Reviewing the GM Mosquito Trials in Burkina Faso Against the Bioeconomy of Science and Public Trust

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE

 

Dear Friends and Colleagues

Reviewing the GM Mosquito Trials in Burkina Faso Against the Bioeconomy of Science and Public Trust

In August 2018, the National Biosafety Agency of Burkina Faso granted approval for the release of a maximum of 10,000 male Anopheles mosquitoes in experimental trials conducted by the Target Malaria consortium. As of July 1, 2019, these GM mosquitoes were released in two small villages in northwest Burkina Faso. This intervention is the first of its kind on the African continent. Target Malaria admits that these initial releases are to pave the way for future gene-drive mosquitoes.

A recent publication raises three key issues about the Burkina Faso field trials that require further consideration:

  • It remains unclear how scientifically and ecologically sound the releases are. The sterilization rate is not 100 percent, and there has been little systematic research into the biological and ecological effects. The GM mosquitoes released do not have a significant immediate public health benefit but relate to potential future benefits that transgenic mosquitoes promise.
  • Trials of this nature are ideally complemented by a public engagement strategy and an independent and impartial scientific team. There is a need for transparency and a genuine, open, and comprehensive engagement with the public which are crucial factors leading to public trust or distrust of medical interventions.
  • The priorities in malaria control measures are dynamic and must be routinely reevaluated. The Anopheles mosquito is a complex and highly adaptive species that has been successful at evading human control measures, including selective genetic mutations. Local activists ask if the financial investments made would not be better spent investing in robust and adaptive health infrastructures across the continent.

The authors maintain that international consortia developing cutting-edge scientific interventions can do better as they situate their research and field trials within settings with limited public health infrastructure and poor populations.

 

With best wishes,

Third World Network
131 Jalan Macalister
10400 Penang
Malaysia
Email: twn@twnetwork.org
Websites: http://www.twn.my/and http://www.biosafety-info.net/
To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net

—————————————————————————————————————

COMMENTARY

The Release of Genetically Engineered Mosquitoes in Burkina Faso:  Bioeconomy of Science, Public Engagement and Trust in Medicine 

Uli Beisel and John Kuumuori Ganle
Volume 62Issue 3 September 2019 , pp. 164-173
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/asr.2019.45

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/african-studies-review/article/release-of-genetically-engineered-mosquitoes-in-burkina-faso-bioeconomy-of-science-public-engagement-and-trust-in-medicine/8F5539854B8880C2894EABAA386D38E0

 [EXCERPT]

Genetically engineered mosquitoes and trust in medicine?

We suggest that three core issues regarding the Burkina Faso field trials require further consideration. First, it remains unclear how scientifically and ecologically sound the releases are. The sterilization rate is not 100 percent, and there has been little systematic research into the biological and ecological effects of genetically sterilized mosquitoes despite the worldwide releases. The bioeconomy to which the mosquitoes are tied is mainly driven by business interests and not science nor the public good. Although this particular trial is philanthropically funded, the data we have on effects so far is limited. What makes the current trial particularly challenging is the fact that the genetically sterilized mosquitoes released do not have a significant immediate public health benefit but relate to potential future benefits that transgenic mosquitoes promise.

Second, what might a genuinely democratic decision-making process look like in a context of biological and ecological uncertainties? Trials of this nature are ideally complemented by a public engagement strategy and an independent and impartial scientific team. In our current comparative research project on trust in biomedicine in Sierra Leone, Ghana, and Uganda, we find that transparency and a genuine, open, and comprehensive engagement with the public are crucial factors leading to public trust or distrust of medical interventions (Park & Akello 2017). Public health education is here only one small part, and indeed not the most important one, for fostering trust. Rather, public health education and engagement are best conducted in a way that enables stakeholders to assess the issue at hand by themselves and “open up” debates, rather than to “close them down” by transferring seemingly uncontested/able knowledge (Stirling 2008).

Finally, the priorities in malaria control measures are dynamic and must be routinely reevaluated. The Anopheles mosquito is a complex and highly adaptive species that has been successful at evading human control measures, including selective genetic mutations. Local activists raise an important question when they ask if the financial investments made would not be better spent investing in robust and adaptive health infrastructures across the continent. These reservations are situated at an uneasy nexus of global health initiatives, focused on single diseases and evidence-based medicine on the one hand, and decades of experience with failed investments in international development in infrastructures on the other hand. Crucial questions remain regarding the engagement of Burkina Faso—and Africa as a whole—with transgenic mosquito trials. International consortia developing cutting-edge scientific interventions can do better as they situate their research and field trials within settings with limited public health infrastructure and poor populations. Such matters are crucial, not only to avoid the inevitable comparisons with colonial-era experimentation on African populations, but also with a view to fostering trust and equitable collaboration in biomedical innovations for the greater public good.

articles post