From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Wed Feb 05 2003 - 10:58:46 MST
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:30:19AM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote:
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/05/1044318670302.html
>
> New fears raised about GM plants
...
> Further questions have been raised about consequences of growing genetically
> modified plants after Australian scientists showed that a hoped-for method
> of preventing "superweeds" does not work.
This is revealing. Note that the nature article simply shows that one
idea doesn't work, but the newspaper (and subject line here) turns it
into a danger message - it didn't work, so there is a risk! It is a bit
like hearing about a failed drug design and reporting it as a greater
risk for disease.
This fits in nicely with a piece I wrote about the acrylamide scare.
Here in Sweden the headlines last week when the BCJ report came out were
along the lines of "CHIPS DOES *NOT* CAUSE CANCER!" (with a size
suitable for V-day and a red 'not' :-). One even said that the results
showed a slight decrease of cancer risk thanks to chips. The original
study was far more humble, and merely showed that there was no
noticeable increase in the risk for certain cancers due to eating
acrylamide-rich food. But this message of "the fears people have seem
unfounded" was turned into "there is NO risk!". Just as the original
announcement from the Swedish Food Administration turned "there are
slight amounts of a substance that cause cancers in certain rats in many
unhealthy foods" into a message of disaster.
Too bad the GM method didn't work, but that means we have to use
*another* method.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 05 2003 - 10:58:27 MST