Responsible Science
GMOs
- Does the British Prime Minister Know What He is Talking About?
www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/responsible-science.htm
21 May 2002
Judging by the front page of Monday's Times (see below) 10 Downing St is already limbering up for the huge row which is likely to take place as the UK's GM farm-scale trials come to an end and the country has to grasp the 'to-commercialise or not to-commercialise' nettle.
The Prime Minister condemns what he calls the 'anti-science' fashion in the UK. But is the resistance he perceives a resistance to science, or simply a resistance to irresponsible science? To what degree does the Prime Minister understand the science himself when it comes to making a balanced judgement regarding the future of British and global agriculture?
Does he, for example, understand the difference between modern methods of biotechnology which incorporate recombinant DNA, and those which rely on 'marker assisted selection' instead?
Is he aware that the latter (which is acceptable to most anti-GM groups, including within the organic sector) actually has more potential to bring benefit to mankind than the former (which forms a core element in the irresponsible use of modern biotechnology due to the way in which it compromises the molecular integrity of organisms)?
Is he aware, indeed, that respected voices in the biotechnology sector consider that the most promising future for modern plant breeding lies in this 'third way'?
Is he aware that by promoting the use of GMOs in global food production he is taking the least optimum option on offer from modern biotechnology, when judged in terms of the most favourable risk-benefit ratios available?
Is he aware that the scientific debate has largely ignored discussion of such considerations, primarily because industry is mesmerised by the intellectual property rights that apply to genetically engineered organisms, rather than focusing on a full reflection of what is in the best interests of society and the environment as a whole?
Is he aware that such lack is driven by commercial influences, not disinterested scientific considerations?
It would be interesting to have the Prime Minister write an essay (unassisted by any ghost writer) on one side of A4 outlining what he understands of the distinction between these two different aspects of modern biotechnology; and what he understands about their relative implications for the future integrity of life of earth. Both are 'modern' (the word that mesmerises the Prime Minister) but their respective potential legacies for the future of mankind and his environment are poles apart.
It would be interesting to see the London Times putting such an invitation to the Prime Minister who has the special privilege of being able to get his views printed on the front pages of newspapers in a way that most others do not.
NATURAL LAW PARTY WESSEX
nlpwessex@bigfoot.com
www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex
Fundamental scientific conceptual errors
in the development of recombinant DNA technology
Letter
to Director General of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation
- June 2001
More
Information At
www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/gmocarto.htm
|
|
|