I recommend the book edited by Brian Tokar, "Redesigning Life," as a 
place to start on this discussion. If you'd like, I'll send a reading 
list from the anti-GMO end.

But why do we have to re-argue old arguments if people on this list 
refuse to hear what's been said in the past. To claim that "all plant 
and animal breeding is, in fact, genetic engineering", albeit with 
"one hand tied behind the back," misses the fundamental points that 
make g.e. DIFFERENT than hybridization, and that have been explicated 
here and elsewhere for years. Need we do that again? To the same 
people who didn't listen the first ten times?

My point -- Is this an honest discussion, with people who have open 
minds (hey, I'm willing to hear new arguments about G.E., but not the 
same old sillyness from those whose ears have walls) -- or is it just 
a chance to belch out corporate propaganda? And to what purpose would 
we revisit this theme, other than the new push being made by the 
biotech industry to gain acceptance for g.e. agro-fuels?


At 04:09 AM 8/26/2008, you wrote:
>Those still tied to attacks on genetic engineering and the European 
>ban on GM foods should listen to the discussion begun today on BBC 
>Radio 4 Farming Today.
>Today's progtramme is available on the web at 
>which for the next 7 days will give acces to the programme on "Listeb Again",
>British agricultural science establishments are currently reduced to 
>operating "with one hand tied behind their back" by the current ban 
>on genetic engineering in Europe.
>Non-scientists still refuse to udnerstand that all plant and animal 
>breeding is, in fact, genetic engineering "with one hand tied behind the back".