[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Gene Tinkering: YOU Are The Mice And They Don't Want You to Know



Tracy Aquilla wrote:

Snip 
> >This is important enough to me that I would get politically active if I
> >thought it would make a difference.
> 
> If it's really important to you, you should be eager to seek the knowledge
> you lack which is necessary to understand the risks involved. I suggest you
> spend some time in the library reading some literature on the subject. There
> are many articles from which one can glean a satisfactory knowledge of the
> issues. I have appended a short list below to get you started.
> 
> McIntosh, Arthur H., and Rebecca Shamy (1980). Studies of a Baculovirus in a
> Mammalian Cell Line. Intervirology 13:331-341.
> 
> Groner, Albrecht (1986). Specificity and Safety of Baculoviruses, in The
> Biology of Baculoviruses, Vol. I. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Inc.
> 
> Brusca, J., M. Summers, J. Couch, and L. Courtney (1986). Autographa
> californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus efficiently enters but does not
> replicate in poikilothermic vertebrate cells. Intervirology 26:207-222.
> 
> Wood, H. A., and R. R. Granados (1991). Genetically engineered baculoviruses
> as agents for pest control. Annual Review of Microbiology 45:69-87.
> 
> Hawtin, R. E., L. A. King, and R. D. Posse (1992). Prospects for the
> development of a genetically engineered baculovirus insecticide. Pesticide
> Science 34:9-15.
> 

Tracy,

I agree with you that people should thoroughly research subjects that 
concern them. However, when scientists write papers for journals they are 
writing for their peers (other scientists) not "Joe Public". While this 
form of publication is efficient for communicating with other scientists 
it is an very inefficient way to communicate with non-scientists. 

As you mentioned the volume of new scientific information is 
incomprehensible to many people. Because of this literature reviews are 
tedious and time consuming. Even scientists are now contracting out "lit 
reviews" due to time limitations. Is it reallistic to expect "Joe Public" 
to do this in his/her spare time? No it isn't! They will collect 
information from the most convenient source. They may come across an 
accurate source or they may find a source who received their PhD from a 
"match book."

Creating misinformation is easy for people who can spin a good tale. Cite 
a few references and you've got instant credibility. Since few people 
check references, this is a particularly effective technique. Once the 
misinformation is out, it is difficult to counteract. The scientific 
community needs to be working more actively to get their message out. It 
is the collective silence of the scientific community that plays into the 
"propagandists'" hands. I believe that scientists must take 
responsibility for getting there message out to the public. As 
scientists, if we want to get our message out to them, we must use their 
media, not ours.

Keep up the good fight.

Blair McClinton, P.Ag.

	The truth is out there, if your willing to look.



References: