View Single Post
  #27   Report Post  
Old 01-10-2003, 06:12 PM
Mike Clark
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London

In article , Peter Ashby
URL:mailto
In article ,
Reid? wrote:

Following up to Paul Rooney

Hang about - GM is good, isn't it?

that's very much a matter of opinion isn't it Paul?

Efficient crops, disease-resistant veg, etc. Any evidence that it's
bad? Or is that just a *possibility*?


Indeed, its a risk, an unquantified one that could have
catastrophic results or might not. Then there are issues about
the way farmers loose the ownership of their seed and the
environmental damage of using pesticide resistant crops coupled
with the pesticide. To my mind, its not worth it.


Then stay away from conventional crops then, very far away. Because the
uncontrolled genetic changes used in their production must, using your
own logic, carry vastly more unquantified risk than a plant in which one
gene has been inserted under controlled conditions and then subjected to
rigorous testing and analysis to show it differs from its unmanipulated
cousins only by the introduced trait.


I agree with you that to have major health concerns because a product is
labelled as "GM" and to implicitly trust "organic" is not a sensible
position to adopt. After all many people already accept the use of GM
products with regard to everyday pharmaceutical products, or even
recombinant rennet (chymosin) as used in the production of many
"vegetarian" cheeses and dairy products. If vegetarian cheeses made
with GM chymosin [in which an enzyme from a cow is put into a yeast] are
considered safe, why are GM tomatoes [in which a protein from a fish is
put into a plant] considered dangerous? It obviously isn't a logical
reaction based on any scientific appreciation of the facts. Many
everyday non-GM plants are dangerous, and for example many beans and
lentils which we use every day in our food would kill us if we didn't
cook them properly to destroy the natural toxins they contain.

However there are other issues behind GM crops that go beyond a simple
consideration of the consequences to health. I consider a major point to
be the way that laws governing intellectual property rights are used to
manipulate commercial interests. Many GM crops are produced by
commercial organisations who are driven by market forces and who wish to
dominate the market place and eliminate their commercial competitors.
The driving force is often a simple consideration of profit for the
company and its shareholders, and doesn't necessarily put a strong
emphasis on what is best for the consumer or the farmer. The fact that
many GM crops contain tolerance to herbicides (and/or pesticides), which
are also protected by patents means that the same company can prevent
the farmer from sourcing products from rival companies by forcing him to
buy the seeds and the herbicide, and the pesticide, on their dictated
commercial terms.

So if you are debating whether GM is good or bad, don't just make it a
discussion centred around the health issues.


Mike URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/
--
M.R. Clark, PhD. Division of Immunology
Cambridge University, Dept. Pathology
Tennis Court Rd., Cambridge CB2 1QP
Tel.+44 1223 333705 Fax.+44 1223 333875