But you have to get people to believe the explanation. Otherwise they'll just say "the market will provide genetically engineered resistant honeybees". "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Corn wouldn't be affected at all, for a start, being wind pollinated. Isn't that true of most of the grasses?
And then we must talk about mounting consequences of "unintended" consequences. If you intend nothing but a quick profit, that is what you get.
I just looked up info on the other huge-tonnage crop: Soybean plants are self-pollinating, auto-incestuous creatures. Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
Or was it a bad dream? Seems harder to tell these days. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
You want to prevent propagation through the greenhouse walls, not only into or out of them. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
These are some dedicated folks. I've seen pictures of guys dangling from ropes on a vertical seacliff busy with their little brushes.
the market will provide genetically engineered resistant honeybees
People do not have to be convinced beyond any doubt. Hell, the Iraq war was allowed very easily.
Simple cautionary logic is just not being applied - that's why it looks like non-starter. No one wishes to be good in repeating: Is it worth to give yet another few reckless project every convenience to prosper at dire risk to everyone. Would it be a really big problem if caution will make some "opportunites" more difficult?
Just look at education of kids today to see the modern mindsetting. Everything has to be fun: learning manners must be fun, spelling must be fun, math must be fun, taxes must be fun, elections must be fun. You don't have to do anything in life that is not fun! You don't have to do anything that does not benefit you immediately! You don't have to worry about anything, but your weekend! Everything you do can be (and must be) easy!
The standards for clinical and field trials keep being eroded on "efficiency" and "growth" [read: profit] grounds.
Look at REACH as a model: any chemical that is not demonstrably safe will be phased out.
It's not for people to show that GM is unsafe, but for the GM industry to show their product is safe. Unfortunately, "safe to humans" seems not to be enough in this case, but it shouldn't have been. After all, insecticides may be developed for a given parasitic species but may harm other useful ones. And biologists know this stuff. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Ms. ATinNM worked on antibiotic resistence transfer factors in the mid 70s. Her lab was showing the use of Tetracyline in animal food, only used to increase the weight gain per pound of food, was creating Tetracyline resistent bacteria in the human gut. The major researcher pissed someone off at the FDA and the lab was shut down.
Just as snark: the lab got its samples of environmental e. coli by swabing the tables of the local McDonald's.
A pleasure I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude
But perhaps there is some connection between making today's news (etc.) fun and making the next decade or century miserable. And perhaps I'm forgetting other non-"fun" dimensions of a life well lived. Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
But it is quite fooling yourself to call everything you have to do fun. Come on, cleaning cat's corner is not the same fun as playing with mum. You clean cat's corner to have actual fun later (better smell in the room, happier and healthier cat), or rather, to keep having (perhaps diminishing) fun with the cat.
In a sense, we can bring now all desired experience to the common fun denominator because we can afford to. (So far, perhaps.) In harder times, you do things for living, not so much for fun.
Habits and prejudices can be stronger than drive for pleasure, for (mostly) good reasons.
