GENTECH archive


Re: 100% Total Worldwide Ban of Genetically Engineered Foods, May 1, 1999 Update

Though I yesterday wrote that I support the idea of testing I would like to make
some more comments on this.
There are a few points that will make it very difficult to come to this point of
having research done that would be acknowledged by both parties. First,  Dr.
Pusztai was someone who was trusted by industry, until he came with results that
were not so much appreciated, to say it mildly. For years, industry has used Dr.
Pusztai's studies in order to get permission for field trials with specific
lectins. I think that industry still has to make a major apology to Dr. Pusztai.
Dr. Pusztai and his team would be one of the few teams that have the skill,
expertise and credibility to perform such research, as far as I am concerned.
Second: it will be very difficult to establish what exactly would be required to
have testing that would be acknowledged by both sides. I know that suggestions are
made to test GE food as thoroughly as medicines. I object to this since it is
exactly in the field of medicines where after thorough testing almost always side
effects in certain groups of people (or animals) show up.
Third: it may remain doubtful that all possible effects can ever be determined, no
matter how many tests are being performed.

wytze wrote:

> Dear Mr. Wengraf,
> I fully agree with your suggestion on having a test done by a reliable person
> that both sides could trust, and to my mind also should be around during  the
> testing process.
> Wytze de Lange
> David Wengraf wrote:
> >
> > Where did this executive summary originate? Was it Monsanto, Friends Of The
> > Earth, or an independent body?
> >
> > I think the most serious problem here is the lack of unbiased information.
> > The information in the post from Mr Ligotti, although it may be totally
> > correct, has been delivered in a way designed to scare readers, especially
> > the points below.
> >
> > I don't want to be rude to anyone, but wouldn't it be a good idea to pause
> > for a second or two, take a deep breath, and get some reliable tests done by
> > someone who both sides of this debate can trust?
> >
> > >    The chemical/genetic engineering industry has done this
> > >    secretly within the past three years.
> > >
> > >3.  The chemical/genetic engineering industry claims that
> > >    genetically engineered food is just a natural extension
> > >    of time-tested crossbreeding and hybridization. Actually this
> > >    is a new, experimental, very dangerous, AND radical technology.
> > >    The process causes unnatural mutation and combination of
> > >    DNA of our food in a manner which excludes nature out of
> > >    the process. This means we and our children are now eating
> > >    lab-created, mutated and experimental "fake" food. They are
> > >    experimenting, not only with us and our children, but with the
> > >    entire food chain.
> >
> > David Wengraf
> > MA Biotechnological Law And Ethics
> > Sheffield University, UK
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > The address for any administrative command like unsubscribe,
> > subscribe or help is:
> >
> >     
> >
> > The searchable WWW list archive is available at
> >
> >     
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> The address for any administrative command like unsubscribe,
> subscribe or help is:
> The searchable WWW list archive is available at