A LAYMAN'S LOOK AT BIOTECHNOLOGY
RESEARCH PRESS RELEASES ARE NOT ALWAYS UNBIASED

I have a couple of farming acquaintances from southwestern Ontario who now are retired. They are aware of my concern for the environment but I was not aware of the depth of their concern until we lunched together this fall. Since that day we have been in closer touch as they offer help, suggestions, and literature.

One of the articles that was sent to me was from a farm magazine. The article is on Genetically Engineered corn. (Frankenfood is the word coined by media for this science.)

This article was written by a Research Doctor at a well-known US university. The article appeared to be well written until I dissected it. It was obvious that there was a great deal of bias interwoven into it. To illustrate the technique I will point out some of the manipulations that are used in these press releases.

First drop the words 'genetically engineered' as this has been getting a lot of bad press. Replace 'genetically engineered' with 'biotechnology'.

Stress the communal commitment of the corporation.

Stress the reduction in pesticide usage. Do not mention that pests can be controlled organically and even through sound.

Stress the profit potential to the farmer but do not mention the profit of the company.

Introduce a little fear. Stress the potential threat to human life if a pest should infect the corn and also be a carrier of a fatal fungal disease. Do not mention the continuing threat of pesticide usage to the diminishing existence of animals in every food chain.

Use words like cowardly intimidation, vandalism, anti-technology, extremists and other unflattering names when referring to those concerned citizens who object to this technology. Use words like receptive, responsive, open, submissive, superior product, for the company's position.

Suggest that those objecting have alternative, but unnamed motives, whereas those of the company are only humanitarian.

OK, why do I personally object to this technology? It is certainly not because I am knowledgeable in this science. I, however, only have to look at all of the other ongoing ventures that, so-called, progressive people have led us into.

We have consciously introduced approximately 400 weeds, and countless animals and insect pests from Europe and Africa to the Americas.

We have abandoned sensible farming practices to erosion and chemical corruption.

We are destroying the fresh water, the ground water, the seas, the air, the stratosphere, the soil and the minds of the people.

We allow children's video games to use the same brainwashing and desensitizing techniques as used by the military; techniques developed to train combatants to kill instantly without reasoning.

We are destroying the rain forest simply to make hamburgers less expensive and to garner greater profit.

We have introduced scores of hormone mimicking chemicals into the environment to disrupt intelligence, the power of reason, reproduction and sanity.

We have taken dead animals and ground them back into the food supplies of the same species. We have created a great threat to humankind by turning vegetarian animals into unwitting cannibals thereby bringing the potential of prion diseases (renegade proteins) right to the dinner table. (These diseases eats holes in the brain and can never be cured.)

Now we want to invade the hereditary blueprints of life itself. All of this is in the name of progress (spelled p-r-o-f-i-t).

It is easy to get caught up in the spirit of excitement but we should resist and object. The dangers are many.

Do I object? Am I concerned? Am I anti-genetic-engineering? Yes.

Have a nice day.