This letter concerns the Sept. 8 column by Aaron Woell, “Genetic experimentation: It’s all good”. Much of the article was misleading or false, and I would like to clarify a few points.

The belief that “tweaking the genes of people would allow us to leapfrog thousands of years of evolution with minimal risks” is merely wishful thinking.

Genetic engineering emerged at a time when it was believed genes that operate independently of their surroundings.

Modern research has established that the effect of a gene is dependent on the interaction with other genes and on the surroundings. A gene inserted from a foreign organism may have unpredictable effects in its new environment, including the creation of harmful or toxic substances. An inserted gene disrupts the normal functioning of a plant or animal.

When nature takes its course, cancer and other unpredictable side effects are not the norm.

Plants and animals have certain safeguards built in that prevent dangerous genetic changes.

Woell mentions that “environmentalists and technophobes” want to “do as little research as possible and then guess at the outcome.”

Actually, more than anything, this describes Biotech companies, which always try to reduce the safety testing requirements as much as possible to save money. We are currently being used as guinea pigs to test the effects of many genetically engineered products.

For example, rBGH is used to increase milk production. Milk laced with rBGH has been sold everywhere in the United States for six years, despite not having been independently tested beforehand for safety.

The U.N. Food Safety Agency has ruled UNANIMOUSLY in favor of the 1993 European moratorium on Monsanto’s genetically engineered hormonal milk due to major risks of cancer.

A supplement company was producing the tryptophan amino acid with bacteria for many years, and decided to use genetic engineering to increase production.

The tryptophan produced in this way was considered “equivalent” to the one produced before by U.S. law.

However, after its release in 1988, it caused the death of 37 people and permanently disabled 1500 others due to a toxin it produced.

This is why many countries do not want genetically engineered food. Woell says Sweden has rejected a ban on GE by a vote of 67 percent.

However, he fails to mention that nearly every other foreign country is banning GE foods from being sold in or grown in their countries.

---

Pascal Openshaw

Freshman

Electrical engineering