◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys.dxiong.com)(xys1.dyndns.org)(xys888.dyndns.org)◇◇

对“王台：转基因技术不可阻挡”的一点纠正

（主要是指出做转基因植物时，选择标记并不是如“王台”说的用抗生素基因，
而是用抵抗抗生素基因，所以不可能在转基因植物体内产生抗生素。）

Dear. Dr. Fang:

Sorry I am forced to use English to communicate since I don't have 
Chinese input system on my computer.

I have just read "转基因食品是否有问题 (科学时报2002.9.29)" posted on 
www.xys.org today.

While I agreed with most of the opinions in the article, I found at 
least one mistake.

Dr. Wang Tai said that 
"特别是很多选择标记都是抗生素，这就有可能在植物体产生一些抗生素，而这
些抗生素是否会对人体有害是人们关注的问题。"

This is not true.  I work as a postdoc in an Agricultural Biotech company, 
and I know the most commonly used selectable marker in transgenic plant is 
antibiotic *RESISTANCE* gene (e.g. Kanamycin resistance gene), not the 
antibiotic gene itself.  The transgenic plant won't produce ANY antibiotics 
since they don't have these genes, no worry is needed.  So I think the above 
quoted statement by Dr. Wang Tai is wrong.  Maybe he was misunderstood by 
the journalist (I hope that's the case).

Actually one of the major traits of the transgenic crops in the market today 
is herbicide resistance.  Some scientists are worried those herbicide 
resistance genes in transgenic crop will somehow be released into weeds 
(so-called "gene escape") by pollination or whatever means and result in 
"super weeds" that are resistant against herbicides.  However, so far no 
hard evidence of gene escape was found after so many years of planting crops 
carrying herbicide resistance genes worldwide.  If Dr. Wang needs an 
example, this is a classical and good one.

The anti-GMO (genetically modified organisms) movement in Europe is more of 
a political issue.  The lack of education of the public in this area 
contributes greatly to the success of this movement.  Even Prince Charles 
once claimed that he will never eat anything with DNA, just to show how 
"naturalismistic" he is.  I wonder whether he will kill himself if someone 
tells him that his body is actually full of DNA.

Things in the US are a bit better than in Europe, since the big companies 
can somewhat influence the lawmakers.  Actually, here in the US, very few of 
the food we buy from groceries are produced from non-transgenic plants.  
Many medicine are also produced by GMO.  However, the public is still poorly 
informed about this technique and they get panic easily, although they are 
not concerned about the very toxic herbicide they spray on their backyard.  
Things are getting better though.  There's an article in either May or June 
issue of this year's National Geographic which discussed the GMO.  Although 
there's no conclusion in the article as to whether we should accept GMO or 
not, it did the job of educating the public nicely.

Biotech is neither more nor less dangerous than any other science, in my 
opinion.  What's dangerous is not the technique itself, but the human that 
utilizes it.  And remember our world is controlled by politicians, not by 
scientists.

Thank you for your time!

x2h

◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys.dxiong.com)(xys1.dyndns.org)(xys888.dyndns.org)◇◇