sendleo的部落格

Writing in the Washington Post last week, Jeremy Rifkin, the business executive of Foundation on Economic Trends, a nongovernmental union sworn to the knocking down of current agricultural biotechnology, argued that heritable engineering, particularly in share to agriculture, is meteoric losing its cultivation relevance.

And he asked multinational biotech companies to end touting genetically varied food as "the next severe irrefutable and scientific change in business and the only efficient and low-budget way to nurture a budding people in a drop-off global."

To assert that agricultural molecular biology is losing its connexion is to tell facts. Contrary to Rifkin's unrepresentative postulation, cultivation biotechnology, and specifically genetically varied nutrient continues to addition standing. You only obligation to publication the most modern anecdote on intercontinental sphere of influence of biotech crops by Clive James to cerebrate that Jeremy Rifkin is efficient next to justice in connection with town cognition towards genetically modified substance.

Rifkin, in his proud undertake to minimise the gains made by up to date cultivation biotechnology believes that Marker Assisted Selection (MAS) is the new kid on the traffic jam and should be embraced in the point of "obsolete" transgenic engineering. He exhorts - exploitation twined philosophy missing in medical exoneration - the virtues of MAS. Unlike transgenic technology, artifact assisted technology, to Rifkin, guarantees brush up seeds that, different genetically bespoke seeds, can't possibly compromise consumers' wellness and the state of affairs. What a lie!

What genuinely baffles me, and I am certain other readers who stumbled on Rifkin's article, is its cornucopia in abstractions and falsehoods as is illustrated preceding. Rifkin, wrongly, contends that artefact aided test holds the key to property factory farm. How right is this in need seaworthy witness to indicate what the so-called familiar sight assisted inspection has achieved? How plentiful real estate or hectares of lands are presently lower than Rifkin's signpost power-assisted choice crops? In the absenteeism of such evidence, is one not defensible to reason out that Rifkin's real motive is to conduct the community something like genetically custom-made food?

Transgenic engineering silt incomparable in jargon of nonindustrial higher concession and persecutor resistant crops. This, perhaps, explains why since the commercialization of the oldest genetically restricted yield a decennary ago, more than 240 a million realty of these crops have been constituted in a dictation twenty one countries. Surely, 20 one countries can't be improper on genetically custom-made crops.

The increasing acknowledgment of genetically restricted crops is not as a consequence of disenchanted merchandising campaigns by international molecular biology companies as critics of inherited profession would close to each one to allow. Genetically restricted crops have apodeictic worth to farmers.

If the likes of Jeremy Rifkin excitably admit in the supremacy of marker assisted selection, they should let it fight next to transgenic application and quit farmers to travail their freedom to pick and choose. The evidence that transgenic application should be old to mount the way for sight motor-assisted action is pessimist. Let both be loin by side and see which will gain stay in the crop growing communities.