"
The beast and its Achilles heel:
A novel target to fight multi-resistant pathogenic bacteria
Most of the guest in the audience at our podiums discussion were around 25 years old and had a university background in biology.
1. What is your general attitude towards genetic engineering?
The general opinion towards genetic engineering was split between being positive and mixed.
2. Would you consume geneticaly modified food?
Only 6% of our audience would not consume genetically manipulated food. More than 60% would consume those items. The rest was undecided.
3. Woud you pay more for food, if no genetics were used in ist production? If yes, how much? (in %)
For food without any genetically changes only one quarter of the audience would pay more. More than 50% would not pay more for “clean” food.
4. Where do you think antibiotic restistances come from?
In agreement with our speakers at the discussion, most guests had the right idea about where new antibiotic resistances come from. 60% think they come from a misuse of antibiotics in general.
5. Imaging you are not feeling well. How fast would you use antibiotics?
In case of being sick, our audience would act as the specialists advise to act: Use antibiotics only as a last weapon and when the doctor prescribes it.
6. How did the panel discussion influence your opinion towards gene technology?
Since most of our guests already had a positive opinion towards “gen-tec”, it is not surprising that 78% did not change their opinion about it. 22% of the audience changed their opinion after the discussion in one way or the other.
7. After this discussion, what would you pay more attention to? (you can chose more than one option)
With our discussion we could pursue more than half of our audience to think more about their food, their usage of antibiotics and genetic engineering in general.
8. If you had to vote tomorrow, would you...
The elections in Germany are coming up in September. That is why we asked our audience, how they would vote regarding genetically engineered food. About a third of the audience would vote pro, another third contra engineered food. The rest would not vote at all.
