While on the surface the human genome may appear similar in much the same way a Ford contains all the same features as a GM car, as we dig deeper each nuance in structure will be encoded quite plainly and clearly (i.e. Vietnamese people will have clear and distinct genetic differences from Chinese people, New Zealanders, American Indians etc.) and it will merely take a genetic program to seek out and or specify these sub-surface deviations and disparities.

It is very much something to worry about as the science of genetics improves. I am uncomfortable with the headfirst and laissez-faire approach to genetic mutations by many scientists today. Nature is not sacred as in it's being "god-engineered" but it is "balance-engineered" and that pairing of wave forms at the quantum level has created a genetic structure which is as balanced as nature permits for each genetic code sequence.

Tampering with the genetic code to create "superior" genes in plants or animals is foolhardy at best - possibly insanely irresponsible and shortsighted at worst. I don't look at genetically engineered fruit or grain as a big accomplishment or as the panacea of starvation around the world. I fully know that the newly engineered grain (or whatever) will be a coarse and unbalanced code sequence which will now experience and accelerated genetic balancing process over it's subsequent generations. The dangers for self-sterilization of a plant or animal are very real as well as the dangers of creating new imbalances in accidental cross-breedings with other nearby genetic structures. The initial gains will almost assuredly be offset by subsequent "natural" mutations as the sequence tries to reachieve its former balance.

It can be likened to building something and using screws and nuts made of wood. The object would be far less durable for the long haul. Our present level of adjustments, likewise, create far less durable genetic code sequences.

Imagine if we had never discovered the Van Allen radiation belts, but sent folks into the belts without protection? We'd be clueless as our astronauts came back sick or with cancers. Sometimes I fear that the equally invisible & immense risks of genetic mutation pose much the same blindspot and when finally some serious tampering occurs which does create havoc - it will make Pandora's box seem like a children's toybox.

Again, I am not against experimentation. I am against the race to introduce largely untested genetic products to market just to boost some soon-to-be ex-FDA types new board position and salary with a genome company. The ephedra and many other drugs stamped ok by corrupt FDA types are a good example of this corrupting of our watchdog agencies. I really don't trust the FDA to know diddly-squat about half the products for which they clear the way to the marketplace and human consumption. The "let's cash in and worry about problems later" mentality which pervades pharmaceuticals and the FDA hierarchy - is simply bad science. It's the Jimmy Neutron school of science experimentation - fit only for laughs on a cartoon:

<IMG SRC=" http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/36484000/jpg/_36484151_jimmy150.jpg";

JIMMY: Goddard, look at this! My shrinking ray was approved by the FDA without any testing!
It's all here in this e-mail!
Even I expected a few more hurdles to jump.
Thank goodness they ignored what it did to Miss Fowl. Guess that hypno-ray really paid off huh boy?

GODDARD: Whirrrrrr.... Bark!

"Oh Jimmy. Your mother and I got a strange letter here from the Commissioner of the FDA
. It says here she is retiring next year and wants to be on the board of JN Science Rays LLC?
Do you know anything about this?"



Be afraid...be very afraid.

;-)

SDAI-Tech1