QUOTE(b3ta @ Oct 12 2009, 03:08 PM)
cool. this taken from my writings about GM food a year ago.
"In my opinion, a person can look at it in 2 perspectives. U need not necessarily choose a stand, but it is important to understand the implications that come with both standpoints.
The 1st is the scientific, or rather practical view of things. With the recent global food shortage in certain regions around the world, escalating food prices have driven many families to a dead end. War zones, which have limited food supply needs an efficient food transportation system to feed armies. GM food, which are modified to be tougher and longer lasting, also providing certain perks have been seen as a viable solution. With these, foods can be transported to deeper regions in the world either as supplies or as aid. Thus far, with no reported substantial claims about negative effects of the consumption of GM food, the research in this field is seen as a win-win situation for all. From a practical point of view anyway.
The other way which u could look at it is from the ethical point of view. GM foods have been tempered with genetically, with genes studied and modified to produce desirable qualities. Creationists around the world have been opposing research into this field due to the very nature of it being against the laws of nature. (pun intended) Furthermore, there has also been questionable emphasis placed on the safety of the products produced, with not much data gathered on the effects of long-term consumption.
in my opinion, both sides of the argument are very plausible. This could go either way and is still generating controversies as i write."
In your opinion, both sides of the argument is possible. But in reality, the latter is completely ridiculous and impossible. First of all the "law of nature" is a fallacious fantasy crafted by delusional people who believe this world is being destroyed by 'evil' doings of mankind and many people buy these ideas cause they are simply ignorant towards basic science. They'd rather rattle like empty bottles than to spend some time in the library reading books.
What is so unnatural about "genetic engineering"? Even if you don't believe in dinosaurs and evolution, scientist has seen with their own eyes that genetic changes occurs very frequently in almost every organism. Sexual reproduction, viruses, pollination, spontaneous errors during genetic replication are all common example of how genetic structure and sequence keep changing. If you believe in evolution, then for us to have come to the kind of biodiversity (alot alot of different kind of living things) that we have today means there has been a great deal of genetic changes so far. If I were to stand in front of you and ask you "Do we look the same?" you'd definitely answer "No". The reason why we all look different is because in sexual reproduction, the genetic makeup are always altered abit. Yes, as a whole, my DNA is very very similar to yours, but that slight difference makes you look different.
People always retort, "Yea that's how it happens naturally but GE is when people play around with genes in labs". Hmm lets examine this problem. If a farmer were to take seed and plants it all over him farm and later harvest them, would you say that is something unnatural? Would you say that his crops is not natural since he planted them instead of plucking them from the forest? Obviously no! It doesn't matter if it is the wind, or the birds, or any other animal or humans who carry these seeds from one place to the other and let them sprout and grow. It is the same with genes, instead of having the mix themselves up in the cells of living things, we not have the tool small enough to see and move them around? We humans are part of the system, part of nature too. Whatever we do, be it plant fruits, rear cows, build houses, hunt whales destroy the ozone or end the world with a bunch of nukes, it's all natural. Nature doesn't always work to preserve what there is now, it's constantly changing. A volcanic eruption can kill many things but also give life to other, so as a flood or hurricane. You think hunting whales till they become extict is unnatural? Actually among animals themselves, competition and hunting drives many species to extinction it's just that we don't realize it because we can't be keeping track of every single unique DNA there is in the world and see which one goes extinct. Don't twist my words either, I am not saying everything that humans do is right or wrong good or bad, that is a totally different question. All I am saying is that we and whatever we do is part of nature.
Another fallacy is that genetic engineering is is harmful to health because it is 'unnatural". If you eat poisonous mushroom you'll die even though it's "natural". Even the bird shit that falls on your car is "natural", though I'll bet you'll get diarrhea from eating it. Just because it's something that exist already doesn't mean it is safe for health. GM food is very safe because they are just altering how it grows and what it produces. They can make it grow faster, bigger, contain more of a certain nutrient and so on. It's not some random mad scientist experiment. They identify exactly what gene causes what decide what gene they wanna put into the plant or animal. Just because your chicken got fatter or your carrot has more vitamin A doesn't mean it's gonna turn poisonous whether in the short run or long run.
Aug 9 2009, 09:38 PM
Quote
0.0168sec
1.28
6 queries
GZIP Disabled