如何管理生物污染——“先污染后治理”还是“零排放”

How to Manage Biological Contaminants:“Pollute First,Control Later”or“Zero Emissions”?

生物性污染可自行增殖并造成长期的系统性侵害。但是,并非所有的生物污染都属于生物性污染。不论是转基因还是基因编辑,严格而言,只有遗传性的基因改造才可能导致生物性污染。即使是非遗传性的基因改造(如不具繁殖性的转基因作物),鉴于潜在的非预期性与副作用的影响,也应采取审慎的管理策略,一事一议,及时反馈与调整。对于遗传性的基因改造,一如针对生物入侵的管理,应严格禁止出于非基本需求的实践(包括具繁殖性的转基因作物),以达到“零排放”的管理目标。在基因改造能挽救病患者的生命,且除了基因改造,尚无其他治疗或缓解方法的情形中,同时若能保证相关操作不致发生意外(导致新的伤害)的话,那么,这种基因改造(即使是遗传性的)可视为出于基本需求的改造,因而是可能获得辩护的。但在现实中,可同时满足这三项前提条件的情形是极少的。因此,就生物性污染而言“,零排放”的管理策略具有普遍性意义。就生物性污染而言,由于其特性而导致利害相关者的外延可无限扩散,在实践层面,任何专家不具有决策权,甚至任何“法人”都不具有充分的自主权,而是应交由国际组织仲裁,并应充分参考“非专业性”公众的意见。

Biologic contaminants can multiply on their own and cause long-term systemic damages.However,not all biological contamination is biological.Strictly speaking,only genetic modifications of a hereditary nature,whether it is transgenesis or gene editing,can lead to biological contamination.Even for non-heritable genetic modifications(such as genetically modified crops that are not reproductive),in view of potentially unpredictable and unintended effects,prudent management strategies should be adopted based on case-by-case analyses and timely feedback and adjustments.For heritable genetic modification,just like the management of biological invasions,practices for non-basic needs(including genetically modified crops for reproduction)should be strictly prohibited to achieve the management objective of“zero emissions”.A genetic modification(even if it is hereditary)may be considered as a modification for basic needs and therefore potentially defensible in cases where the modification saves the life of the diseased person and where there is no treatment or palliative alternative to the modification,and where it is guaranteed that the operation will not result in an accident(leading to a new injury).In reality,however,there are very few cases where all three prerequisites can be met at the same time.Therefore,in the case of biological contamination,the management strategies of“zero emissions”have universal significance.In the case of biological contamination,where the extension of stakeholders is unlimited due to its characteristics,in practice,no expert has decision-making power,nor does any“legal person”have full autonomy.Instead,it should be left to an international organization for arbitration,with due reference to the views of the“non-professional”public.