>> Genetic Engineering of plants is a non-issue in my mind. It
>> doesn't solve the underlying problem and moves society towards
>
>What exactly is the underlying problem, in your mind?
The arguement i hear most often supporting GE is that we have
to feed the world and GE is the answer. The assumed
underlying problem here is famine and a growing population.
At present we do have enough food in the world to feed everyone
but not sustainabilily and most socieites do not recoginze the
need to limit our growth (future demand for food). The
deeper problem is in our beliefs about growth and the definition
of sustainability. Also, we have a distrubution problem.
>I tend to disagree with your view on this, but nevertheless I will pass on the
>following related link to article about GE crops acceptance in the US vs the
>EU:
>
>http://www.cnn.com/NATURE/9907/08/genetics.enn/
What i found at that web site was a brief summary of
why GE was more of an issue in Europe than in the US.
That just scratches the surface of this issue. There
are lots of reports and arguements that go on
forever. Also, several new books have appeared on
this topic.
My view is that GE is being promoted by a few corporations
who expect to make a profit and have little interest in
helping humanity. Many of the changes are of questionable
value. Such as:
terminator gene
roundup ready soybeans
Bt potatoes
The reason this isn't an issue in my mind is.... i can't
find any good argements from the GE side. On SAGNET
this has been discussed for months. Not one argement
for GE side has ended up with a convincing position. This
has also occured on several other lists.
----------
Jeff Owens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Zone 7, http://www.teleport.com/~kowens
Underground house, solar energy, reduced consumption, no TV
