War on GMOs escalates

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

As a preface, two rhetorical questions:

- why the Ministry of Education and Science, and not the Ministry of Agriculture or Rospatent, took up the development of GMO legislation?

why the timing of public consultations (from 29.12.12 to 16.01.13) was timed to coincide with the New Year holidays?

The article below will help answer these questions. For those who want to take part in the protest and sign the appeal, we offer a link.

Currently, the public and political resonance on the problem of GMOs (in many documents the abbreviation GMOs and LMOs are also used) is increasing in European countries, where a moratorium on the production and distribution of GMOs was introduced from 1999 to 2003. Moreover, today the EU has collected more than a million signatures of citizens regarding the declaration of Europe as a zone free from the cultivation and use of GM organisms. In the coming months, the European Parliament will put this issue to a vote. Given the fact that most European countries de facto and de jure have already declared themselves GMO-free zones, it is safe to predict that an indefinite moratorium on the cultivation and use of GMOs will be introduced in the European Community.

Despite the fact that international jurisprudence has established rules and directives in the field of circulation and use of GMOs, such as the European special set of rules for the creation, testing, distribution, use and control of GMOs (EU Directive 90/220 / EEC; EU Directive 2001/18 / EC, which entered into force in April 2003), and at the UN level, two main initiatives have been taken: "Code of voluntary rules to be followed when introducing (releasing) organisms into the environment" (draft prepared by the Secretariat of the Organization United Nations Industrial Development Organization - UNIDO), and the Protocol on Biosafety under the Convention on Biological Diversity (Cartagena Protocol and Aarhus Convention), Russia did not use them in its legislation related to genetically engineered organisms and did not join the Cartagena Protocol and the Aarhus Convention …

Now, when Europe is on the verge of making a fateful decision to ban GMOs, Russia, being a part of the European Ecological and Economic Area, is beginning to actively promote the registration, creation and distribution of GMOs on its territory, clearly fulfilling its obligations in the field of biotechnology data from the United States during the negotiations on joining the WTO. Apparently only this can explain the activation of our side in our speeches with the support of GMOs at the international (by the FAO Declaration of April 22, 2012) and the domestic legislative space, a vivid confirmation of which is this draft Resolution, posted for general discussion on the website of the Ministry of Economic Development just under Christmas holidays on December 29, 2012 with the scheduled end of it on January 16, 2013, which looks like a mockery and complete disregard for the opinion of society.

Russian civil society cannot stay away from the ongoing processes in the field of environmental and food safety associated with the spread of GMOs and believes that the proposed draft Resolution "" in this form can not be accepted.

There are many flaws in the draft Resolution. To begin with, GMOs cannot be simplified to the word "", which has a completely different meaning. After all, we are dealing with a genetically modified organism created by artificially introducing new genes into the coadapted genome, taken in some cases from representatives of even other kingdoms, the presence of genes of which was “rejected” by the process of evolution and natural selection.

Section I. General Provision

In the General Provision, which deals with State registration, in (page 5) it is stated that GM organisms must be "", i.e. they differ from conventional counterparts, and only in this case they are entitled to registration in our state and our patent structures (and these are permanent license fees). Based on the context of the document, the statements and testimonies of GMO supporters that all GMOs are identical original varieties and fully comply with them (principle of conformity) and that they do not pose any risks to the environment and human health. It has been proven that any change in the genetic apparatus of living things at the level of genes (mutations) always leads to changes that can manifest themselves at the morphological, cytological or molecular levels. Why such a manifestation is excluded when introducing genes and their groups during genetic engineering manipulations with the genome remains a mystery.

Section II. State registration of modified organisms and the expansion of the types of their intended use

III State registration of products

Neuralink will focus its brain implants on patients with disabilities in an effort to restore them to use their limbs.

“We hope that next year, after FDA approval, we will be able to use implants in our first humans - people with severe spinal cord injuries such as tetraplegic and quadriplegic,” said Elon Musk.

Musk's company isn't the first to go this far. In July 2021, neurotech startup Synchron received FDA clearance to begin testing its neural implants in paralyzed people.

It is impossible to deny the benefits that can be derived from the fact that a person will have access to limbs that are paralyzed. This is truly a remarkable achievement for human innovation. However, many are concerned about the ethical aspects of technology-human fusion if it goes beyond this area of application.

Many years ago, people believed that Ray Kurzweil did not have time to dine with his predictions that computers and humans - a singularity event - would eventually become reality. And yet we are here. As a result, this topic, often referred to as "transhumanism", has become the subject of heated debate.

Transhumanism is often described as:

"a philosophical and intellectual movement that advocates the improvement of the human condition through the development and widespread dissemination of sophisticated technologies that can significantly increase life expectancy, mood and cognitive abilities, and predicts the emergence of such technologies in the future."

Many are concerned that we lose sight of what it means to be human. But it is also true that many treat this concept on an all-or-nothing basis - either everything is bad or everything is good. But instead of just defending our positions, perhaps we can spark curiosity and listen to all sides.

Yuval Harari, author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humanity, discusses this issue in simple terms. He stated that technology is advancing at such a breakneck pace that very soon we will be developing people who will surpass the species we know today so much that they will become a completely new species.

“We will soon be able to rewire our bodies and brains, whether through genetic engineering or by directly connecting the brain to a computer. Or by creating completely inorganic entities or artificial intelligence - which is not at all based on an organic body and an organic brain. It's something that goes beyond just another kind."

Where this can lead, since the billionaires from Silicon Valley have the power to change the entire human race. Should they ask the rest of humanity if this is a good idea? Or should we just accept the fact that this is already happening?