-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Biotech Activists - vs. - US scientific establishment
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 19:57:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Eisenscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: ?
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
--=====================_48257550==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 14:15:26 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lorna Salzman)
Subject: ISIS condemns suppression of scientific debate
I apologize for any cross posting of this important statement from Mae Wan
Ho. I believe that it is being issued as a press release by the three
signers below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The following posting is of great import and urgency. It signals the likely
establishment of a global conspiracy of establishment scientists comparable
to the judicial panel of the WTO, a "WSO" as it were, to inundate the
media, the public and government officials with pro-genetic engineering
propaganda.
It is likely that this campaign will be as intense, as corrupt and as
fevered as the response elicited from the pro-nuclear gang in the 1970s.
The higher the stakes, the more frenzied and duplicitous the response. This
pro-GE tidal wave will displace the corporate response, at least in the
higher decision-making and academic circles. The corporations will put
their multi-million dollar public relations campaign out in popular media,
and the scientists will start twisting arms at higher government levels and
making threats to discredit the critics.
We are in for a long dirty battle, headed by the US scientific
establishment, which has already, in the 20th century with the nuclear
power issue, given science a bad name by prostituting the scientific method
in the interests of status, political connections, money and clout. This
makes it all the more imperative that scientific critics of GE start
speaking out with a unified voice and that they reach out to the decision
makers with the information that the pro-GE gang is trying to denigrate or
suppress. We activists need these scientists in our work. I hope they will
not fail us. Science needs to be reclaimed in the interests of the public
and of democracy. We cannot allow it to be contorted by self-interested
scientists pretending to be impartial and objective. This is the battle of
the 21st century..and perhaps of all time.
Please save Saturday Sept. 9th for the ESF and Club of Rome teach in on
genetic engineering.
Lorna Salzman
Genetic engineering education project director,
Earth Society Foundation
Biotech Activists ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Posted: 05/11/2000 By
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
============================================================
The following letter, which gives a good insight into how corporate science
works in the global arena behind closed doors, has been rejected from
Science magazine despite three requests for reconsideration from Dr. Samuel
Epstein. The issue at stake is democracy and the social control of science
and technology, which is all the more urgent, as technologies become more
powerful and uncontrollable.
This is not the first time that magazines such as Science, Nature and New
Scientist have refused to give voice to scientists dissenting from the
corporate view, to which they give undue and apparently unlimited access.
Nature Biotechnology even published a long article attempting to discredit a
scientific review - on the potential hazards of the cauliflower mosaic
viral promoter (now published) - in the worst style of gutter journalism,
and only gave a very grudging right to reply after a delay of three to four
months. I have long cancelled my personal subscriptions to these magazines,
and I suggest others might consider doing the same.
We can have no confidence in the International Academy Council being
proposed, unless and until the composition of this Council has gone through
the necessary open democratic process. Scientists like us have tried our
best to engage the scientific community as well as the general public in
open debate. Some, like Dr. Arpad Puztai had lost his job and bore the brunt
of vilification from the scientific establishment. We have all had our lives
and work ruined, not the least of which by being forced to read boring
scientific papers and documents that we would never have volunteered to read
if we didn't think it was so important for the public to be informed of what
corporate science has in store for us. This is what democracy is all about.
We have repeatedly invited and challenged those real scientists who disagree
with us to debate the science in public and in terms that the public can
understand. They have turned us down again and again.
At the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, the President of the U.S.
National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Bruce Alberts, and an unheralded group
of a dozen other presidents of national science academies, quietly gathered
behind the scenes to propose the creation of an International Academy
Council (IAC) as a global science advisory board. The object of the IAC,
expected to be formalized this month, is to provide "impartial scientific
advice" to governments and international organizations on issues such as
genetic engineering, threatened ecosystems, and biodiversity. While most
would agree with Alberts "that the world needs much more advice from
scientists," there are serious questions on reliance of advice from an
NAS-modeled IAC.
Through its huge think tank, the National Research Council (NRC)
chaired by Alberts with a full-time staff of 1000 and a $200 million budget,
the NAS conducts studies and prepares about 200 reports annually, largely
under contract to federal agencies. However, in flagrant violation of
governmental openness rules (the 1972 Federal Advisory Committee Act) which
Alberts still vehemently opposes, NRC committees and panels meet secretly in
closed sessions, fail to disclose their minutes and conflict of interest
statements, and fail to require that their membership reflects balanced
representation of divergent interests and viewpoints. Illustrative is the
conduct of the NRC committee on "Comparative Toxicity of Naturally Occurring
Carcinogens" which issued the 1996 report on "Carcinogens and
Anticarcinogens in the Human Diet." This report trivialized concerns on
cancer risks to infants and children from food contaminated with
carcinogenic pesticides, as these were alleged to "occur at levels far too
low to have any adverse effects on health." Acting on behalf of an ad hoc
coalition of about 100 leading independent experts in public health and
cancer prevention, and representatives of a wide range of labor and citizen
groups, one of us (SSE) warned Alberts that this committee was grossly
unbalanced and "disproportionately weighted with industry consultants;" it
should further be noted that no pediatrician was invited to serve. Alberts
responded admitting "that some of the committee members have performed some
consulting for industry," but dismissed these concerns as "the same members
have also advised or consulted for regulatory agencies." Other concerns
were expressed that the composition of the NRC Committee could "be used to
discredit or undermine" the previous NRC report on "Pesticides in the Diets
of Infants and Children," which explicitly warned of cancer risks to
children.
A more blatant conflict of interest is evidenced by the composition
of the March, 1999 NRC biotechnology panel with its disproportionate
representation of experts directly linked to the industry. This conflict
was compounded by the subsequent discovery of a revolving-door relationship
between the industry and NRC. Unknown to the panel, its executive director
Dr. Michael Phillips was secretly negotiating for a senior position in the
Biotechnology Industry Organization. He joined the industry some 3 months
later.
As federal support is beginning to shrink, the NAS plans to increase
funding from non-federal sources, which currently account for some 15% of
its budget. The NAS is also planning to extend its influence to major
national policy concerns. However, characteristic of his penchant for
secrecy, Alberts has refused to release a pending report recommending
reorganization of NAS policies and procedures.
Evaluation of global concerns, particularly on public health and
environmental integrity, should not be entrusted to a non-transparent and
unaccountable cabal of self-appointed experts, such as the proposed IAC,
whose views may reflect special interests rather than the public. Instead,
highly qualified independent scientists acceptable to or working with
non-governmental organizations (NGO's) should play a major role in any
international science advisory body. These include the recently proposed
World Academy of Science in Society, The Physicians and Scientists for
Responsible Application of Science and Technology (PSRAST), and the group of
some 300 "World Scientists."
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago and
Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition
2121 W. Taylor St.
Chicago, IL 60612
(312) 996-2297
Edward Goldsmith, M.A.
The Ecologist
46 The Vineyard, Richmond, Surrey, U.K.
(011) 44-181-332-6963
Mae Wan Ho, Ph.D.
Department of Biology
The Open University
Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, U.K.
(011) 44-1908-653-113
============================================================
How to Use this Mailing List
============================================================
You received this e-mail as a result of your registration on the
biotech_activists mailing list.
To unsubscribe, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of
the message type:
unsubscribe biotech_activists
For a list of other commands and list options, please send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message type:
help
Please direct questions about this list to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please direct technical questions about this service to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lorna Salzman
718-522-0253; 631-653-3387
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having
been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and
that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of
gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most
wonderful have been and are being evolved" (Charles Darwin, The Origin of
Species).
"Evolutionary history should provide the primary basis for assessing
biological integrity". (Paul Angermeier & James Karr, "Biological Integrity
vs. Biological Diversity...Protecting biotic resources", BioScience, vol.
44 #10, Nov. 1994)
--=====================_48257550==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html
<PRE>
______________________________________________
You can subscribe to Solidarity4Ever by sending a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and unsubscribe by sending an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is a read-only list, but if you have an item you want posted, send it to
the list moderator at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who will determine whether it is
appropriate for redistribution. You can temporarily suspend delivery by sending
a request to the same address. Notify the moderator at the time you want
delivery resumed. You can also manage this function yourself by going to the
list at <www.igc.topica.com/lists/Solidarity4Ever.</PRE>
--=====================_48257550==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html
<PRE>___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. <A
HREF="http://www.topica.com/t/16">http://www.topica.com/t/16</A>
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics</PRE>
--=====================_48257550==_.ALT--
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths,
misdirections
and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and
minor
effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said,
CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
