This is a part of “Gore and Bush Offer Their Views on Science”Science Vol.290,Num.5490,Issue of 13 Oct 2000, pp. 262-269—*Science: The first analyses of the complete sequence of the humangenomewill soon be published. Should there be any restrictions on the use ofthis information in areas such as genetic engineering, DNA patenting,and obtaining health insurance? GORE: Raw, fundamental genome sequence data, which cannot be patented,should be made freely available to scientists around the world for usein developing the next generation of medical diagnostic products,treatments, and cures. Unencumbered access to this information willpromote discoveries that will reduce the burden of disease, improvehealth around the world, and enhance the quality of life for allhumankind. Intellectual property protection for gene-based inventionsalso plays a critical role in stimulating the development of importantnew health care products. Information about the genetic makeup of individual people has thepotential to be used against them for discriminatory purposes. This mustbe prevented. In 1998, I raised the issue of genetic discrimination atthe National Academy of Sciences, because Americans need to be reassuredthat their genetic information won’t be used to prevent them fromobtaining or keeping their health insurance or their jobs. As president,I would strongly support such assurance. In the area of DNA and gene patents, I believe that the Patent andTrademark Office is moving in the right direction by raising the bar onits standards for patents. Patent law has stood us in good stead sincethe framers of the Constitution put it in place to “promote progress inscience and the useful arts.” BUSH: I oppose all types of discrimination, including discriminationbased on the use of genetic information. As governor I worked with thestate legislature to achieve legal protections in Texas against geneticdiscrimination. In 1997, I supported and signed a model genetic privacylaw that makes it illegal for insurers and employers to make decisionsbased on genetic test results. *Science: Do you think the risks of genetically modified crops and otherproducts outweigh their potential benefits? GORE: This type of technology holds enormous promise to help increasecrop yields, produce more nutritious foods, and improve environmentalquality. Genetically modified crops can create new markets for ournation’s farmers in areas like pharmaceuticals, energy, and rawmaterials for industrial chemicals. We need to maintain ourscience-based regulatory approach to capture the benefits and minimizethe risks. We need to remember that modern agriculture is not arisk-free endeavor. We need to assess any risks associated with geneticengineering in the context of the risks regulators, farmers, andconsumers have been dealing with for decades. BUSH: I oppose barriers to safe food and believe that our health andsafety regulations must be based on sound science. In 1999, 50% of thesoybeans, 40% of the cotton, and about one-third of the corn produced inthe United States was genetically modified. The European Union, however,has imposed a moratorium on the import of new biotech crops.Additionally, despite a ruling at the World Trade Organization, whoserules require adherence to sound science, the European Union continuesto ban the import of U.S. beef treated with growth hormones. The next president must carry a simple and unequivocal message toforeign governments: We won’t tolerate favoritism and unfair subsidiesfor your national industries. I will fight to ensure that U.S. productsare allowed entry into the European Union and that accepted scientificprinciples are applied in enacting regulations. American farmers arewithout rival in their ability to produce and compete, and the futureprosperity of the U.S. farm sector depends in large part on theexpansion of global markets for U.S. products. 첨부 파일과거 URLhttp://www.ipleft.or.kr/bbs/view.php?board=ipleft_5&id=75