Wednesday, March 22, 2000, 11:13:35 AM, you wrote:
WB> Doug et. al.:
WB> This morning on 'Good Morning America' was a story about a
WB> California Biotech company which will begin offering cloneing of
WB> pets to the wealthy (I missed the price tag). Your statement may
WB> be more precognitive than you realize.
I'm not surprised. That things have gone as far as they have (and will
continue to do so) IS ridiculous, but that's evidently obvious only to
some of us. This doesn't eliminate the serious nature of the problem,
nor does it obviate the need a for a solution. In fact, there are less
obvious antecedents to this that continue to go largely unnoticed.
(Grafting trees is one, and having mentioned it has brought little
It seems like most folks have settled into being consumers of the
seemingly variated life style options offered by the system that
cultured them. Cloning is simply an additional step in the same
direction. The homogenous mediocrity, the complacence, the
acquiescence, the apathy, the lack of conviviality and identification
with causes, the lack of unity, the lack of criteria - are nothing
new. And how much can I worry about it? I left that. (There was only
one whole generation of my blood line in it).
I will try to post a summary defining the juxtaposition between a
evolutionary whole organism / biosystems approach on the one hand and
the chemical formula approach on the other, just to see if the fish
are biting - when time permits.
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
WB> -----Original Message-----
WB> From: Douglas Hinds [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
WB> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 9:31 AM
WB> To: Klaus Wiegand
WB> Cc: email@example.com
WB> Subject: Re: fermentation products
WB> Hi Klaus,
WB> Wednesday, March 22, 2000, 1:45:54 AM, you wrote:
KW>> hello douglas,
KW>> ... to add some spice to the discussion, where (and if at all) gene
KW>> technology should stop, here's another option:
KW>> Christians For The Cloning Of Jesus - use DNA samples from the
KW>> Shroud of Turin. ALIVE!!
WB> Why stop with JC? A whole living wax museum could be reconstituted and
WB> promoted as a circus - just imagine the possibilities: Freud,
WB> Einstein, Jesus of Nazereth, Adolf Hitler, Joan of Arc, Attila the
WB> Hun, Gengis Khan, John F Kennedy, FDR, Malcom X and more - all under
WB> one roof. It would be a real money maker.
WB> Unfortunately, while this suggestion is more obviously ridiculous, it
WB> obeys the same myopic reasoning and mentality motivating current GMO
WB> development in agriculture. The importance of historical context and
WB> evolutionary congruence (a field not yet defined scientifically), is
WB> blanked out of the process of GMO development. The concept is not so
WB> much as even recognized by those involved, and this is a grave error
WB> on their part, as well as on the part of the governmental agencies
WB> responsible for overseeing public health and environmental concerns in
WB> the US.
WB> Fortunately, other participants in the scientific community do
WB> perceive inconsistencies and potential dangers as inherent with the
WB> recombinant approach, particularly where not needed nor appropriate
WB> (i.e. in agriculture, rather to correct biomedical pathologies), and
WB> the evidence that should have been accumulated *before* releasing GMOs
WB> for public use in agriculture is now slowly but surely being compiled.
WB> The last minute attacks on those who question the viability of the
WB> whole proprietary GMO approach to agriculture will produce no lasting
WB> effects other than to eventually (but convincingly) discredit those
WB> who've sold out the public interest to the cause of private gain at
WB> the cost of an unforeseeable (in terms of proportions - and to those
WB> who choose not to look for it), uncontrollable and totally unnecessary
WB> environmental damage.
WB> This is not surprising, in view of the damage now being done under
WB> current conventional agricultural production systems, in spite of the
WB> plethora of better alternatives available but not receiving sufficient
WB> promotion - a form of protecting the commercial interests of those
WB> corporations who've invested in these proprietary but inappropriate
WB> "solutions" to the problems they've also (and consistently, from the
WB> same ego-centric rather than agro-centric perspective), perceived
WB> While a free market responds to hype, sustainable alternatives win out
WB> in the end, when they survive to do so - as long as the rules of the
WB> game (legislation and the mass media) are not excessively slanted to
WB> their detriment. That's where forums like sanet play an important,
WB> even indispensable role.
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 05 2000 - 20:00:32 EDT