Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
How Dare You Insult Chlorophyll-Kind!
Nature News is reporting that the Swiss government's ethics committee on non-human biotechnology has issued guidelines instructing researchers how to avoid offending the dignity of plants. If their projects are ruled as affronts to plants, their funding will be pulled.
What might constitute undignified interference with plants?
The committee has created a decision tree presenting the different issues that need to be taken into account for each case. But it has come up with few concrete examples of what type of experiment might be considered an unacceptable insult to plant dignity. The committee does not consider that genetic engineering of plants automatically falls into this category, but its majority view holds that it would if the genetic modification caused plants to 'lose their independence' - for example by interfering with their capacity to reproduce. The statement has confused plant geneticists, who point out the contrast with traditional plant-hybridization technologies, for example in roses, which require male sterility, and the commercial development of seedless fruits.
Let's forget modern biotechnology. What about such egregious violations of vegetal dignity as grafting cabernet sauvignon shoots to alien American grape rootstock? And might not hybridization be considered forced plant miscegenation? Also, what could be worse for plant "independence" than domestication? After all, domesticated plants can't thrive without human nurturing. We've turned such crops as corn, wheat, oats, potatoes, and tomatoes into photosynthetic slaves. Finally, what could be more outrageously disrespectful to chlorophyll-kind than being eaten by people? The horror, the horror!
Episiarch|5.5.08 @ 10:38AM|#
Aren't the Swiss usually pretty level-headed and reasonable? And what will happen to Ricola, which is made with herbs (PLANTSSSSSESS, MY PRECIOUS)?
|5.5.08 @ 10:40AM|#
The committee has created a decision tree ...
Decision tree!!!
See how they objectify us with their language!!!
- Outraged Oak
Elemenope|5.5.08 @ 10:41AM|#
Obligatory "Disgustipated" reference:
You see Brother Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day, and to them...it
is the Holocaust.
|5.5.08 @ 10:43AM|#
but its majority view holds that it would if the genetic
modification caused plants to 'lose their independence' - for
example by interfering with their capacity to reproduce.
So basically they are trying to limit the ability of companies like
Monsanto to produce and sell you seeds whose plants will not
produce seeds of their own thus forcing you to buy new seeds from
Monsanto every year.
|5.5.08 @ 10:43AM|#
If it is an intolerable insult to Swiss plant dignity to attempt to eradicate a natural plant (ie, poppies, marijuana), then we can celebrate this decision.
Jorgen|5.5.08 @ 10:44AM|#
This is a good idea, actually. Just send of all the bureaucrats and lawmakers to some nice farm somewhere where they can argue about how to preserve the dignity of plants.
|5.5.08 @ 10:47AM|#
ChicagoTom: Please remember that tarmers are not stupid: they won't buy seeds from any one unless they find those seeds useful, e.g., more productive, requiring fewer inputs, etc. I don't see hybrid corn farmers complaining about the fact that they must buy new seeds every year. BTW, just for the record, 2008 is the 100th anniversary of the creation of hybrid corn.
|5.5.08 @ 10:48AM|#
Decision tree!!!
See how they objectify us with their language!!!
- Outraged Oak
Indeed! Why must it always be a decision "tree" and not a decision
bush or fungus? What about a decision moss? They still have a lot
to learn about real plant dignity.
Deep Thought|5.5.08 @ 11:01AM|#
If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting them down? We might, if they screamed all the time, for no good reason.
|5.5.08 @ 11:15AM|#
avoid offending the dignity of plants.
Does this mean we can't make fun of Donderoooo any more?
|5.5.08 @ 11:18AM|#
Uh oh... I hope they don't realize that malting barley requires the maltster to terminate the germination process, which could be equated to mass abortion. God help us if these people combine forces with MADD.
|5.5.08 @ 11:20AM|#
Animal rights, then plant rights.
I guess the next and final step is mineral rights.
Oops - that phrase is already taken.
|5.5.08 @ 11:26AM|#
Why must it always be a decision "tree" and not a decision
bush ...?
It is ALWAYS a decision bush, because he is The Decider!
Taktix®|5.5.08 @ 11:28AM|#
I think this is a back-door attempt by the Swiss to legalize sex with cantaloupes.
|5.5.08 @ 11:29AM|#
Europe's War On People, rivals the US War On Drugs, for the blatant stupidity its champions will utter in its defense.
|5.5.08 @ 11:35AM|#
ChicagoTom: Please remember that tarmers are not stupid:
they won't buy seeds from any one unless they find those seeds
useful, e.g., more productive, requiring fewer inputs, etc. I don't
see hybrid corn farmers complaining about the fact that they must
buy new seeds every year. BTW, just for the record, 2008 is the
100th anniversary of the creation of hybrid corn.
Ron,
My post was merely an indication of why I thought the government
was doing this, not whether or not farmers needed/wanted this. This
wouldn't be the first time government proposed solutions to
non-existent "problems".
But based on the wording cited, my impression is that Monstanto
type seeds are the target of the Swiss committee. The inability to
cite any other examples of plant independence abuse seems quite
telling.
|5.5.08 @ 11:36AM|#
I would pay good money for a brilliant blue rose. Black tulips are also on my wish list.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 11:42AM|#
I don't see hybrid corn farmers complaining about the fact
that they must buy new seeds every year.
And you would seek out these complaints to verify your impression
that your view is correct, no?
I seem to recall some recent protests internationally by farmers
who complain about the "have to buy seeds every year" aspects of GM
crops. Of course these farmers are just dupes falling for the
tricksy socialists and their lies.
*Full disclosure. I have no problem with GM crops conceptually.
There have not been many improvements to traditional varieties in
terms of taste, texture and the like, as far as I can tell.
|5.5.08 @ 11:52AM|#
Neu: Farmers protesting non-existent "terminator" seed crops.
Yea. I really believe that they did that without being misled by
helpful
anti-biotech anti-capitalist, anti-corporate NGOs. Perhaps
you'd like to verify that fact before citing it.
As I seem to have to remind people, farmers can avoid "terminator"
seeds (or any other seed) simply by not buying them.
|5.5.08 @ 11:54AM|#
How long before the Swiss jail all bees?
Can't happen, insects have been a protected minority in Europe
since 2003. In fact, some college kids in Amsterdam have recently
been agitating for full voting rights for hive/colony species.
|5.5.08 @ 12:15PM|#
Neu: Farmers protesting non-existent "terminator" seed
crops. Yea. I really believe that they did that without being
misled by helpful anti-biotech anti-capitalist, anti-corporate
NGOs. Perhaps you'd like to verify that fact before citing
it.
As I seem to have to remind people, farmers can avoid "terminator"
seeds (or any other seed) simply by not buying them.
"anti-biotech anti-capitalist, anti-corporate NGOs" need to start
protesting apple trees...you can't grow edible apples from an apple
seed.
Bronwyn|5.5.08 @ 12:15PM|#
I dunno, Gaunt. I'm sure somebody could come up with an argument
that dirt has feelings, too.
They'll go after the Haitians, first. Just watch.
BakedPenguin|5.5.08 @ 12:35PM|#
robc - "Jack Handey" was from the Phil Hartman era. We should allow it.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 12:50PM|#
Ron,
I think I cited the exact counter-evidence you would provide.
My challenge was for you to verify your opinion that hybrid corn
farmers don't complain about the need to buy seeds every year. They
have the option not to buy, for sure. That doesn't mean they don't
see that as a bug in the product. I buy Microsoft, but complain
about it all the time.
That, however, doesn't fit into the narrative you are trying to
create.
|5.5.08 @ 12:58PM|#
Neu: Do you actually know any farmers? Why don't you use Apple or Linux? That's the reason farmers buy hybrid corn seeds. Of course farmers would prefer to use magical self-reproducing corn seeds for free, just as you would prefer to use perfect free software.
|5.5.08 @ 1:09PM|#
What, nobody has mentioned the Iranian rule against seedless watermelon? Promotes homosexuality, you know.
|5.5.08 @ 1:51PM|#
"what could be more outrageously disrespectful to
chlorophyll-kind than being eaten by people?"
How about being eaten by a death-row inmate as his final meal?
kinnath|5.5.08 @ 2:27PM|#
My challenge was for you to verify your opinion that hybrid
corn farmers don't complain about the need to buy seeds every
year.
As far as I know, farmers tend to change crops (corn vs soybeans)
and varieties (different hybrids) on a regular basis to meet market
demand and environmental conditions (e.g., no one has planted a
damn thing yet here in IA because we haven't had more than two
consecutive days of sun the last month).
The old guys bitch all the time in the local cafe on Saturday
morning, but I don't hear them bitching about seed.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 2:34PM|#
Ron,
Neu: Do you actually know any farmers?
Yes.
Why don't you use Apple or Linux?
I do on occasion.
That's the reason farmers buy hybrid corn seeds. Of course
farmers would prefer to use magical self-reproducing corn seeds for
free, just as you would prefer to use perfect free
software.
Who said anything about perfect or free?
You claimed that users of GM corn didn't complain about having to
buy seeds yearly. They may choose to buy GM corn even though it has
a feature they don't like, but that doesn't mean they don't
complain about that aspect of the product.
Think of it as analogous to attempt by the RIAA to include digital
copy-protection in CD's and MP3 files
DRM- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management)
I like this company's policy on that issue
http://cdbaby.com/mp3
|5.5.08 @ 2:37PM|#
Chicago Tom -- Among many examples, seedless watermelons would
fall under the ban, as would turkeys (the breasts of tom turkeys
have been bred to be so huge that the turkeys can't mate. Many
varieties of pigs can't go outdoors because they've been bred to be
so lean that they can't handle cold.
Need I go on?
|5.5.08 @ 2:44PM|#
Neu: I didn't write that corn farmers didn't complain about
using GM corn. I wrote that they didn't complain about "hybrid"
corn. You brought up the NGO incited "complaints" about *GM
crops*.
Your comparison with RIAA copy protection tellingly suggests that
you are thinking of non-existent terminator crops. I suspect that
terminator crops-should they ever exist--will go the same way as
digital copy-protection.
With all due respect, at least my "narrative" is not a
fairytale.
|5.5.08 @ 2:45PM|#
My challenge was for you to verify your opinion that hybrid
corn farmers don't complain about the need to buy seeds every
year.
No one is forcing them to buy seeds every year. Plenty of
non-hybrid seeds out there that can fertilize and produce viable
offspring. The farmers buy the seeds despite the need to buy a
fresh batch every year for the same reason people watch TV shows
with commercials embedded -- the producers have found a way to sell
a good with a built-in solution to free riders to prevent a
"tragedy of the commons" problem. Enough people watch and respond
to TV commercials to make it profitable to broadcast, and people
buy enough of the grain that needs annual repurchases to repay the
upfront R&D costs.
It's an ingenious feature, not a bug.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 2:48PM|#
So, for my position on this...
I don't think regulations making it illegal for a company to make a
product with copy-protection are a good idea.
If that is the aim of these policies (guidelines? are they
inforcable...what is the exact language?) then they are
misguided.
However, libertarians should be worried about the flip side of this
issue as well...large corporation whose profits depend upon
copy-right protection using the force of government to stifle
innovative use of their products.
Government policies which favor or encourage monopoly power in the
food industry seem like the most dangerous kind of
government/corporate collaboration.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 2:50PM|#
Ron,
The mechanism is actually contractual, not engineered into the
crop, true.
Brandybuck|5.5.08 @ 2:52PM|#
I think this is a back-door attempt by the Swiss to legalize sex with cantaloupes.
What? Sex with cantaloupes is illegal? <gulp> I guess that
means I'll have to go back to the musk melon.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 2:56PM|#
Ron,
I wrote that they didn't complain about "hybrid"
corn.
Yes, but in response to the topic brought up by ChicagoTom, "seeds
whose plants will not produce seeds of their own thus forcing you
to buy new seeds from Monsanto every year"
Which is the context in which the RIAA analogy makes sense.
The current situation uses contractual mechanisms to control the
costumer's behavior and protect the corporations intellectual
property.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 2:57PM|#
Prolefeed,
One man's bug is another's feature, for sure.
People never complain about commercials either, of course.
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 3:09PM|#
FWIW,
The comments at Nature News also quickly went to the terminator
crops issue. It seems that the decision tree includes this as one
of the branches leading to a "not ethical" decision.
If that is the motivation behind the "dignity" provision, then it
should be discussed even if it is currently a, what was it
"fairytale."
This is about stifling future science not current technology.
No?
|5.5.08 @ 3:17PM|#
People never complain about commercials either, of
course.
Of course they complain about the commercials. People hate being
prevented from being free riders. Now if some idiots in Congress
outlawed commercials, and most broadcasting vanished because of
that stupidity, think people might complain about that, too?
I record all TV shows prior to watching so I can be a free rider
and zip through the commercials. If they want me to watch them,
they better make commercials that make sense at 16X speed and
without sound.
Or be funny like the Mac nerd vs. cool guy commericials. I back up
and watch those at regular speed.
Or Victoria Secrets commericials, unless the wife is watching,
too.
Or some of the beer commericials.
People aren't complaining about commercials, but rather
unentertaining commercials.
Oleg|5.5.08 @ 3:41PM|#
Great news!
Dignity of plant - sounds pretty stupid, but whatever! It may
impede (not stop completely) biotechnology research, but in the end
we will be much safer with this kind of regulation.
By the way, Swiss voted against GMOs some years ago.
lunchstealer|5.5.08 @ 4:18PM|#
Fuck you, plant.
Wait, they're not suggesting that we shouldn't insult Robert Plant
are they?
Neu Mejican|5.5.08 @ 7:25PM|#
Of well,
I thought maybe a discussion of intellectual property rights might
have emerged from this topic...
I always find it interesting how the GM issue is full of
mis-directed assertions about the other side, when at its essence
it is an intellectual property issue. Sure, some of the crazy
people in the world see a conspiracy to sap our essential fluids,
but most critiques of GM with any thought behind them seem to
center on the dangers of ceding control of the food supply to
centralized corporate interests.
ADM and Monsantos have an interest in creating products that they
can control so as to maximize profits. If a monopoly phone company
was seen as an unwarranted centralization of power, it seems we
would want to avoid a similar congealing of market share in the
food industry. Discussing this issue is not the same, however, as
silly attempts to ban certain research activities...or
products.
But putting the force of government on the side of intellectual
property holders needs to be done very carefully to assure that
fair use concepts are maintained and honored. Science and culture
are collaborative accomplishments...governments should not enforce
policies that stifle collaboration, it seems.
Charles|5.5.08 @ 7:50PM|#
The same folks that scream "NO GM FOOD!" are also screaming "WE
WANT STEM CELL RESEARCH FROM ABORTED FETUSES!".
About all I can say is WTF?
carbuzzard|5.5.08 @ 9:51PM|#
I don't know whether bananas have dignity, but they certainly have great appeal!
Colin|5.5.08 @ 9:56PM|#
"[T]here is no difference appreciable either by the eye, or by
any other test, between a germ that will develop into an oak, a
vine, a rose, and one that (given its accustomed surroundings) will
become a mouse, an elephant, or a man."
-- Samuel Butler
|5.6.08 @ 8:41AM|#
The same folks that scream "NO GM FOOD!" are also screaming "WE
WANT STEM CELL RESEARCH FROM ABORTED FETUSES!".
we can solve that problem if we only make soylent green out of
people created by artificial insemination (yeah, artificial
insemination babies arn't quite due to stem cells - although maybe
we can use stem cells to make them green, but they fit well with
the whole GM thing)
jtuf|5.6.08 @ 9:47AM|#
Epicurus and his followers proved that legumes have souls millennia ago. The data was overwhelming. Every time they ate legumes, the legume souls escaped from their bodies noisily. Of course, I think Epicuris has more worth as a case study for evolution than as a mentor.
|5.6.08 @ 1:07PM|#
dan k:
Embryonic stem cells are not taken from fetuses, whether aborted or
miscarried. By the time development reaches the fetus stage, there
are no embryonic stem cells left. As the name implies, embryonic
stem cells are taken from early stage embryos.
former farmer|5.7.08 @ 4:05AM|#
Neu Mejican: You are completely missing the point. The key word here is hybrid. Farmers don't generally complain about having to buy seed each year because there isn't an alternative (short of growing non-hybrid strains)- this isn't a nefarious corporate plot, it is the nature of hybrid corn (and many other hybrid crops).
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245