RE: [pf] Dr. John Hagelin's testimony to EPA's Scientific Advisory Panel

by David A

15 December 2000 17:41 UTC

Emory,

Sorry to disappoint, but I'm not up on these other claims and am also 
too busy to research them right now. I only knew about Pustzai from a 
discussion we had here a few months ago. 

This issue has gotten so polemical that frankly I am wary of claims from 
nearly everybody. It's almost reached the status of a religion. So many 
things are propagated on the Internet and to unravel them is a lot of 
work -- for example, these claims as originally written in the 
Providence Journal didn't even cite specific studies, which would seem 
to me to be the very first step in communicating something of this sort. 
Maybe, like Pustzai, they're all urban legends. Maybe they're not. I'm 
sure one could dig the studies out. Then I'm sure that pro-GM forces 
have countered them as bad science or something. Then I'm sure that 
anti-GM sides have countered those as written by sell-outs, then 
Greenpeace is defamed, then someone calls the other a fascist, until 
finally you can't even be sure of what color underwear you're wearing.

There's a big article in the 12/15 SCIENCE about all this: "The 
Ecological Risks and Benefits of Genetically Engineered Plants," L. L. 
Wolfenbarger and P. R. Phifer," SCIENCE VOL 290 15 DECEMBER 2000 
2088093. It's archived on the 12/14 issue of AgBioView if anyone wants 
to read it, at http://agbioview.listbot.com. The paper is also written 
about in today's NY TIMES: 
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/15/science/14BIOT.html

Now I am going to eat my GM-infested lunch.

David

"If we had not evolved to the point where we could muck about, something 
else would have and we just have to learn our way through them. That's 
what we're about. That's what evolution is about and that's what we're 
here for. It seems to me that all kinds of organisms manipulate their 
environments one way or another, and if you don't believe me, take a 
look at what your dog does to your backyard."

     -- Walter Truett Anderson, Humanity 3000 Proceedings





Mullen, Emory wrote:
> David,
> 
> I appreciate the 'dissenting' view on Dr. Hagelin.  As Jill points out, 
> it
> could be biased criticism-I cannot verify this though.  So much 
> information
> to sort through!  However, what do you say to the information regarding 
> the
> examples of mishaps with genetic engineering that I pasted from the 
> first
> article below?  Unfortunately I don't have all the time to do the 
> research
> on the claims (I guess I'm assuming you have or will research these 
> claims
> because you are more thorough and determined than me).
> 
> From soil to superviruses: In 1994, a genetically engineered bacterium
> developed to aid in the production of ethanol produced residues that
> rendered the land infertile. New crops planted on this soil grew three
> inches tall and fell over dead. 
> 
> The food chain: In 1996, scientists discovered that ladybugs that had 
> eaten
> the aphids that had eaten genetically engineered potatoes died. 
> 
> The immune system: In 1998, research by Dr. Arpad Pusztai uncovered the
> potential for genetically altered DNA to weaken the immune system and 
> stunt
> the growth of baby rats. 
> 
> Monarch butterflies: In May 1999, researchers at Cornell University
> discovered that monarch butterflies died unexpectedly from eating 
> milkweed
> plants that had been dusted with the pollen of genetically engineered Bt
> corn. 
> 
> Pregnant mice: A 1998 study showed that DNA from the food fed to 
> pregnant
> mice ended up in their intestinal lining, white blood cells, brain
> cells,and their fetuses. This suggests that the genetically engineered 
> DNA
> in the food we eat can end up in our own cells. 
> 
> Honeybees: Last May, a leading European zoologist found the genes from
> genetically engineered canola jumped the species barrier and were picked 
> up
> by the bacteria in the digestive tracts of bees. This indicates that
> antibiotic-resistant genes in genetically engineered foods can cause the
> bacteria in our own intestines to mutate into superbugs that cannot be
> killed by antibiotics. 
> 
> Superviruses: Viral promoters are invasive agents used by genetic 
> engineers
> to trick a cell into accepting and integrating an alien gene into the
> cell's own DNA. Some scientists predict that releasing viral promoters 
> into
> the gene pool could lead to the creation of superviruses and novel
> infectious diseases for organisms at every level of life--from bacteria 
> to
> humans. 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:       Jill Taylor Bussiere [SMTP:jdt@itol.com]
> > Sent:       Thursday, December 14, 2000 8:16 AM
> > To: pf
> > Subject:    Re: [pf] Dr. John Hagelin's testimony to EPA's Scientific
> > Advisory Panel
> > 
> > David A.,
> >     Someone's losing their job over their criticism of Genetically altered
> > plants is not an indication of bad science, but rather as a threat.
> > 
> >     My understanding of the UK Royal Society is that they were promoting
> > GE
> > foods and crops - anyone else know about that?  Don't have time to check
> > this morning. Again, if this is the case, their criticism doesn't count
> > for
> > much.
> > 
> >     Also, being from an "accepted and honored" university these days may
> > well mean that you are in cahoots with those pushing genetically
> > engineered
> > crops and food.
> > 
> >     So none of your arguments carry much weight with me - unless I am
> > wrong
> > about the UK Royal Society.
> > 
> >     Again, David A., I am puzzled by your view towards genetically
> > engineered foods.  You don't need to put it forth again, as I have 
> > already
> > heard your enthusiasm.  But it seems to me unbridled and uncautious.  
> > Both
> > those characteristics can be dangerous when dealing with new creations 
> > and
> > technology.
> > 
> >                 Jill
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: David A <davidnh@visto.com>
> > To: <positive-futures@igc.topica.com>
> > Cc: <davd@ihug.co.nz>; <robt_m@talk.co.nz>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 6:13 AM
> > Subject: RE: [pf] Dr. John Hagelin's testimony to EPA's Scientific
> > Advisory
> > Panel
> > 
> > 
> > > David MacClement wrote:
> > > > John Hagelin testified:
> > > >> The immune system: In 1998, research by Dr. Arpad Pusztai
> > > >> uncovered the potential for genetically altered DNA to weaken the >>
> > > >> immune system and stunt the growth of baby rats.
> > >
> > > Pusztai's results were roundly criticized as bad science by the UK's
> > > Royal Society, and in fact he lost his job over it. See an earlier pf
> > > discussion for more specifics:
> > > http://csf.colorado.edu/forums/pfvs/2000/msg03957.html
> > >
> > > Moreover, Hagelin, affiliated with the Maharishi University in Iowa, is
> > > hardly seen as the most upstanding of scientists
> > > (http://www.trancenet.org/nlp/physics/index.shtml), and many of his
> > > former collaborators, including John Ellis at CERN, have distanced
> > > themselved from him
> > > (http://www.trancenet.org/nlp/physics/superstring.shtml).
> > >
> > > David