>
> In the past quarter century, however, the process changed from being a 
> shotgun approach, creating many random mutations, to a carefully targeted 
> process.  Using new gene manipulation methods, technicians design and 
> generate 'mutations' by methodically inserting specific promising genes, 
> rather than by merely creating genetic chaos and picking the 'good' 
> results--if any--from the mess of random natural, chemical and radiation 
> assisted mutation.
>
> we can understand that there is no magic difference between 'GMO' and 
> non-GMO crops.
What is certainly indisputable is that natural selection is quite different 
from the techniques employed in the genetic modification of plants. Thus 
far, Nature has not seen fit to insert strawberry genes into salmon, nor to 
develop corn varieties that are lethal to monarch butterflies. Also 
indisputable is that the driving force behind genetic modification is not 
providing more food for a hungry world or any of that sort of pr stuff--it's 
all about profit. After all, if feeding the hungry were the goal, why would 
Monsanto create terminator seeds? Why prohibit farmers from saving seed, 
which practice has been done since the beginnings of agriculture, and which 
has assured the security of seed biodiversity? If it were all about feeding 
the hungry, why is there presently such a strong focus on abandoning food 
production in favor of ethanol production (yes, lots of GM corn will be 
utilized in this endeavor)? So, now we are burning our food?

What is most indisputable is that the extent of the complexity of the 
natural world cannot be understood by humans. When we do things like insert 
genes from one species into another species that is completely dissimilar to 
the first, we are in essence tugging on one little strand of the web of 
life. Haven't we learned yet that that tug ripples throughout the rest of 
the web? Yes, scientific developments of the past century have been 
astonishing. Yet simply because we possess the mental capacity to do 
something, does not in itself mean we should in fact do it. How often, 
unaware of the implications of our actions, do we humans create situations 
that are worse than they were when we set out to "fix" things. Thalidimide 
anyone?

Jeffrey Hamelman
Hartland, Vermont

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---