Genetically modified this, gluten free that and a boat load of other shit you never had to think about before eating your food. Now it seems everything you eat could become your last supper. Allergies pose the biggest threat. Mainly, because the majority of those allergens could lead to anaphylactic shock, which in some cases if you don’t have an Epipen could lead to death. And even more so now, that Mylan, is pulling a Turing Pharmaceutical and has raised their prices by as much as five hundred dollars.
What does genetically modified really mean? REWIND! Let’s shift back to my last post ‘Where Were You Made & Do You Have a Complex?’ and concentrate on Malthusian theory mainly, famine. They say, ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.’ For some good intentioned scientists, this means the beginning of a possible avenue towards reducing famine.
Well, I know it’s strange, but let’s venture into the definition of computer science, which according to the Oxford Dictionary, is “the study of principles and the use of computers.” However, Zelle emphasizes, “computer science is more than just the study of computers and from my nominal experience, I would say it is more of an art and combination of science. For example, if you want to increase the speed of your computer, as a benefit of accomplishing your work more quickly, by tweaking and editing parts of an already existing system there is an increased likely hood other parts or processes may suffer. This is typically referred to as the law of unintended consequences.
Moreover, Chang of The New York Times explains, “A new generation of crops known as gene-edited rather than genetically modified is coming to the market. Created through new tools that snip and tweak DNA at precise locations, they, at least for now, largely fall outside of current regulations.”
Yes, civilization has made enormous leaps and bounds, but this all comes back to a perfect circle from the law of unintended consequences, or in some cases is it really the law of unintended consequences or the exploitation of it?
Jacob Brogan, of Slate Magazine, “Though people still tend to weaponize it as a simple anti-scientific screed, Frankenstein, which was first published in 1818, is much richer when we read it as a complex dialogue about our relationship to innovation both our desire for it and our fear of the changes it brings.”
