Prince Charles on GE
(Thanks to Cliff Kinzel for distributing this through the Ban-GEF
newsgroup)
EXCERPT ON GENETIC ENGINEERING FROM THE 1996 LADY EVE BALFOUR MEMORIAL
LECTURE DELIVERED BY HRH THE PRINCE OF WALES AT THE BANQUETING HALL.
LONDON 19 SEPTEMBER 1996
Of course, biotechnology, genetic engineering, release of GMOs, call it
what you will is a particularly emotive subject, and I do not intend to
stoke those emotions tonight. I shall content myself with quoting from
the
January 1996 report of the government's Panel on Sustainable Development.
They acknowledge, as I do, that the release of genetically modified
organisms COULD lead to major advances in medicine, agriculture and the
good health of the environment. Then they go on to say, crisply and
clearly, that - and I quote:
"The introduction of GMOs must proceed with caution to ensure
that
any benefits now are not made at the expense of the safety and well-being
of future generations and their environment. Once released .... a GMO
cannot be recalled: the action is irreversible. More than in other areas
there is uncertainty about the long-term outcome of human actions and of
human ability to deal with the consequences. Introduced genes may over
time
spread to other organisms with consequences that cannot necessarity be
foreseen.
And they end with a stark warning when they say, and again I am
quoting their words:
"Unfortunately there are many recent examples of failure to
anticipate problems arising from the use of new technologies (such as
CFCs,
asbestos, pesticides and thalidomide). Potential consequences are more
uncertain where self-replicating organisms are introduced into the
environment.
I am not sure I have much to add to that: except to say that I
believe that we have now reached a moral and ethical watershed beyond
which
we venture into realms that belong to God, and to God alone. Apart from
certain medical applications, what actual right do we have to experiment,
Frankenstein-like, with the very stuff of life? We live in an age of
rights
- - it seems to me that it is about time our Creator had some rights too
...
I am sure that the Government's response, in the shape of a
consultative process and a national conference, will be a great help. And
it is, of course, reassuring to know that in this country we already have
one of the most open and thorough regulatory systems in the world for
assessing the possible consequences of releasing GMOs into the
environment.
But that system has not been designed to weigh up the benefits of this
dramatic new technology against the risks, nor can it compare the
biotechnological approach with more conventional ways of achieving the
same
ends. At the moment, as is so often the case with technology, we seem to
spend most of our time establishing what is technically possible, and
then
a little time trying to establish whether or not it is likely to be safe,
without ever stopping to ask whether it is something we SHOULD be doing
in
the first place. I believe that this particular technology is so powerful
and so far-reaching that we should seek ways of engaging a wide range of
people and interests in a thorough ethical debate about how and where it
should be applied.
I know that commissions are not altogether fashionable at the
moment, and that they are only as influential as the recipients of their
recommendations are prepared to make them, but I do wonder whether there
isn't a strong case for a standing body, like The Royal commission on
Environmental Pollution - which itself produced a crucial report on GMO
releases, as long ago as 1989. A Public Biotechnology Commission would
provide a forum for discussion by people with knowledge and vision of the
whole spectrum of possible effects, both good and bad. Such a body would
help to bridge the gap that I believe exists between a tiny group of
knowledgeable experts and the rest of us. At the moment I fear we are
equally susceptible to the arguments of vociferous and plausible vested
interests and to the somewhat apocalyptic scare-mongering of those for
whom
any scientific advance is anathema.
_________________________________________________________
Richard Wolfson, PhD
Campaign for Mandatory Labelling and Long-term
Testing of all Genetically Engineered Foods
Natural Law Party, 500 Wilbrod Street
Ottawa, ON Canada K1N 6N2
Tel. 613-565-8517 Fax. 613-565-1596
email: rwolfson@concentric.net
Our website, http://www.natural-law.ca/genetic/geindex.html
contains more information on genetic engineering.
To receive regular news on genetic engineering and this
campaign, please send an email message with 'subscribe GE'
in the subject line to rwolfson@concentric.net To
unsubscribe, please send the message 'unsubscribe GE'
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
--------- End forwarded message ----------
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".