions of ethic go therefore rather to continue to influence the consumers. In a more general point of view, the journalist thinks that during the next ten years, researchers are going to make immensely evolue the genetic engineering, even through some massive opposition voices appear. The genetic engineering really became the technology of the next century.

Finally, Mrs. Pellegrini separates her personal position of her professional position on the genetic engineering. Personally, it is not necessary to make confidence eyes closed to the agroalimentary. Then, if applications of the genetic engineering can be beneficial, this is not the direction that one takes at the moment. On the plane professionelle, she tempts to be objective while presenting opposite side arguments, as in the supplement of the Hebdo of which she/it wrote the major part; « but we will never make it of way neutral complétement. And it is so much the better ».
 As for our personal opinion and our impressions on the interview, we think that Mrs. Pellegrini, to the picture of her supplement, made proof of a relative objectivity in most her answers. Our opinion agrees with this subjects. This interview was very pleasant, because a real discussion to out of date the simple process question-answer. One realizes that a scientific opinion permits to take off some relative doubts to what is biologically possible: for example, of forecastings for the future that prove to be impossible. A scientific opinion mingled to a journalistic mind has admirabely brought to findings that hold really account of all domains of the genetic engineering.

 Retour à la page d'accueil du projet YRE à Genève