Re: SOC/BIO: Rifkin's "worldwide moratorium" on genetically

From: Steve (
Date: Wed Aug 02 2000 - 09:02:48 MDT

> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:47:01 -0400
> From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <>
> Subject: Re: SOC/BIO: Rifkin's "worldwide moratorium" on genetically
> modified organisms

>> Surely we should err on the side of caution ...... we just don't know
>> large-scale GM cultivation will impact on the environment. The dangers of
>> H-bombs &c. is all too apparent, but some new technologies might have
>> subtle dangers. We are not living in sci-fi fantasy .... if things go
>> in the world they effect real lives.

>Plant pollen is not like grey goo, so stop giving it that level of

You made the initial comparison with H-bombs ...... I only point out that
the dangers are more subtle and we should tread carefully.

> It is more like a forest fire, which it is possible to fight
>and contain and eliminate (much as we have eliminated smallpox and other

Yes, but even forest fires are harmful .... and aren't some diseases (TB?)
that were once thought to have been eliminated fighting back?

There are no remote mountains or whatever in the UK that can be freed of
bees, even if there might be in the States. But surely other insects move
pollen about as well as bees?

OK, so you question the motives of "greenies" who may have left-wing
politics. But for sure the motives of Monsanto and the big agri-businesses
pushing this GM thru as fast they can *ARE* motivated solely by
self-interest and financial gain. Aren't some of the GM crops being
selectively modified to uptake more of a particular brand of pesticide?

If they want to feed the starving millions in Asia, then maybe they could
donate the $m's they are throwing at GM foods research. Why isn't the same
level of research going into permaculture?

Steve zine

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:30 MDT