On 3/31/99, Tyler Ochoa <tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> wrote:
>
> On 03/30/99, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
> >
> > The following news release indicates that it is possible for
> > seed companies to produce a product that thwarts farmers'
> > tradition of keeping each year's product for planting.
>
> I think the threat is a good deal greater than even the news release
> suggests. My (admittedly limited) understanding of plant genetics
> is that plants in the wild are capable of exchanging genetic
> material, even between species.
With a number of qualifications, this is correct. But the major qualification is that cross-species fertilization produces sterile hybids anyway.
> The mechanism is that plant viruses can assimilate genetic material
> from a host, and transplant it into another plant.
Well, that is one mechanism, though not a very common one, especially between species (viruses tend to be somewhat species-specific).
> If the "Terminator" gene spreads from commercial crops to wild
> plants, it could sterilize the planet of most, if not all,
> plant life.
This is a little far-fetched. Viral transfection of the sort you are contemplating is an relatively rare event, even without the control safeguards built into commercial recombinant plants. The natural mutation rate of plants would probably tend to change planetary flora faster than this mechanism.
> Let me assure you that I'm not a doomsday conspiracy nut.
Me, either.
> I am not a plant biologist,
Me, either -- but I'm probably about as close as you're going to get on this list. Does yeast genomics count?
> and I would be happy for someone to explain to me why this nightmare
> scenario is pure science fiction and could not actually happen.
Could not actually happen? Of course there is some probability that it could happen -- but I wouldn't let it ruin your weekend.
> But I have not yet received any such assurances, and given my
> limited understanding, it seems unnervingly plausible to me. How
> ironic it would be if we avoided nuclear annihilation only to
> starve ourselves into extinction because of patented plants.
Well, who says we've avoided nuclear annihilation? I would be much more concerned about that, frankly ... or getting hit by a meteor ...
BTW, what exactly does this have to do with copyright?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:35 GMT