From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury@www.aeiveos.com>
>The general thrust seems to be -- if it is genetically engineered
>it is new and therefore it must be bad, lets wait until we know
>everything. Nobody explains that the only way you "know
>everything" is to produce the variety of situations in which that
>knowledge becomes known. Oh no, computers with keyboards and
>monitors that may emit X-rays, oh gosh, lets not use them until we
>know for sure who might use them too much and get repetitive
>strain injury or maybe even cancer.
I certainly wasn't saying anything genetically engineered is automatically bad, in fact I thought the micronutrient rice was a good idea, provided it is properly tested.
"Roundup Corn" on the other hand seems to serve no one except agribusiness, and I have concerns about the total environmental effect.
A few years ago the agribusiness industry sued a small dairy company because their label indicated they did not use a milk production enhancing hormone. They tried to insist this implied their product was "bad". The company in question simply stated that their customers did not want milk from these sources, and their label was to reassure these customers.
I trust agribusiness as much as I trust bill clinton.
>The problem Jay (returning to the original comment) is that
>everything we eat, drink and most of our activities have some
>risk associated with them and the only way to eliminate those
>risks is to stop living. Short of that the best we can
>do is educate ourselves regarding the relative risks and
>adopt reasonable precautions and behaviors.
Brian
Member, Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
Life Extension Foundation, www.lef.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W