Jump to content

GE fish debate – not just talking about Danios.


Keri Anne

Recommended Posts

The reason I put my original question here is I dont beleave in keeping things underwraps and think It should be up for discussion and if not then there should be answers as theyll be out in the public sooner or later and if the fnzas covers them up then it doesnt look good for them or us the members.

I also have a genuine interest in what people think on the issue of GE fish.

I wasnt going off topic, and I was definately not trying to manipulate your thread, nor was it for my own agenda I was just trying to add on a discussion regarding an interesting topic which has now got many questions unanswered for the rest of the fish keepers & members of this site!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the positive comments!

This subject is one dear to me. I had to chose between staying with my career in GE or staying in NZ, and at the end of the day I chose staying in New Zealand and learning a new trade over working overseas. I try to stay current with the technology, and it's heartbreaking to see the misinformed twaddle pumped out on the news.

GE seems to be a genie that can't be put back in the bottle. Rather than a blanket ban I would much prefer to see strict conditions put on labs doing GE work, because it has so much to offer us. Some of the work being done verges on magical, and politicians with no idea what the issues are feel obliged to stick their oar in.

I have seen some elegant and beautiful work killed by politicians. Cow milk that would help kids with cystic fibrosis? Banned. Corn that was nutritionally complete for starving kids to eat as a staple food? Gone. A cure for many types of childhood leukemia? Forbidden. Injections that would regrow damaged hearts, livers and kidneys in an adult human? Not here thanks.

In contrast, I have also seen some asinine and dangerous schemes blocked, and I was glad they were.

GE pets are an interesting point of discussion because people will pay good coin for a new beautiful or unusual pet. Where there is a profit to be made, people will find ways to do it. I think we should accept that if a change cannot be stopped, it should be managed. Better to have regulatory hoops than people smuggling dodgy livestock in their underwear I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I put my original question here is I dont beleave in keeping things underwraps and think It should be up for discussion and if not then there should be answers as theyll be out in the public sooner or later and if the fnzas covers them up then it doesnt look good for them or us the members.

I think you really do need to read me previous post again :wink: You are way off the beaten track. If you knew what was going on then you wouldn't post the comment you just made :wink:

As I said think outside the box. I love to give you a hint.....but I can't. Now for me to not comment says something. I clicked, can you?

Frenchy :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New Zealand government decided to ask the royal commission to look into GE, and come up with a recommendation after looking at the possible risks and benefits of the new technology. In the meantime they put an immediate ban on it - the moratorium.

Well, the commission came back, with a solution that was fair and sensible. That GE should proceed but with the necessary laws to make sure that the risks are minimized. Since its not a popular thing to do they were totally ignored. People pushed their own agendas- not based on rational science but very much on a pre-disposition of fear.

I'm in a rather unusual position, in that I'm all for science and I'm all for conservation. I've pretty much given up on trying to convince people of how GE is one of the most beneficial technologies of all time, as in the end everyone will be forced to deal with it, and it will become commonplace. The New Zealand government wants GE, but they don't want to be associated with it. Right now they are spending millions of dollars in GE research, but not saying it publicly.

How weird is it that I want nuclear power, GE and sustainable whaling, whilst also being anti global warming, anti bottom trawling and anti overfishing. The fact that science supports the affirmative of all the positions above, while in the populace it creates huge divisions, shows that the problem's with people, not science. I'm of a strange new generation where science is my religion, but it's not actually, if you catch my drift. :lol:

I think its ironic that Green Peace will flout all the science behind global warming but totally ignore the science behind the safety of GE. The story is the same on both ends of the spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...