[extropy-chat] BUSH science vs KERRY science

Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. megao at sasktel.net
Sat Sep 18 14:21:33 UTC 2004


After reading the bio I have an opinion which would be based upon
a purely self centered view as a Canadian.

Some of Kerry's pro-blue sky science would be good for the USA.
If one is speaking for other countries however, it would be good to see
the USA
not move forward on bio-technology based on novel cell-based technology.

The pro-GM stance would allow the big economics to move that forward in
the USA
It would thus allow other countries to exploit the technologies the USA
does not wish to properly develop and thus gain a lead over the USA in
this area.

The GM bio-pharma movement is already well underway so it is time to see
it
cully commercialized.

However it appears that big pharma has learned one lesson from the
anti-GM crop
side,  and that is not to use mainstream crops.

An article in sept issue of Biophar Intl. Magazine
http://www.biopharminternational.com
entitled "green plants as medicine factories"
leads me to believe that the minor crop and weed species will become the
hosts for
biopharmaceuticals.  Mint, cannabis, thistle, dandelion, kochia,
pigweed, caragana trees, hawthorn trees, mint, and possibly perennial
cereals are all suited by
bio-pathways and as orphan crops would have lettle or no opposition by
groups protecting their existance.  As well most of these are already
considered pests
and exterminated on sight.  As well the term "weed" denotes a plant that
can survive and produce under rigorous and harsh conditions.  If you
have a multibillion dollar
cash crop which species would you want for host a corn crop which is
suceptible to
drought, fungus, weatherdamage, insect damage or Kochia which can motor
on through irregardless of the above as well as grow in saline soild
which would
make any other crop a marginal producer.

A "Big Oil" and High Barrel cost would enable large windfarm
developments on the
Canadian Prairies to be economic.

Kerry would be very good for the USA economy in the longer run so if I
was a USA Citizen I would most certainly vote for him.
If I was a Canadian or japanese or chinese or european I would push the
USA
voters to vot for Bush and take advantage of the economic weaknesses he
has
created by favoring only certain parts of the economy to the detriment
of others.

N'est Pas?

Pharmer Mo from LA North , Eh!

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> "In the build-up to the US presidential election, science is making a
> sizeable impact on the political agenda. But what will anotherfour
> years of George W. Bush mean for science, compared witha term under
> Democratic challenger John Kerry?
>
> To find out, Nature has asked the two candidates 15 questionsabout
> their science policies."       The following does not require a
> susbscription. http://www.nature.com/news/specials/uselection/index.html  Climate
> change
> Kerry advocates stricter stance on greenhouse-gas emissions.
> Yucca Mountain
> Fate of nuclear waste dump divides candidates.Stem cells
> Candidates take opposing stances on medical research.Nuclear weapons
> research
> Need for new bomb tests questioned.
> Manipulation of science
> Bush administration stands accused of distorting science.
> ----------Brett
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040918/66e9a24d/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list