John Marlow wrote,
> Harvey Newstrom wrote,
> > In a battle of memes, the anti-GM factions have won this round.
>
> Actually, that's not correct--the pro-GM industry has lost it through
> its own blundering incompetence.
You are absolutely right. It is more accurate to say that the industry shot
itself in the foot with this one.
> > If GM foods are to continue to be a viable technology, we must be
> >able to control it so that we decide whether it goes into our food
> >or not.
>
> Well, you know, another blundering bad-PR strike against these guys
> is their rabid insistence that there BE no labeling and, hence, no
> choice. 'You'll eat it and drink it and pay us to do it whether you
> want to or not,' has been their attitude from the start--just like
> the food-irradiation guys.
Yes, I have spoken for labeling myself. I fear allowing other people to
make scientific choices for me. I often find myself in a scientific
minority. Let's face it, cryonics, life-extension drugs, life-extending
diets, AI computing, and nanotechnology are controversial issues. Many
scientists would gladly override our choices in these matters because they
do not believe we are scientifically correct. I would rather have full
documentation, and then I will make my own choice.
I don't trust the tobacco industry to tell me if cigarettes are safe for me.
I don't trust the meat industry to tell me if mad cow disease is a concern
for me. I don't trust the auto manufacturers to tell me if my RV might flip
over. I don't trust software manufacturers to tell me if their product has
bugs. Frankly, I don't trust anybody with a large cash incentive to lie to
me. Open documentation with independent verification is the only safety
protocol that works.
-- Harvey Newstrom <http://HarveyNewstrom.com> <http://Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:42 MDT