Yes, but with cattle a farmer can keep what he chooses without affecting
his neighbours; not so with bees and there lies the crucial difference.  We
see the same thing with GM crops.

This isn't really so, in any case. The farmer's livestock may not get out of the field, but there is a whole slew of contagious diseases that can and do. So keeping animals and crops has always been a community enterprise. Some things you can keep on the farm and some you can't.

That isn't to say that it's OK for GM pollen to flow willy-nilly any more than it's OK for GM fish to escape into the wild populations, or that using GM insects is perfectly harmless. But there is a difference between (1) actual harm as determined by evidence, (2) legitimate potential for harm, and (3) unwarranted fear of harm based upon ignorance and paranoia. 

A great many people seem confused about the difference between science based studies and philosophical evaluations based on a sense of what is right and wrong. I am not saying either one is infallible nor on particularly shaky ground. Plenty of scientific studies are pure crap and the world would be even more chaotic that it is, were it not for deep thinkers. 

Ultimately, though, I believe it is about consensus building. If you think a thing is wrong, and you think people should be persuaded to think as you do, get to work on it. But come prepared with evidence and clear explanations. Because a lot of people can smell fear and propaganda at a distance.

PLB

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm