> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-extropians@extropy.org
>
> The following critique of the current Ag/Bio GM technology and its
> implementation was forwarded to me on an "anti-GM" mailing list:
>
> http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~dcandmkw/ge/gebrown.htm
>
> I'd be very curious to see what sort of reaction it sparks from
> folks here
> who are more knowledgable about molecular biology.
>
The greatest concerns of the "public" in general seem to have to do with
immediate harm they, or other organisms such as butterflies, could suffer
due to exposure to GM foods. The following passage from Patrick Brown's
article was highlighted on the web page: "Indeed, it can be argued that gene
transfer via rDNA techniques resembles the process of viral infection far
more closely than it resembles traditional breeding." This sounds scary,
and given that the highlighted portions are the only parts of the article
that many people will read, it's probably safe to conclude that many people
will come away from the article with a bit more convinced of the
advisability of strict government controls on genetic research.
The following paragraphs from PB's article nicely summarize my main
concerns:
"The real threat to the future of plant biotechnology is the irresponsible
and premature releases of the first generation of GMOs that are full of
unsound scientific assumptions, rife with careless science, and arrogantly
dismissive of valid concerns.
The current generation of GMOs provide little real benefit except corporate
profit and marginally improved grower returns, while at the same time
introducing a host of poorly studied human and ecological risks. Not
surprisingly, many have questioned the value of these crops and the
integrity of those who support their use."
The current state of research in the field of plant genetics (I'm speaking
here only of US research; I'm not as familiar with reserach elsewhere) has
been brought about largely by the high level of involvement of the federal
government, and government-assisted corporations such as Monsanto, in
agricultural research of all sorts. Most agricultural schools push the
concept of farming-be-formula as the only possible way to go; and every
formula will naturally involve the use of the commercial products offered by
Monsanto.
Most US farmers rely heavily on various subsidies provided by the federal
gov't, and again at the level of local agricultural extension services,
farming-by-formula is pushed as the only sensible way to go. This isn't
surprising given that the extension service agents have been educated in the
schools which teach this same thing.
The conclusion drawn by the "public" seems to be that we need MORE gov't
involvement in agricultural. The only way I can see that someone could
logically arrive at this conclusion is by ignoring most of the available
data.
The greatest threat I see from the current direction of GM technology is
widespread famine in the not so distant future as a larger and larger
proportion of the world's agricutural lands are planted in genetically
almost-identical cultivars of a few staple crops. This same danger existed
with the use of hybrid corns produced the old-fashioned way; it's not unique
to GM crops. What disturbs me is that GM technology is being used to push
world agriculture farther along that same path rather than along a more
healthily branching path of genetic diversity.
The 1970 corn leaf blight epidemic, which destroyed half the corn crop from
Floria to Texas, should be heeded as a warning. In this case a new strain
of the fungus which causes southern leaf blight was able to spread unchecked
through fields of genetically identical hybrid corn. This would not have
been nearly so likely to happen with wider genetic diversity in corn
cultivars and smaller fields of corn interplanted with other crops. As the
shift is made world-wide from thousands of local cultivars to the
farming-by-formula use of a few GM cultivars, the danger increases of a
larger-scale version of the corn blight catastrophe. I'd go so far as to say
it's inevitable if the agricultural industry continues its present course.
I'd like to see more pure research being done, more effort put into
UNDERSTANDING genetics. There are so many questions that are interesting in
and of themselves--such as, for instance, how transposons fit into the
process. But most of the money that's available for genetic research is
funneled through the federal gov't and corporations and universities
controlled by the same ideas and often the same people.
One solution I see is to set up research facilities that are not associated
in any way with any gov't or gov't assisted corporation. As I've mentioned
before on this list, an "underground" economy with "underground" research
facilities.
Bonnie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:47 MDT