::To whom it may concern:
I find genetic engineering of anything to be good. This way we can crop out the genes we don't like. We can make them stronger, fatter, more plentiful, more docile, more aggressive. The possibilities are endless. So I am all for this. However, we must be careful with HOW we approach this. Sure, we can modify as many genes as we wish, but as they said in Jurassic Park, "Chaos Theory" it will win out. (at least in my perspective). I am sure down the road we'll have these perfect fish! Strong, large, docile ect... and yet some rare fish disease will develop and Salmon levels will drop. So I find my self in this dilemma. Should wee continue on with this experimentation/implementation or should we air on the side of caution.
Further, what is the environment impact of these 'fish'? How much are we trying to change? Are we trying to completely change the fish? Or are we trying to select certain traits to get the best yield? Are we concerned with the health of the fish either? What if, in an adverse effect, the longevity of the fish is compromised by 2-3 years? The fish end up dying out early, before they can even be matured and caught? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of GMing?
I also bring up this point: Humans are top (at least we think we are) the main reason, as to my understanding is for the humans. Thus, if this messes up and the fish end up dying off, well then haven't we just turned full circle and we are back to square one. So if I may sum up pretty much my entire response: Let us proceed, but proceed with the greatest of cautions.::
Now, as to why I picked this topic. I love GM. I do, I find it fascinating Take a gene from X and insert it into Y and BAM. It's freeze resistant. That is why I chose this topic, and also why I am all for it. However, I also recognize the risks associated with GM-food and animals. Disease. Disease. DISEASE! One new strain of a disease could, in theory, completely wipe out the entire population. I used the Chaos Theory to point that out. Or perhaps even Marshals Law: IF it can go bad; IT WILL. So we have to be careful with this things. However, the clarity of what exactly shall be going on this these fish is still left unknown. I believe they are GMing them to produce higher yields and stronger fish. So with this whole article, like I said, let's go for it, but let's go for it cautiously.
Hi, Jon:
ReplyDeleteGood job. This was just what I was looking for in terms of this assignment. You picked an interesting issue that had some personal resonance, gave it some good thought, and provided your opinion to the government.
I'm glad you found a regulatory action being taken by a federal agency that concerns an issue that is fairly controversial to the public -- GM. We've certainly seen in the SD class that people have sharply divided opinions on this issue! The goal of this exercise was for you to see how pretty important policy steps are being taken basically under our noses -- that a whole lot of environmental policy, including policy concerning food production and GMs, occurs via agency action and rule.
My only critique is that I'd like your writing to be more polished. Writing your material in Word and then pasting it on your blog or into comment fields will only help you. There were some misspellings and grammar issues that Word could easily have helped you correct.
Journal content: 1.6/1.6
Journal writing quality: 0.2/0.3