Hello Steven B.,
I agree with you. For me, this potential for GM to disrupt is the real
issue and not just for environmentalists. And it is the present limit to
our understanding of the possibilities that creates the ethical issue *at
this time*. We just do not know enough about the consequences nor about the
significance of the consequences. Thus today I do not like GM. I may never
like it. But it seems to me that the mapping has become perhaps the most
important human endeavor today. There is so much yet to learn.
Thanks for your comments, Steven.
Ray
---------------------
> Well, I can't seem to get much interest in this topic for some reason, so
> I've been doing some reading and some thinking. At first I was not
convinced
> that GM was much of an issue for those of us interested in environmental
> ethics, but I'm starting to change my mind. The recent "mapping" of the
> human genome and resultant press has made me wonder if the scientists and
> policy wonks really grasp the significance of all this. I believe, but I
> could be wrong, that the human genome is only the second or third mapped
> genome. I think the others are one bacteria (E. coli) and fruit flies
> (Drosophilae), if there are others I'd be interested to know.
>
> In other words, we are only on the edge of understanding the variety of
> genotypes on Earth, and a long way from understanding the
> inter-relationship. We don't yet know much about the inter-relationship of
> species, let alone individuals, despite all the claims of ecologists. For
> the most part the autecology of species is a mystery. We are mostly agreed
> that human induced extinctions are a major issue of environmental
ethicists,
> which is why I posted the article about cloning an extinct species. So, my
> attention and concern about GM has been directed there. Here is a quote
from
> "The Gold Bug Variations" by Richard Powers (if you haven't read this, do
> so).
>
> "The specter is more terrifying than mass extinction. The annihilation of
> most of the globe seem survivable so long as some fraction of the message
> remained interact. But if monstrous meaninglessness propagates with the
> speed and exactitude of natural transmission, everything is over. The loss
> of a great library to fire is a tragedy. But the surreptitious
introduction
> of thousands of untraceable errors into reliable books, errors picked up
and
> distributed endlessly by tireless researchers, is nightmare beyond
measure.
>
>
> Powers was, in fact, talking about induced mutations, but the idea remains
> the same. The potential of GM to disrupt, massively, the evolved genomes
of
> thousands of species is, IMO, an issue we should be thinking about. I am a
> scientist, and I'm not a luddite, in fact I'm pretty critical of that sort
> of thinking. I guess the recent discussion about the unabomber got me
> thinking about that. However, I'm beginning to wonder if GM is such a good
> idea at this time. I have no doubt that the mapping of the human genome
> will, in time, promote health and long life to most of humanity, but I
worry
> about the disruption of natural cycles, including disease and such, on the
> rest of life.
>
> Just a morning, not mourning, thought.
> sb
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|