Here's something that might be of interest. It's an excerpt from an e-mail I
just sent this evening to Bob Gronski, who works for the National Catholic
Rural Life Conference, here in Des Moines.

Bob had asked if I was familiar with the ideas of Miguel Altieri.

Earlier this year, I had mentioned to Jim, just as we were starting writing
the "Genetic Engineering at a Crossroads" piece that appears on our website,
something to the effect that, while I did not oppose the acquistion of
scientific knowledge, I thought it wrong for biologists to destroy the
subject matter of their science, as molecular biologists are now on the verge
of doing.

Below, in an e-mail to Bob Gronski, I discussed this concept in a little more
detail.

Rich, have you seen this thread of discussion elsewhere, among the writings
of bioethicists or others?

This is from the e-mail to Bob:

I was trying to remember where I had read an article by Miguel Altieri, just
recently. Now I remember that it was in a superb new publication, a colorful,
well designed magazine called Safe Food News, published by Mothers for
Natural law. I picked up a copy of it at Campbells Health Food Store here in
Des Moines early last month. Then at the rally in Iowa City about two weeks
ago I got a box of about 100 copies of the magazine. Let me know if you would
like some copies of this publication.

Altieri says wonderful things in his article about the threats from genetic
engineering to the integrity and dignity of life. He is identified at the end
of the article as an agroecologist from U.C. Berkeley. On the opposite page
is an article by Martha Herbert, MD, PhD, an instructor in neurology at
Harvard Med School. She discusses agroecology in her article. I'm pretty sure
it was this article that introduced me to the fact that there exists a field
of study called agroecology. So I've known the word "agroecology" for only
about a month, but it has set my imagination to working overtime. This is the
proper way to use science. To work with nature to achieve health, prosperity
and beauty. Genetic engineering is just the opposite. It threatens to destroy
the very subject matter of the science in which its practictioners are
trained--biology.

No other science that I know of has the potential to do that--and the
enthusiastic practitioners to get the job done  Physics and chemistry, despite
giving scientists and engineers the ability to make bombs able to destroy
entire planets, still do not give anyone the ability to destroy the subject
mattter of chemistry and physics. Matter, time, energy, the chemical
elements--all would survive a nuclear war. Life is much more delicate.
Biologists--whose job it is to learn all they can about life--could now,
armed with genetic engineering, destroy life.

Tom

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]