What follows is not an economic question. I have no expertise in genetic engineering, though I am a skeptic, worried about possible consequences -- and even more worried about corporations is having property rights in such matters. Here is the background to my question:
They are very successful breeders. Each pair of cane toads can lay 33,000 eggs per spawning (some published references estimate they produce as much as 60,000 eggs!). They are also an ecological disaster.
My question is, do we have anything to learn from the experience with the introduction of invasive species?
The simple answer is that we should learn from all of our mistakes (and successes). One thing to keep in mind about genetic engineering is that it has been going on for thousands of years. Have you ever seen a dog or eaten an apple? The difference today is that it can be done much more efficiently, which is a double-edged sword.
ReplyDeleteMy feelings about modern genetic engineering are not dissimilar to my feelings about capital punishment or presidents of the United States: I'm not opposed in principle, but I don't trust the people who are eager to do it.
GE and selective breeding are not the same thing.
ReplyDeleteExactly one of the following statements is true:
ReplyDelete1. "I have no expertise in genetic engineering."
2. "GE and selective breeding are not the same thing."
Look, breeding apples and breeding dogs is not the same thing (dogs have bigger sex organs), but the biological effect is identical: one or more genes is altered in future generations. The difference is the process used to get there, not the biology. By definition, any method used to change genes selectively in future generations is genetic engineering. Ah, but you were thinking of the use of recombinanat DNA, or "gene splicing". My point, which you choose to ignore, is that it's just a matter of efficiency.
“Exactly one of the following statements is true:
ReplyDelete1. "I have no expertise in genetic engineering."
2. "GE and selective breeding are not the same thing."’
Not exactly. GE is a type of selective breeding, and note that all breeding is selective - it just depends upon whom or what is doing the selecting. Generally, selective breeding refers to instances where humans act as agents of selection rather than organisms breeding in nature without the influence or interference of said species.
Which gets to the point of “it's just a matter of efficiency.” This is the rather simplistic point that some proponents of GE take either because they know no better and thus believe it or that taking this position gives them carte blanche to do as they please. Without getting into details (I am a biologist but not a genetic engineer per se) I’d say that from all that I have seen and read and discussed that when it comes to living organisms and ecosystems it is best to proceed with caution. They almost always turn out to be more complicated than we can imagine.
I have no expertise in genetic engineering but GE (once of Dow-Jones Industrials fame) has proclaimed over the years that it " ... brings good things to life." Now if only GE's stock could be revived. Jack Welch's genes might help.
ReplyDelete"My question is, do we have anything to learn from the experience with the introduction of invasive species?"
ReplyDeleteYes.
Patent protection becomes paramount as part of the process, which is the driver for the industry. Does the WTO protect the results of genetic manipulation? Monopolized markets are the goal.
ReplyDelete