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

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



Carter Fields wrote:

Mike Zauzig <mzauzig@atlcom.net> wrote regarding my comments about his
earlier post:
> 
> >
> >Your interpretation of my viewpoint is flat wrong.  I think a curious
> >mind is a fabulous thing.  However, with knowledge comes responsibility.
> >
> >Firstly, a better word would be fatalism.
> >
> >Secondly, I am surprised at how emotional the responses have been from
> >the "gene jockeys".  Why so defensive?  I thought that an open mind is
> >essential to scientific thought.  Is it so hard to address the concerns
> >of others.
> >
> >Now, are you sincere in equating gene-splicing with traditional breeding
> >practices?  Because, if you are, I certainly have a lot to learn (which
> >is very possible).  Right now, however, I would think that genetic
> >engineering can create gene sequences which almost certainly would never
> >happen through natural processes no matter what the environment. (Please
> >correct me if I'm wrong.)
> >
> >My overall concern is this.  If an engineer makes a serious
> >miscalculation, a space shuttle could blow up.  If a political leader
> >makes a miscalculation, large numbers of people can die.  But if a
> >genetic researcher makes a mistake, the consequences are almost
> >inconceivable.  The entire web of life on Earth could be rearranged into
> >who knows what.  And, whereas you would think my primary concern would
> >be for homo sapiens' place in a new order, I am actually more concerned
> >about the well being of life on Earth in general.  I realize how
> >dramatic this sounds, but that is how I see things.
> >
> >A rogue genetically engineered cow can be controlled and does not
> >concern me.  A rogue genetically engineered germ is different.
> >
> 
> I completely agree with you mike, and I am a molecular biologist!  The only
> flaw in your argument:  if you wouldn't alter the germ, then don't alter
> anything (like the cow)!!
> 
> By messing with genes, we are being very egoistical...thinking that we "know
> all."
> 

I love it, guys.  As far as I can tell, your position is: Death to all
mutations.  Now.  

Either of you may explain any differences between your perception of
your position and my perception.  I'm really curious how you get your
mind around that.  

My position regarding genetic engineering is: Induced mutation, with the
offspring monitored for adverse events.  For the life of me, I cannot
see how this is different from observing natural mutations.  Please
explain where I am going wrong.  I'd hate to think all my training in
animal science has been wasted because I cannot understand this.

Steve Denham



Follow-Ups: References: