From: Brian D Williams (talon57@well.com)
Date: Thu Jul 20 2000 - 13:14:29 MDT
From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
>> The problem is that the science the GM industry is doing
>>involves me as the unwitting lab rat, a part I am loath to play.
>Yet you, and no one else, for that matter, seems to object to
>being 'lab rats' when new breeds of plants are developed by time
>honored processes of human directed hybridization. The only
>difference between GM foods and those developed by the hit or miss
>methods of the past is that GM is focused, informed, and directed.
Come on Mike the two processes are hardly similiar. Hybridization
of existing SPECIES is a completely different thing from the kind
of trangenetic manipulation possible with modern biotech.
I'm not a poster boy for those who don't understand the basics, I'm
arguing that there is a big difference between producing things
which have enhanced nutritional value, and those that merely have
enhanced economic value for a specific company.
Of course a good product would automatically have both.
>> They can start to promote the "calming down" by halting their
>> opposition to labeling.
>>
>> It's clear the industry is unwilling to face the facts.
>As if the ignorant people who irrationally fear GM foods even once
>face the facts.
Ignorant or not it's clear many people don't want these products.
The industry knows this which is why they oppose labeling, playing
the "we know best" crap. It is this attitude many people (including
me) oppose.
>> The historical evidence is seen daily in newspaper headlines,
>>even when companies know about bad things their products do, they
>>either ignore it, or hide it.
>Which is why there is the FDA process. Most of what I've ever
>heard that are the 'bad' things these products do is bogus
>unfounded hysteria based on fake science by people with an agenda.
I'm not arguing what anybody else said.
We've been historically through the "this pesticide/herbicide is
perfectly harmless" routine before. The first thing that happens is
people start using it in quantities that pose problems with
agricultural runoff.
I'm not even arguing that these things are bad, I just want them
labeled so people can choose.
Perhaps the ultimate telling point is that the industry wants to
try changing the name from GMO to something else.
I call that sneaky, deceptive and dishonest.
Brian
Member:
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
Adler Planetarium www.adlerplanetarium.org
Life Extension Foundation, www.lef.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
Mars Society, www.marssociety.org
Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:04 MST