Picked this up off worldwide correspondents for interest Jack Caley Agricultural biotechnology and sustainable farming 2003-05-20 06:44:45.0 When philosophers and biologists get together to discuss genetically modified food, the focus veers away from the potential for a production lift from Bt corn -- a genetically modified corn that produces its own defense against the corn borer pest. The focus shifts to the nature of technology itself, particularly organic engineering, and the underlying assumptions of genetically modified food and its relationship to sustainable food systems. The stakeholders' conference on agricultural biotechnology and sustainable agriculture at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan at the end of April created just such a discussion. Maarten Chrispeels, professor of biology at the University of California, San Diego, talked about biotechnology as a tool box for agricultural researchers, farmers and consumers. For Chrispeels, the issue is not biotech "yes" or "no." Genetic modification technology can help solve weed, pest, drought and salinity problems that currently lack any other solution. Sustainable agriculture will benefit from the growing number of tools in the biotechnology box when farmers adapt them to local agro-ecologies and subsequent farming systems. Gary Comstock, professor of philosophy at North Carolina State University, talked about "Vexing Nature? Ethics and GM Food." He criticized industry's prime argument that GM food will improve agricultural sustainability. According to Comstock, the argument is unsound: it discounts the opportunity costs of other choices for research and funding. Comstock also analyzed and discounted as unsound the main arguments against GM foods: the potential harm outweighs the benefits; we are playing God; we are changing the world; and crossing species barriers is unnatural. He called for a broader discussion of the ethics of GM foods if their benefits are to be realized and environmental risks minimized. Egbert Schuurman, who teaches philosophy at the Agricultural University of Wageningen in the Netherlands, made the case for the profound differences between technology that creates new inorganic tools like metal widgets or electricity, and technology that develops new organic tools like genetically modified seeds and bioengineered animals. He cautioned against the assumption that drawbacks of a new technology can be fixed by still more technology. The DNA of organic life is not just a collection of Lego blocks waiting to be restacked by human ingenuity. Organic life has an inherent level of uncertainty. Once in the environment, new organic tools reach beyond our scientific/technical control and will, given time, develop a life of their own. Schuurman recommended the development of an ethical framework specifically for technology that manipulates living organisms -- a framework that admits to uncertainty and protects quality of life both now and in the long run. While GM food finds its way to grocers' shelves, its social and ecological implications remain unclear. Email this article to a friend © Copyright Meredith Corporation 2003