And the stoplight turns from "go" to...
As an aside from political speak and all associated jargon, I’ve always considered myself to lean a little more toward the green side; that is, the side of environmental activists and rah rah picketing against animal testing and for your own cause and all that. Ironically, this after-thought degree in Environmental Health has started to sway this opinion a bit. After becoming completely engrossed in a lecture this morning from our fifth guest speaker from Monsanto (previously thought of as representative of big scary chemical corporations out to rule the world), I slowly began to realize that there are nuances to every supposedly “black and white”, “good or bad” decision.
For example, there was a recent decision of the Canadian Environmental Protection Agency to continue using glyphosates (a selective pesticide) on specified acres of land designated for forestry. Immediately the term "pesticide" brings about the connotation of malicious intent and environmental harm. However, being that this chemical is biologically engineered to affect only an enzyme found only in plants, and not animals or humans, and million dollar multi-year studies have been done by both private industrial as well as governmental toxicological organizations to look for sub-chronic, chronic, carcinogenic, or any systemic effects, there just is not evidence there to make a case for necessitating environmental protection against it. Moreover, particularly in Nova Scotia where the forestry industry is its biggest economic contributor, they cannot feasibly or rationally eliminate the use of glyphosates merely on the basis of misconceived notions. However, after long legal disputes and several litigations mediated by eco-toxicologists as well as finance experts, the suits were overturned, much to the benefit of Nova Scotia.
So when exactly did socio-political concerns both overtake and undermine science? Let me not even delve into the topic of bio-engineered or modified foods; which we do, in fact, consume every day. But I suppose the point that I very long-windedly tried to get to is this: we must look at things in the proper perspective and objectively scrutinize the cost/benefit analysis, because more harm could ultimately be done, even with honorable intent.
posted by Sheila @ 10/28/2004 01:10:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home