_________________________________________________________________
WORLD RAINFOREST MOVEMENT
_________________________________________________________________
Film Review:
The Gene Hunters, Zef Productions, Producer Luke Holland. To be
broadcast in UK on Channel Four: Sunday 26 February 7.00 pm.
The wave of international concern for vanishing biological
diversity has identified a new field for prospecting - vanishing
peoples. The US-based 'Human Genome Diversity Project' is intent
on collecting tissue samples from 700 endangered indigenous
societies, whom it refers to as 'isolates of historic interest'.
It aims to 'immortalise' them, by establishing viable cell lines
in laboratories, in order to search for unique DNA sequences that
may offer clues to genetically-caused diseases and to potentially
lucrative cures.
This fascinating television documentary, by independent TV
producer Luke Holland, confronts us with the moral dilemmas of
this 'genetic goldrush'. The proponents argue that the
collection, and eventually patenting, of rare human cell-types
and genes from these peoples is justified for the 'greater human
good' - the applied science provides a short cut to new cures.
The peoples themselves, however, have rather different opinions,
as this film so sensitively brings out. Explains Leonora
Zalabata, spokeswoman for the Arhuaco people of northern
Colombia:
'Our land, our culture, our sub-soil, our ideology and our
traditions have all been exploited. This could be another
form of exploitation. Only this time they are using us as
raw materials'
George Annas, Professor of Medical Ethics of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology agrees:
'We're taking from them their DNA, which we now consider
like gold. Its even worse than standard colonialism and
exploitation because we are taking the one thing that we
value. And after we take that we have no real interest in
whether they live or die.'
Nor has Ray Apodaca of the National Congress of American Indians
much sympathy for the 'pure science' justification of this
research - that it will reveal the history of human migrations.
'We know where we came from, and we know who we are, and we
think we know where we are going. Why do we need to know
anything else? I mean, is this for their benefit? It
certainly isn't for ours.'
He reminds us of earlier 'scientific' investigations into the
unique characteristics of native Americans, which led to hundreds
of Indian graves being robbed in the last century to measure
skull sizes and estimate racial intelligence. Taking people's
blood and other tissues in the name of science and global
benefits today is not very different and has led to bitter
recriminations.
Behind the new rhetoric lie the same attitudes, which treat
indigenous peoples as inferior and ignorant, and therefore deny
their rights.
'They haven't been honest. They haven't told the indigenous
authorities what they are looking for. We think the way
they have taken away these samples is arbitrary. We don't
want to be guinea pigs for their experiments' explains
Leonora Zalabata.
The complaint highlights the key issue in this moral debate -
'informed consent'. Do the individuals who are giving these
samples know what happens to them? Are they consulted about
further applications of the scientific findings? Are they assured
of a share of any benefits? High in the Sierra Nevada in Colombia
we learn the truth, as geneticists from the Bogota-based Genetics
Institute, accompanied by scientists from the pharmaceuticals
giant Hoffman-La Roche, draw blood from isolated Asario Indians.
'In fact, we don't tell every community that we are immortalising
their cells' Dr Alberto Gomez admits to camera. On the contrary,
we learn, the Indians are persuaded to allow their blood to be
taken because the visiting doctors offer them one-off medical
treatments, which these isolated peoples otherwise have little
chance of obtaining.
Nor, we learn later, do the communities get informed about any
scientific findings. Patents are being taken out without the
knowledge and consent of the local people. Indeed in a startling
test case documented in this well researched film, the California
Supreme Court has already ruled that a biotech company may patent
a person's genes even where he has not only refused to give his
consent but taken the matter to court.
Here, then, is a process which not only denies the collective
rights of indigenous peoples to control their own destinies but
also the individual rights of US citizens to own their own cells.
Business profits get priority and there are, potentially,
hundreds of millions in the making.
Is it ethical to ignore tribal peoples' rights and interests for
the 'greater good'? George Annas thinks not:
'It is virtually impossible to get the informed consent of
indigenous people for this. Number one, I think, because if
they understand the project they would refuse and, number
two, if they don't understand they can't give consent. So
it is total exploitation. It is taking things which can be
of no benefit to them.'
Scientists, however, are concerned that there may never be
another chance to take their samples: the peoples may die out
taking their genetic secrets with them. One way out of this
conundrum might be benefit sharing; entering into contracts with
indigenous peoples to ensure that they get a cut of any profits.
It's a problematic suggestion. In the first place, as the film
reminds us, most indigenous people have learned to mistrust
foreigners' false promises. They will be hesitant to enter into
new agreements based on trust. And, if there is to be benefit
sharing, how will you ensure that the profits return to the
community in an appropriate form and who will vigilate the
honouring of agreements?
The producer's sympathies for the rights of the indigenous
peoples are clear, but he leaves us to make up our own minds
about the best solutions to this moral dilemma. For me, it is the
lessons of Leonora Zalabata that will stick in my mind:
'Science and technology solve problems, but they are also
aggressive. But our way of looking after humanity and
helping to save the world, of looking after the earth and
making a brotherhood of mankind is done without technology.
Our technology is in the head, the heart and the spirit.
That is different.'
The only just solution is to enforce a respect for human rights.
As George Annas concludes:
'We need to secure their future as peoples, not just
immortalise their genes.'
Copies available free to organisations in the Third World from:
Television Trust for the Environment, Prince Albert Road, NW1
4RZ, England. Fax: +44 171 586 4866.
Marcus Colchester
World Rainforest Movement 22 February 1995
______________________________________________________________