Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OIHl433 <br /> <br />10. Jack Doyle, 1985. Quoting George Kidd of L. Wm.Teweles & Co., <br />Genewatch 2(2-4):3. <br />11. BWG, p. 2l. <br />12. National Research Council. p. 44. <br />13. M. Sun, 1986. "Engineering Crops to Resist Weed Killers," Scienee. <br />231:1360,1361. <br />14. Hope Strand, June 90. "Test Tube Agriculture," Dollars &" Sense. <br />15. BWG, p. 21. <br />16. BWG, p. 24. <br />17. Jack Doyle, 1985. Altered Harvest. Viking Penguin Press, N.Y., <br />N.Y., p. 358. <br /> <br />18. Chuck Hassebrook and Gabriel Hegye., 1989. Choices for the <br />Heartland, Center for Rural Affairs, WalthiD, NE, p.2l. <br />19. Ha...brook & Hegyes, p. 87. <br />20. BWG, p. 21. <br />21. Doyle. 1989. "Biotechnology is not Sustainable Agriculture,- Not <br />Man Apart, 19:4, p.lO. <br />22. Ha8sebrook & Hegye8, p. 87. <br />23. BWG, p. 5,5. <br />24. Marty Strange, 1988. Family Farming, Univ. of Nebraska Press. <br />Lincoln, NE, p. 46. <br /> <br />Brave New Pigs: .Part Human, Part Machine <br />Kathy CaUmer <br /> <br />The simple act of biting into a ham sandwich <br />may soon qualify as cannibalism. If genetic engineers <br />at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ohio Univer- <br />sity, Dow and Monsanto have their way, pigs whose <br />chromosomes have been spliced with human genes <br />may be on the market in less than ten years.' Aherd <br />offorty such pigs-all of which carry human genes <br />that code for the production of human growth <br />hormone-is under study at the USDA's Agricultural <br />Research Center in Beltsville, MD.' <br />Of course, since nature never intended for pig <br />and human genes to intermix, there are side effects. <br />The price of genetic tinkering is paid by the pigs <br />themselves, which suffer from arthritis, anestru~, <br />lack of libido, pneumonia,ulcers, lack of rear-leg <br />coordination, and increased susceptibility to stress.' <br />These creatures interest agricultural research- <br />ers because they are leaner than other pigs and have <br />greater feed conversion efficiency, that is, they <br />require less feed to attain a particular weight. The <br />human gene insertion even offers the possibility of <br />cutting seven weeks offthe,time it takes before a pig <br />is readyforslaughter" For pork producers looking at . <br />the bottom line, less feed and shorter f"Inishing time <br />mean lower costs and thus, greater prof"Its. Evi- <br />dently, making proflts overrides such moral problems <br />as what Wes Jackson calls "creeping cannibalism." <br />Today, we insert two or three human genes; tomor- <br />row, twenty, thirty, a hundred? At what point is a <br />pig no longer a pig? <br />The pigs at Beltsville are but one exhibit in the <br />brave new world of genetically engineered animals, <br />creatures whose very existence represents a radical <br />break from evolutionary history. Down through the <br />centuries, almost every culture in the world has had <br />strict taboos against bestiality, or sex between hu- <br />mans and animals, which was seen as a violjltion of <br />natural law. Nature's wisdom in setting boundaries <br />between species was assumed and respected. When <br />people did engage in liaisons with animals, nature at <br />least provided a control: Offspring were not biologi- <br />cally possible. <br /> <br />Now molecular biologists have g{)ne beyond the <br />obscene. Making an end run around nature'sres,tric-, <br />tions, genetic engineers are mixing genes from, many <br />distantly related species of organisms to produce <br />progeny that nature would never allow. Gene splic- <br />ing-()r recombinant ,DNA technology-allows biolo- <br />gists to insert mouse genes into sheep,bacterial genes <br />into cows, human genes into pigs. The resulting <br />offspring are known as transgenic animals. <br />Whereas mules-the product of,conventionally <br />crossing horses and donkeys-are sterile, transgenic <br />animals are capable of reproducing and thus passing <br />on their altered genetic endowment into perpetuity. <br />And unlike conventional bre,e,ding, genetic engineer- <br />ing gives biotechnologi.sts the potential to splice genes <br />from any species into any other, no matter how far <br />apart evolutionarily those species may be. <br />It has been suggested that such drastic inter- <br />ventions in the animal kingdom may have unforeseen <br />environmental repercussions.6 Despite the concerns <br />of some scientists, however, a tightly knit alliance of <br />universities, government agencies, corporations and <br />venture capital f"Irms has jumped on the biotechnol- <br />ogy bandwagon, sinking millions of dollars into <br />research on transgenic animals. <br />President Reagan's 1986 signing of the Federal <br />Technology Transfer Act made it possible for federal <br />laboratories and private companies to engage in <br />cooperative research projects. Even the trade publi- <br />cation, Genetic Engineering News, admitted that "the <br />idea of government, industry and university collabo- <br />ration, given their traditional penchant for 'separa- <br />tism,' is quite alien to American enterprise." <br />Nevertheless, promises of regional "economic <br />development," especially in areas hard hit by the loss <br />of U.S. jobs in manufacturing and heavy industry, <br />have given impetus to the formation of biotech <br />consortiums involving the private, public, and aca- <br />demic sectors. In its "Directory of Biotech Centers <br />1989," Genetic Engineering News listed 57 such <br />centers in the United States! <br />The Edison Animal Biotechnology Center <br /> <br />19 <br />