This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: biotech unravelled

On 2/14/02 10:43 AM, "Yvonne Cunnington" <ycunnington@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> For an extremely interesting article, check out Unraveling the DNA Myth: The
> spurious foundation of genetic engineering in February's Harper's Magazine.
> The author is Barry Commoner, senior scientist at the Center for the Biology
> of Natural Systems at Queens College, City University of New York, where he is
> the director of the Critical Genetics Project. Dense reading, but
> extraordinarily interesting for garden writers on the hazards of genically
> engineered transgenic plants and the reason for the proliferation of genomic
> studies over the past 20 years.
> 
> The article's last sentences: "The irony, of course, is that the biotechnology
> industry is based on science that is forty years old and conveniently devoid
> of more recent results, which show that there are strong reasons to fear the
> potential consequences of transferring a DNA gene between species. What the
> public fears is not the experimental science but the fundamentally irrational
> decision to let it out of the laboratory into the real world before we truly
> understand it."

Having read this article as a biologist, I think it is important that
members of this forum, who communicate regularly with the public, be fully
informed about the issues.

There may be reasons to be concerned about genetically engineered organisms,
but the ones discussed by Barry Commoner in his Harpers' article are
probably not among them.

Commoner claims that "the biotechnology industry is based on science that is
forty years old and conveniently devoid of more recent results."  That
statement is patently false.  Biotechnology would not be possible without
the incoporation of many discoveries made in the last 40 years.  What
happened [more than] 40 years ago was that it was conclusively demonstrated
that DNA is the hereditary material, controlling the form and activities of
the organism by controlling protein synthesis.  Nothing in the thousands
upon thousands of research papers that have been published on the topic
since 1958 has changed that basic conclusion.  Yes, as is always the case
with science, the original concepts have been expanded and, in minor ways,
corrected to accord with experimental and observational results, but the DNA
theory still stands as one of the best substantiated theories in all of
science.

A good test of a theory is its ability to produce results.  The entire
modern science of molecular biology has grown from Crick and Watson's
original papers.  Countless medical advances and the biotechnology industry
have also arisen from this source.  It works.

Commoner is correct in stating in his article that gene expression is
modified and partially controlled by proteins.  This is correct.  But those
proteins are made under the control of other DNA genes.  By suggesting
(largely  by omission) in his article that those proteins come from
somewhere else, Commoner is slanting his case.  He sets up a straw man which
he then easily knocks over.

Barry Commoner, originally an ecologist and population biologist, and one of
the founders of the environmentalist movement, has a long history of
stubborn and ill-founded opposition to the DNA theory.  He has significantly
modified his stand so that he no longer claims that proteins are the genetic
material, but it appears that he (almost alone among biologists) remains
unconvinced about DNA.  His position in modern biology is extremely
isolated.  The appearance of this article in Harpers', rather than in a
scientific journal, suggests that few if any of Commoner's colleagues share
his views.

That doesn't mean that he is necessarily wrong, but it does mean that the
probability that he is right, and a myriad of well-trained and highly
competent researchers in molecular biology are wrong, is very small.  The
role of the maverick is over-valued in our society.  The experts very
infrequently get it wrong--that's why they're experts--and the fact that
very rarely a lone voice crying in the wilderness turns out to be right
doesn't mean that every off-center viewpoint is correct.

Commoner seems more concerned that genes implanted into plants won't
function than he is that they might escape to invade other plants and there
cause great trouble.  In fact, the escape of engineered genes is THE major
concern in the environmental impact of genetic manipulation.  It's the Law
of Unintended Consequences again.

My judgement is that Commoner is using public concerns about genetic
engineering to ride his ancient nag of a hobbyhorse--opposition to the DNA
theory--into the public spotlight again.

Particularly now that it has reached an industrial scale, biotechnology must
be watched and regulated carefully.  I am confident that that is being done,
but not so confident that it will continue to be so under the impact of big
money provided to congress and the administration by agribusiness concerns.
Our problems with this technology are not going to be scientific ones, but
social and political ones.  The danger of articles like Commoner's is that
it may induce some to relax their vigilance.

Bill Shear
Department of Biology
Hampden-Sydney College
Hampden-Sydney VA 23943
(434)223-6172
FAX (434)223-6374
email<wshear@email.hsc.edu>
Moderating e-lists:
Coleus at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coleus
Opiliones at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/opiliones
Myriapod at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/myriapod
MilliPEET website at
http://www.fmnh.org/research_collections/zoology/zoo_sites/millipeet/home.ht
ml

"The editors of newspapers, the popular clergy, politicians and orators of
the day and office-holders, though they may be thought to be of very
different politics and religion, are essentially one and homogeneous,
insamuch as they are only the various ingredients of the froth which ever
floats on the surface of society."
Henry David Thoreau, Journals, Aug. 9, 1858.

======== An American Classic ===========================
There's a good reason why Reader's Digest has long been one
of America's favorite magazines. Find out why that's true by
trying a risk-free subscription now!
http://click.topica.com/caaacQ3bUrGSSbVSZwBf/TopOffers
=================================================

GWL has searchable archives at: 
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters/
If you have photos for GWL, send them to gwlphotos@hort.net and they will show up at  http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos/ 
**************************************************

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: topica.com@spamfodder.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrGSS.bVSZwB
Or send an email to: Gardenwriters-unsubscribe@topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index