The Council for Responsible Genetics (CRG) was founded 25 years ago by a coalition of scientists, public and occupational health activists, and reproductive rights advocates.  From its inception, CRG published articles in its bulletin, GeneWatch that examined the societal impacts of new discoveries in applied genetics.  The field of public interest biotechnology had not yet taken root when CRG was formed, a tribute to the prescience of its founders. 

Many of the articles appearing in GeneWatch were written for a general audience, but were based on the latest scientific findings. CRG Board members, lawyers, biologists in many disciplines such as practicing geneticists, ecologists, embryologists, and molecular biologists contributed articles on risk assessments of genetically modified organisms, on the possible military uses of biotechnology, and on the mythology and oversimplification of the role of genes in biological systems,

As the commercial interests in biotechnology became pervasive in American universities, there was a scarcity of disinterested and scientifically informed critics of biotechnology. The Council was the only dedicated place people could go to for another viewpoint on some new product or technique, a plan to genetically redesign human beings, or a project to re-speciate the biosphere with synthetic genetically-modified organisms.

Among its early contributions, CRG coined the term "genetic discrimination," debunked false or exaggerated claims made about behavioral genetics, questioned the ethics of germ-line gene therapy, warned the public about the risks of genetically modified food, and advanced an agenda for financial disclosure in journals in response to the conflicts of interest arising when academia became partners with for-profit biotechnology companies.

In the mid-1980s, CRG sponsored a national conference in Washington, D.C. that brought together environmental, occupational and public health groups to share information about the impacts of biotechnology to their fields and to their constituencies.  Our Board members were among the first to correctly predict that chemical corporations would use genetic screening to rid the workplace of individuals who were genetically presdisposed to be affected by toxins and radiation in the environment rather than improving the health conditions of the workplace.  Advocates in the disability rights movement learned that genetic screening could be used to marginalize their role and value to society.  More generally, CRG has deciphered and debunked genetic reductionism, the view that genes (outside of cells, organs, and the environment) are the causes of disease, behavior, intelligence or aggression, a dangerous development for free, democratic societies. As a result of this pioneering work a generation of teachers, activists and scientists has been informed by CRG's publications, briefing papers, workshops and books.

    Among CRG's many societal contributions over the past quarter century include:

• Early attention to the potential use of recombinant DNA (the scientific term to describe gene splicing) for biological weapons, organizing both a Briefing on Capitol Hill in 1985 and an  American Association for the Advancement of Science panel in 1986.
• Publication of Presenting a Biological Arms Race, Susan Wright, ed. MIT Press, which helped to establish civil penalties in the United States under the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. Signed in London, Moscow and Washington. 
• Entered into force on 26 March 1975, the Convention called for the prohibition of the production, stockpiling or development of bacteriological weapons.
• Compilation of the first documentation of genetic discrimination against people who could not obtain employment, health or life insurance because they or a member of their family had a genetic condition and provided the intellectual grounding for the recently enacted Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA).
• Publication of Genetically Engineered Food: Changing the Nature of Nature. M. Teitel and K. Wilson.
• Creation of a Citizen's Guide to Genetically Modified Food.
• Promotion of the Safe Seed Campaign, a pledge among seed manufacturers and distributors committed to non-GM seeds.  By the beginning of 2001 10 percent of the seed catalogues in the United States were carrying the "Safe Seed Pledge."
• Issuance of a Genetic Bill of Rights, along with a published book of commentaries titled Rights and Liberties in the Biotech Age, S. Krimsky and P. Shorett, eds.
• Organization of a national conference on Forensic DNA Databanks and Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System.

The current landscape of public interest organizations in biotechnology and applied genetics has grown, especially over the past decade. Each group embodies a specialized advocacy role.  Grass roots organizations have sprouted throughout the world, especially in Europe, Africa, and India in opposition to GM crops.  Other groups have lobbied against patents on seeds and animals or against introducing cloned animals in the food supply.  A new generation of reproductive rights groups have campaigned against the commercial sale of women's eggs, cloning of human embryos, and pre-natal genetic screening for the sole purpose of creating "perfect" babies.  

Other biotech public interest organizations are involved in policy change or public education. Many of these groups have filled crucial gaps in advocating for responsible uses of genetic technologies. However, CRG remains the only organization that is explicitly dedicated to examining the best science, interpreting the results, assessing the implications, and communicating it to a general audience.  CRG works with grass roots activists and provides a bridge between scientists and social activists.

Given the complex landscape of biotechnology activism worldwide, there is an ever-growing need for an organization that offers a sober, honest, and cautious public-interest analysis of new developments in biotechnology and medical genetics.  Public interest biotechnology watchdog and advocacy groups can become more effective in their work if they have access to reliable knowledge grounded on good science and interpreted by individuals who are not tied to commercial interests. Given the growth of commercial opportunities in biotechnology and the political support it has enjoyed in the early years of the 21st century, it is more important today than it has ever been to build a network of disinterested and trusted experts who can interpret new developments in genetic technology and communicate them to the media and to a broad audience. CRG can continue to do for grass-roots public-interest biotechnology organizations and the general public what other scientifically-oriented non-profits do in promoting public dialogues for safe nuclear energy or in advancing public understanding of global warming.

In September 2007, CRG held a two-day strategic planning retreat that included current and prior board members, members of other public-interest organizations, bioethicists and long-time supporters of CRG.  The result of that intensive session was the establishment of a renewed mission statement and a series of well-defined goals to carry the organization forward into the 21st century.

Toward this end, CRG:

• Explores and documents developments in biotechnology through a holistic approach that considers science within a social, cultural, ethical, and environmental context.
• Serves as a global knowledge resource, providing information and education about the potential impact of new and emerging biotechnologies.
• Develops concrete policy solutions to address emerging issues in biotechnology.
• Mobilizes and collaborates with scientists and other organizations to inform the public and promote democratic control of science.
• Exposes over-simplified and distorted scientific claims regarding the role of genetics in human disease, development and behavior.

If CRG no longer existed, it would have to be reinvented. Some science-based non-profit group would be sought after to distill complex information in applied genetics for activist groups who are trying to raise public awareness, engender informed debate and safeguard human, animal and environmental health. 

Like all technological revolutions, genetic technology must be democratically managed to ensure that it is not misused for narrow interests. Toward this end, we need an organization that provides the intellectual and political space for scholars and activists to share knowledge, to raise social and ecological questions such as whether genetic technology is consistent with principles of sustainability, to alert people to the social justice ramifications of the human genome project, and to help people engage in decisions about the path society should take in creating genetically modified life forms. The Council for Responsible Genetics is well-positioned to serve as catalyst and thought leader in the movement to steer biotechnology toward the advancement of public health, environmental protection, equal justice and respect for human rights.