>a broad team of highly qualified and indisputably unbiased
investigators, who
>are given time and money in amounts commensurate with the task, finds no
>evidence of any adverse human health effects from recently available
>genetically engineered crops, would this be good or bad news?
I think one of the key elements, if not THE key element here, is TIME.
If given the TIME "commensurate wit the task", we would all be long dead
before the report were ever issued. And I would certainly hope that the
finding was that such materials have no adverse health effects on the
human race. But the overwhelming evidence against such a possibility
(evidence from other studies of so-called harmless compounds that have
proven to be very harmful over time), is such that I would not want to
wait for the study to be completed before banning the use of these
products. Ban them first; study them for 50 years and see if there is
any evidence that they could be harmful. If any evidence, even a very
small incidence, is found, retain the ban.
Remember that several of the corporations that are developing and
selling these things are the same companies that developed and sold (and
tried very hard to convince us there was no problem with) products that
turned out to be very dangerous. DDT, PCPs, Dioxin, and others.
--Dan in Sunny Puerto Rico--