Genetic Engineering
Genetic Engineering of plants is a non-issue in my mind. It
doesn't solve the underlying problem and moves society towards
control by large economic interests. From an ecological
standpoint it isn't good for diversity and who knows what
long range negatives will result. Recently Scientific American
slogged into the controversy with:
----
Scientific American: Poison Plants?
http://www.sciam.com/explorations/1999/070599plants/index.html
The Case for Genetically Modified Crops
The advent of plant biotechnology was hailed as the engine of a Second
Green Revolution, capable of providing farmers with the hardier,
higher-yielding, disease-resistant and more nutritious crops needed to
sustain a burgeoning world population. Plant scientists argue that
modification is really nothing new; using tools such as selective breeding
and hybridization, humans have been influencing the genetics of food crops
for millennia. Indeed, present varieties of corn, they say, bear little
resemblance to their historical progenitors. The contribution of
biotechnology is that the process can be sped up enormously and new traits
incorporated from virtually any species. These proponents insist that their
new varieties have been more extensively tested than any in history and
that their safety as foodstuffs and in the environment is well proven.
RELATED LINKS:
Endorsement of Genetically Modified crops by a World Bank panel
Backgrounder from Cargill
Pending approvals at USDA
Plant biotechnology at Monsanto
Bt gene approvals at EPA
Product reviews by the FDA
The Case Against Genetically Modified Crops
Opposition to genetically modified plants comes from many fronts. It ranges
from those like biotechnology gadfly Jeremy Rifkin, who oppose gene
splicing on religious and moral grounds; to environmental and consumer
rights groups, including Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists,
that fear unexpected consequences to the environment; to health and pure
food advocates, who see the new products as adulterated; and to small
farmers and organic growers, who see the products as a sign of big
chemical makers, seed merchants and commercial farmers trying to force
them into buying these goods or going out of business. These groups charge
that there has been insufficient testing, that the benefits have not been
adequately demonstrated and that there is a clear potential for ecological
disaster. Moreover, they argue that the same forces that stymied earlier
crops, such as acquired resistance to pesticides by insects, will also
triumph over the laboratory feats of the gene splicers.
RELATED LINKS:
Friends of the Earth on Genetically Modified crops
Position of family farmers
Britain's Prince Charles speaks out
Profile of biotech foe Jeremy Rifkin from Scientific American
Report on Genetically Modified soybeans from Greenpeace
Safety issues of Genetically Modified crops
Natural Law Party on Genetically Modified foods
Campaign to Ban Genetically Engineered Foods
Analysis of Roundup Ready products from Genetically
Manipulated Food News
Religious opposition
------------------------------
jeff's comments: It is getting difficult to avoid GE
crops. A garden is good and buying organic is still safe.
Careful selection of bulk food is another way.
Some countries are fighting this and their imports are
safe, although it is best to buy within one's bio region.
This topic of food and water problems is really depressing.
I just read a book on water and that was followed by an
article on the pollutants in breast milk and why mothers
should not nurse anymore. These are not isolated problems,
everywhere you look there are major problems. Why doesn't
industry and researchers see the big picture? They only
see an expanding population that needs feeding
at a profit and convinced that the problems are overstated.
