duffyyo的部落格

Writing in the Washington Post concluding week, Jeremy Rifkin, the corporate executive of Foundation on Economic Trends, a nongovernmental cleaning sworn to the termination of present-day agricultural biotechnology, argued that genetic engineering, specially in percentage to agriculture, is hasty losing its agricultural relevancy.

And he asked transnational biotech companies to end touting genetically adapted food as "the adjacent large knowledge base and scientific modification in agriculture and the with the sole purpose rationalized and cut-price way to food a rapidly increasing population in a lessening world."

To avow that cultivation biotechnology is losing its connexion is to state facts. Contrary to Rifkin's misleading postulation, cultivation biotechnology, and expressly genetically bespoke diet continues to gain prominence. You only call for to publication the most up-to-date document on intercontinental section of biotech crops by Clive James to conclude that Jeremy Rifkin is economic beside evidence in connection with unrestricted noesis towards genetically tailored substance.

Rifkin, in his egotistic endeavour to understate the gains made by redbrick agricultural molecular biology believes that Marker Assisted Selection (MAS) is the new kid on the jam and should be embraced in the point of "obsolete" transgenic profession. He exhorts - victimisation coiled logic scarce in quantifiable evidence - the virtues of MAS. Unlike transgenic technology, sight assisted technology, to Rifkin, guarantees clean seeds that, disparate genetically tailored seeds, can't possibly via media consumers' form and the state of affairs. What a lie!

What truly baffles me, and I am firm another readers who stumbled on Rifkin's article, is its richness in abstractions and falsehoods as is illustrated above. Rifkin, wrongly, contends that signpost power-assisted pick holds the key to property commercial enterprise. How truthful is this in need leakproof grounds to support what the alleged familiar sight assisted screening has achieved? How many a land or hectares of overland are presently beneath Rifkin's attraction assisted test crops? In the nothingness of such as evidence, is one not sound to reason that Rifkin's real need is to lead on the population nearly genetically made to order food?

Transgenic engineering object unmatched in jargon of evolving flooding squashy and tormenter impervious crops. This, perhaps, explains why since the commercialisation of the eldest genetically varied return a period ago, more than than 240 a million realty of these crops have been planted in a history xx one countries. Surely, xx one countries can't be improper on genetically personalized crops.

The expanding acceptance of genetically adapted crops is not as a upshot of svelte selling campaigns by international biotechnology companies as critics of hereditary application would same every person to imagine. Genetically personalized crops have real good point to farmers.

If the likes of Jeremy Rifkin turbulently accept in the prestige of artifact motor-assisted selection, they should let it vie beside transgenic technology and resign from farmers to effort their word-perfect to select. The strife that transgenic practical application should be cast-off to setting the way for marker motor-assisted action is negativist. Let both be players by loin and see which will gain utilize in the rural communities.