I don't necessarily agree that the precautionary principle is bad science in
all cases. If the suggested harm is extreme, as in the case of toxic waste
or global harm, or something of that magnitude, then it might be good
science. In this case the projected harm is a "maybe" allergic reaction. So,
there is the problem. And, I'm not sure it is bad science so much as
anti-science. GMO has become a sort of Frankenphobia. The symptoms are most
evident in the EU where GMO products have had an almost complete ban with no
evidence being presented about it. GMO protests in Great Britain have become
socially acceptable, sort of like anti-war protests. Most of the anti-GMO
Web sites simply make the assumption that GMO is 'bad' and should be banned.
I'm suspicious of GMO, especially when I see things like rabbits being given
jellyfish genes so that they will glow in the dark, but the science of the
situation is far from clear as yet.
Steven
http://www.du.edu/~sbissell
What we lost with that wild, primal existence
was a way of being for which the era of
agriculture and civilization lacks counterpoise.
Human life is the poorer for it.
Paul Shepard
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of William J.
McKinney, Ph.D.
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Illegal GE Corn Found in Taco Shells
At 11:00 AM 9/20/00 -0600, you wrote:
>No, I think we are witnessing an interesting aspect of the rise of
>anti-science.
Of course, I would argue that the precautionary principle is bad science...
so I think we are in agreement here!
Bill
****************************************
William J. McKinney, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Chairperson
Department of Philosophy and Religion
MS4200
Southeast Missouri State University
Cape Girardeau, MO 63701
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
voice: 573-651-2818
fax: 573-651-2200
**************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|