In article <1992May24.010750.18246 at ncsu.edu>, samodena at csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu
(S. A. Modena) writes:
> In article <vm02tINN2tn at agate.berkeley.edu> nigel at notmendel.Berkeley.EDU(Nigel Walker) writes:
> >BTW: I think making plants more resistant to herbicides ranks right up there
> > with building nuclear power plants on KNOWN faults. ( steps off soapbox
> I'm going to show that to the people in our department working on just that
> and ask them to get on their soapboxes....I feel that a little back and
> forth on the rational for the work would be illuminating.
I quote from someone who's been doing quite a bit of thinking on the rationale
for doing biotechnological work, as indicated by the excerpt:
"Having attempted to analyze the impact of my own work in biotechnology,
I came to the conclusion that the way of thinking and the physical
manipulations required to do molecular biology made it likely that results
of basic inquiry would be used to support continued simplification of the
agricultural system. My own framework indicates the need for increased
decentralization and complexity in food production in order to enhance
biological diversity, and thus stability of soil, air, water, and culture.
Therefore, I decided to quit doing molecular biology in favor of inter-
disciplinary work related to sustainability."
-Martha Crouch, Dept. of Biology, Indiana Univ.
From: "Why it is Difficult to be an Ethical Biotechnologist"
A presentation to be delivered next week at a conference on
Bioethics at Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX.