Re: [pf] A European import we'd do well to reject

At 19:54 3/8/2000 -0700, Betsy Barnum wrote, responding to David Appell:
>I think it's high time that the precautionary principle was instituted
throughout the scientific world and applied to *any* and *every*
technological development that comes out of any kind of research. Until a
new process, substance, technological application is shown through testing
and open analysis to have benefits that society agrees -- after an open
public discourse with *all* information available -- has greater benefit
than its potential harm, it should not be produced or implemented. The
advances you cite ["Electricity? Computers? Pharmaceuticals (some of them
GE)? Automobiles?"] are perfect examples of why we need to view new
technologies skeptically ...


**  My wife and I both have physics PhDs - she's been on the research side,
I've done more lecturing - and I certainly (and Bera probably) agree with
Betsy on the *need* for the precautionary principle to be applied.
Science-based innovations (at least) should go through a slow development
stage - not rushed the way GE is - then have an open public discourse with
all information available. To make a *public* decision, not a corporate
decision, on whether to disseminate it.

**  Just this morning (it's Friday afternoon now), we both made initial
submissions to our New Zealand Royal Commission on Genetic Modification,
which is to determine whether genetically modified living organisms are to
be released into the NZ environment.

**  That's more the way things should be done, but it took the election of
Greens to over 5% of the NZ Parliament to make it happen.

David.
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz 
http://www.emucities.com.au/member/davd/index.html#top
******************************************************

___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A  The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics