"Some people seem not to have grasped the significance
   of moving genetic code between species, something
   that could never happen in nature."

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I am of
the impression that genetic science has discovered
that a wide range of species possess similar,
verily, common genes - although not all traits,
characteristics, or facets of these genes manifest
themselves in the formation of each creature or
plant in each of the creatures/organisms in those
so-called varied or different "species" (obviously).

What has been discovered is that a wide range of
what we call "life" possesses remarkable similarity
at the *genetic* level. Various 'things' are turned
on or enabled to be developed depending on the
"species" (remember, the concept of different "species"
predates genetic-level science - I liken it to early
claims that the world is *flat* before disproval
occurred and the true nature of the earth was
discovered).

We aren't all as different as we *think* we area,
therefore, I am going to extrapolate that inter-species
gene splicing doesn't carry the risks that some leap
to conclude.

RF Jim



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jinx" <joecolquitt@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:45 AM
Subject: Re: [OT]: Space travel disasters


> > Furthermore - we have already changed our food chain
> > through the process of selective breeding
>
> The difference between relatively harmless selective breeding
> and genetic modification is enormous. Some people seem
> not to have grasped the significance of moving genetic code
> between species, something that could never happen in nature.
> Selectively breeding tomatoes by grafting and cross-pollination
> is one thing, but inserting bacterial genetic code into a tomato is
> quite another - some would say monstrous. One of the claims I
> find totally unpalatable (as unpalatable as supermarket tomatoes)
> is that "we can feed the world with better crops". This ignores the
> fact that there is enough food to go around but tinpot regimes and
> civil wars put a stop to the even distribution of it. Bottom line is what
> it's always been - money. Even at the amateur gardener level there
> are already suspicions that seed is modified so that (a) the plants
> grown from it are sterile, so you have buy a whole new lot next season
> and (b) that the seeds and "recommended" fertiliser (made of course
> by the same company) must be used together, as there's something
> in the fertiliser that is missing from the seed
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads