|
<br />'I'!"":'"-,,'"'I"
<br />0/;-;.'" '"~ ','W
<br />
<br />000487
<br />
<br />pigs to their natural, pre-domesticated role as forest-
<br />dwelling foragers. In the "improved natural agricul-
<br />ture" system, pigs forage among fruit and nut trees
<br />for their food, which results not only in healthier pigs
<br />but in lower costsRnd management requirements for,
<br />farmers.
<br />As healthy as these systems may be, consumers
<br />can "vote with their pocketbooks" only if humanely
<br />raised pork is labeled as such. Sadly, labeling require-
<br />ments that would help consumers make informed
<br />choices are poor to non-existent in most states.
<br />Although the 1990 Farm Bill contains provisions for
<br />federal organic certification standards, consumers
<br />must demand strict enforcement in order to gnaran-
<br />tee a viable market for organically produced meats.
<br />, In the event that transgenic pigs do end up
<br />being marketed-a real possibility in the next dec-
<br />ade-at the.very least, legislation should be passed
<br />that would require pork from transgenic animals to
<br />be labeled as such. The fact that currently no federal
<br />legislation exists that reqnires labeling of BST-
<br />treated milk should give consumers some idea of
<br />what they're up against.
<br />Groups such as the Foundation.on Economic
<br />Trends38 and the Council for Responsible Genetics"S
<br />are working to promote independent (Le., non-
<br />corporate-funded) studies and greater publicdisclo-,
<br />sure of the possible hazards of genetic engineering.
<br />These groups deserve support. Concerned citizens
<br />should educate themselves and mobilize politically,
<br />for as fossil fuels become scarcer, it is likely that we
<br />will see a huge, multibillion-dollar push for geneti-
<br />cally-engineered life forms as substitutes for the
<br />products of fossil-fuel technology.40 For example,
<br />proponents oftransgenic pigs cite the evidence that
<br />such pigs consume less feed-an increasingly attrac-
<br />tive .trait in an age of accelerating resource shortages.
<br />Biotechnologists claim some of the same goals
<br />that we at the Land Institute espouse-a society with
<br />less pollution and lower energy and resource require-
<br />ments-but the biotechnological method of moving
<br />toward those goals is diametrically opposed to ours.
<br />Genetic engineers believe they can improve the
<br />human lot by dominating and distorting the rest of
<br />nature to snit short-term demands. We believe
<br />history shows that such a strategy soooner or later
<br />exacts a huge toll. A truly sustainable society can be
<br />achieved only by respecting natural limits.
<br />
<br />References and Notes
<br />
<br />1. Steve Marbery, July 1989. "Enter the Princeton Pig," Hog Farm
<br />Management, pp. 6-13.
<br />,2. Steve Marbery, "July 1987. Building Tomorrow's Pig," Hog Farm
<br />J{anager.nent;pp.~10.
<br />3. Marbery, "Building Tomorrow's Pig."
<br />4. Brooks Adams, January 1990. 'The Coldest Cut: Sue Coe's
<br />'Porkopo1is.... Art in Ar.nerica, pp. 126-129.
<br />5. P.J. Regal, "Models of Genetically Engineered Organisms and Their
<br />Ecological Impact," Ecological Studies, Vol. 58, pp. 111-129.
<br />
<br />6. Barbara Fletcher, MD., May 1988. "'Government, Industry and
<br />University Collaborate to Form Biotech Consortium," Genetic En~
<br />gineering News, p. 11.
<br />7. Mark D. Dibner and Janet E. Hafer, September 1989. "Biotech
<br />Centers Catalyze GovernmentlUnivel"8itylIndustry Interactions,"
<br />Genetic EngirifN?ring"NewB, p. 22,
<br />8. Steve Marbery." "Enter the Princeton Pig."
<br />9. Deborah Erickson, August 1990. "Down on the Pharm," Scientific
<br />American, pp. 102-103.
<br />10. William Booth, January 22, 1986. "Of Mice, Oncogenes, and
<br />Rifkin," Science, Vol. 239, pp. 341-343.
<br />11. Jeremy Cherfas, July 13, 1990. "Molecular Biology Lie8 Down with
<br />the Lamb," Science, Vol. 249, pp. 124-126. .
<br />12. Gene Bylinsky, October 26, 1987. "Hete Come the Bionic Piglets,"
<br />Fortune, pp. 74-89.
<br />13. LeoJ. Hertzel, March 1990. -Genetic Engineering: Supercow atthe
<br />Supermarket," North American Review, Vol. 276, No. I, pp. 9~26.
<br />14. John Robbina, 1987. Diet for a New America, Stillpoint Publishing,
<br />Walpole, NH, p. 66.
<br />15. Gene Bruce, Nov. 1990. "Dirty Chicken, "T!f,e Atlantic, pp.3249.
<br />16. Dick and Sharon Thomp8on, SeptJOct. 1986. "Healthy Hogs
<br />Without Drugs," The New Farm, pp. 12-17.
<br />17. Robbina, p. 83, p. 90.
<br />18. Samuel S. Ep8tein, July 27, 1989. "Growth HormOnes Would
<br />Endanger Milk," Los Angeles Times.
<br />19. Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., SeptJOct. 1989. "B8T:ThePublicHealth
<br />Hazards," The Ecologist, Vol. 19, No.5, pp. 191-195.
<br />20. Keith Scllneider, April 21, 1990. "Biotechnology Enters Political
<br />Race," New York Times.
<br />21. Epstein, "BST: The Public Health Hazards."
<br />22. Chuck Haasebrook and Marty Strange, 1981. Tahe Hogs, For
<br />Erample: The Transformation of Hog Forming in America, Center
<br />for Rural Affairs, Walthill, NE, p. 3.
<br />23. Robbina, p. 80.
<br />24. Hassebrook and Strange, p. 4.
<br />25. Appendices to "Animal Patenting Fact Sheet" froIQ ~e Foundation
<br />on Economic Trends.
<br />26. John Sterling, May 1987. -Patent Office Decides that New Animals
<br />Can Be Patente~" Genetic Engineering News, p. 13.
<br />27. "Experiments conducted on apeman~type ,slaves," Wisconsin State.
<br />Journal, May 14,1987.
<br />28. Hous~Resolution 1556, intro~cedbyRep.RobertKastenmeier(1).
<br />WD, March 22, 1989.
<br />29. For more on human genetic engineering research and what it may
<br />bode for the future, see Ted Howard and Jeremy Rifkin, 1977. Who.
<br />Should Play God?, Dela.ccrte Press, New York, NY. Also watcli for
<br />Andrew Kimbrell's Second Genesis, Harper & Row"in 1991~
<br />30. For information contact: Humane Society of the United States,
<br />2100 LStreet,N.W., Washington, DC 20037; the Humane Farming
<br />Association, 1550 California St., Suite 6, San Francisco, CA 94109:
<br />the Farm Animal Reform Movement (FARM), 10101 AshburWn .
<br />Lane, Bethesda, MD 20817: or the Animal Welfare Institute, P.O.
<br />Box 3650, Washington, DC 20007.
<br />31. Sharon Montague, May 27, 1990. "Law restricts investigations of
<br />kennels," Salina Journal.
<br />32. Kathy Kiely, May 20, 1990. "War between animal rights groups,
<br />medical labs puts Congress on spot," Houston Post.
<br />33. Anthony Phelps, April 1988. 'The Hidden Hazard," Hog Farm
<br />Management, pp. 38-39.
<br />34. Robert Aherin, June 198"6. "Are Your Confinement Buildings a
<br />Threat to Your Health?" Hog Farm Management, p. 30.
<br />35. Stanley Curtis, April 1984. 'The Air They Breath. May Cause
<br />Disease," Hog Farm Management, p. 84.
<br />36. Dick and Sharon Thompson, "Healthy Hogs Without Drugs."
<br />37. Craig Cramer, May/June 1990. "Profitable Pork on Pasture," The
<br />New Farm, pp. 15-18.
<br />38. The Foundation on Eoonomic Trends can be contacted at 1130 17th
<br />St., N.W., Suite 630, Washington, DC 20036, or (202) 466-2823.
<br />39. The Council on Responsible Genetics can be contacted at 186 South
<br />St., 4th Floor, Boaton, MA 02111, or (617) 423-0650.
<br />40. For more on thi8 topic 8ee Jeremy Rifkin, 1983. Algeny, Penguin
<br />Books, New York, NY.
<br />
<br />23
<br />
|