[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Gene Tinkering: YOU Are The Mice And They Don't Want You to Know
Mike Zauzig wrote:
> > Carter Fields wrote:
> > 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.
>
> "Induced mutation"? That has a nice, soothing sound to it. Like,
> you're
> just kinda helping old Mother Nature move along.
>
> OK. Now explain to me how you "monitor for adverse events" when you
> don't have a thorough grasp of the system that the organism is a part
> of.
More to the point: you are NOT inducing mutation of existing genetic material within the
chemical soup it developed in, you are transplanting snippets of genetic material into
a totally alien biochemical environment. The analogy is to a crazy quilt of patches - or,
more dramatically, to Frankenstein: life made up of bits of life.
You mention monitoring results - but in fact the industry is lobbying to make such
monitoring IMPOSSIBLE. For example, Monsanto and others want to prevent labelling of
genetically altered foods, keeping you in the dark about the food you eat and making the
effects of these experiments untraceable. There will be no way to retrospectively link
health problems with Monsanto products (what clever lawyers they have!).
Go to a good library, and read what scientists said about the safety of DDT and related
insecticides. Read what the chemical companies said. Then read how the truth came out -
and how the chemical companies and the scientists (who are often beholden to these
companies financially) attacked the truth and denied responsibility. THEN read some
current statistics: these poisons are being sold by the ton to uneducated farmers in
unregulated areas of the world by these same cynical conglomerates.
Don't take the agribiz and chemical companies' assurances with a grain of salt. If there
were no risk, they'd be labelling genetically altered foods THEMSELVES as a marketing
ploy. Instead, they want to make any ill effects untraceable. Why? Because they
themselves are worried.
Joshua
References: