Real Talk!

Some historians credit Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis (1698-1759) as the pioneer of genetics. Through his study of biology, Maupertuis suggested that parts of both mother and father contributed to the character of their offspring.

Other historians point to Augustinian monk, Gregor Mendel, and his study of pea plants, published in 1866, outlining what has become known as Mendelian Inheritance. In fact, Mendel defined a concept that he described as an allele, which was the fundamental unit of heredity- practically synonymous with the term gene. Allele now means a more specific variant of a particular gene.

In 1868, Charles Darwin presented the “pangenesis” hypothesis in his 1868 work “The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication”. In theory, pangenesis holds that body cells shed gemmules, which collect in the reproductive organs prior to fertilization. In later years, Darwin elaborated further on this model, focusing on the transmission and the development of inherited characteristics.

Sir Francis Galton in 1883, drew upon the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin, being the first to formulate a social philosophy around “the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations…”

Galton believed that since many human societies sought to protect the underprivileged and weak, those societies were at odds with the natural selection responsible for extinction of the weakest. Galton urged changing social policies in order society be saved from a "reversion towards mediocrity".

First outlining his theory in the 1865 article "Hereditary Talent and Character," Galton elaborated further in his 1869 book Hereditary Genius in which he claimed that the less intelligent were more fertile than the more intelligent of his time. Galton did not propose any selection methods; rather, he hoped a solution would be found if social mores changed in a way that encouraged people to see the importance of breeding.

Galton first used the word eugenic in his 1883 Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development and, in 1904, he clarified the definition as "the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those that develop them to the utmost advantage."

As a social movement, eugenics had reached its pinnacle of popularity by the early decades of the 20th century. The scientific movement began to unravel in the 1930’s when eugenics were used as justification for the racial policies of Nazi Germany, causing a backlash in the public and among some scientists and thinkers- raising new questions and concerns about the ethical and moral application of eugenics.

While, in the broader sense, eugenics can be described as the study of "improving human genetic qualities." Curing disease, for instance, by eliminating the genetic predisposition. In other circles, the term “eugenics” is used to refer to everything from prenatal care to forced sterilization, even euthanasia and present-day reprogenetics, preemptive abortions and designer babies.

Some scientists, believing that eugenics deal with perceived beneficial and/or detrimental genetic traits suggest that defining what improvements are desired or beneficial may have cultural deviation, argue that the matter cannot be determined objectively (e.g., by empirical, scientific inquiry). For instance, in some ancient societies, forms of infanticide were acceptable.

Civilizations, such as Rome, Athens and Sparta, practiced infanticide through exposure as a form of phenotypic selection. In Sparta, newborns were inspected by the city's elders, who decided the fate of the infant. If the child was deemed incapable of living, it was usually exposed to the Apothetae near the Taygetus mountain. It was more common for boys than girls to be killed this way in Sparta. Trials for babies included bathing them in wine and exposing them to the elements. Only the strongest survived and procreated.

Early Roman law decreed that deformed infants must be put to death. Patriarchs in Roman society were given the right to "discard" undesirable infants at their discretion, often resulting in drowning in the Tiber River. The practice of open infanticide in the ancient world did not subside until the Christianization of the Roman empire.

Nazi Germany, under Adolf Hitler, tested genetic theories through infamous experimentation on live human beings. The Nazis attempted to produce and maintain a “pure” race of Germans, utilizing programs of “racial hygiene”.

During their regime, the Nazis forcibly sterilized hundreds of thousands of people, characterized by them as mentally and/or physically unfit. It is estimated that the Nazi eugenics program sterilized some 400,000 people, between 1934 and 1937.

The second largest known eugenics program, created by social democrats in Sweden, continued until 1975. The goal of the program was to decrease the number of deviant offspring. It targeted the mentally ill.

If a family member was considered deviant, a full out investigation was conducted on the family and because it was thought to be easier to persuade a woman to be sterilized, the procedure was conducted more frequently them, despite it being simpler to perform the operation on men.

From inception of the “Sterilzation Act of 1934” until 1975, Sweden sterilized more than 62,000 people. In 1999, the Swedish authorities began offering modest compensation to those victims who had never consented to the procedures- provided they requested compensation.

In the U.S., eugenics can be traced to 1896, when many states enforced laws to prohibit marriage and force sterilization of the mentally ill in order to prevent the "passing" of mental illness to the next generation. Some states sterilized "imbeciles" for much of the 20th century.

The most significant era of eugenic sterilization was between 1907 and 1963, when over 64,000 individuals were forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in the United States.

A “Eugenics Record Office” was opened in 1910 at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. It remained a center for eugenics and human heredity research for the first half of the twentieth century.

In Canada, the Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta was enacted in 1928, focusing the movement on the sterilization of mentally deficient individuals, as determined by the Alberta Eugenics Board through i.q. testing. The practice unfairly categorized immigrants who were new to the English language, resulting in lowered i.q. scores and countless sterilizations. The Act was repealed in 1972.

Most countries have, at some time or other, enacted some form of Eugenic policy that has been disrupted by the common criticism that such policy, inevitably, leads to unethical practice- implying, somehow, that concern about genes will result in genocide.

The Mid 40s through the 60s, may be categorized as “The DNA Era”, while the 70’s moved into the science of genomics. Scientists produced fine-scale genetic mapping and began to determine DNA sequences.

In the 1980s, biological engineering became the focus of big science. The potential benefits of genetic engineering were considered limitless. Scientists were able to develop hardy, disease- and weather-resistant food sources, eradicate deadly diseases, and modify some life forms.

Conservatives and fundamentalists argued form, the natural and normal, while scientists proved that the natural and normal could be altered and manipulated. Hybrid research went into overdrive, attempting to select hybrid combinations that would increase value to growers, processors and end-users.

Harvard University was granted the first patent on a genetically engineered organism (1988): in this case, said to facilitate medical research, it was a mouse susceptible to cancer.

The lines between technology and biology began to merge.

During the 1980s, The Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) genetically modified traditional basmati rice to produce a hybrid they called Pusa Basmati-1 or PB1. PB1 has doubled crop yields.

Difficulty in differentiating genuine basmati led to the development of a protocol through which exporters of basmati rice use 'purity certificates' based on DNA tests.

RiceTec (a Texas Based firm) won a patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,663,484) on "basmati rice lines and grains in 1997, effectively securing lines of basmati and basmati-like rice and ways of analyzing that rice.

This created international outrage and a strain on diplomatic relations between Indai and the U.S. There were allegations of biopiracy.

Biropiracy? This is a practice, by means of patents, through which some body obtains legal rights over indigenous knowledge - particularly indigenous biomedical knowledge - without compensation to the indigenous groups who originally developed such knowledge.

RiceTec lost most of the claims of the patent, including, most importantly, the right to call their rice lines "basmati." This was considered a huge victory for Indian farmers who could have faced enormous economic losses from the patent.

In the 90s the Monsanto company developed a gene for herbicide resistance. Engineers had isolated and then altered the gene that produces the Bt-toxin, and inserted it, using a gene gun (particle bombardment), into the DNA of the cotton plant.

By 1996, Monsanto announced plans to “Save the world through genetic engineering”. Promising a golden future that would reduce in-process waste from manufacturing and turn fields into factories that would produce everything from lifesaving drugs to insect-resistant crops, Monsanto’s technology was going to reduce environmental impact, decrease poverty and help the world.

The other variety was Roundup Ready® cotton. It contained another bacterial gene that enabled the plant to survive an otherwise toxic dose of Monsanto’s Roundup® herbicide.

The patent on Roundup’s main active ingredient, glyphosate, was set to expire in 2000, the company was planning to sell Roundup Ready seeds, bundled with their Roundup herbicide and by doing so, effectively, extend their brand’s dominance in the herbicide market.

Monsanto was feeding the cotton plants used in its test plots to cattle.

The problem is, particle bombardment can cause unpredictable changes and mutations in DNA, which can result in new types of proteins. & some of these proteins may be toxic. Rogue proteins might possibly lead to mad cow or some other prion-type diseases.

& now every cell of their Bt cotton produced a toxic protein.

Short for “proteinaceous infectious particles,” prions are improperly folded proteins, which cause other healthy proteins to also become misfolded. Over time, these cause holes in the brain, severe dysfunction and death.

Prions survive cooking and are believed to be transmittable to humans who eat meat from infected “mad” cows. The disease may incubate undetected for about 2 to 8 years in cows and up to 30 years in humans. Unknown proteins, including prions, might even effect humans who consume the cow’s milk.

Genetically Modified (GM) crops routinely create unintended proteins, alter existing protein levels or even change the components and shape of the protein that is created by the inserted gene.

Transgenic seeds are now patented and controlled by at least six multinational companies (Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont, Dow, Bayer, BASF). Montsanto now genetically engineers seeds that produce a toxin to ward off insects. reducing the need for chemical pesticides.

In some circles, Monsanto practices are known as "Terminator Technology" because the seeds have been genetically-engineered so that when the crops are harvested, all new seeds from these crops are sterile.

Traditionally, for thousands of years, farmers have saved the seeds from their crops to replant them the following year. Most farmers cannot afford to buy new seeds every year, so collecting and replanting seeds became a crucial part of the agricultural cycle.

"Millions of years of biological history will be lost if transgenic seeds are allowed to be planted in the Mexican milpa”, warned Dr. Ignacio Chapela, a University of California-Berkeley biologist.

Still, Big Biotech with Monsanto went forward with plans to replace those millions of years with seeds like the Terminator, which goes sterile after one growing cycle, and obligates farmers (who have signed binding contracts with Monsanto) to buy more. A process tagged "bio-slavery

Corn means nutrition and livelihood in Mexico and it also the culture and religion. Maize came from the gods and the Aztecs and Mayas nourished those gods with sacrificial victims to keep it coming.

The transnational attack on corn stirs passions and paranoia amongst the descendants of Mexico's first peoples.

In 2001, Mexico’s Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources confirmed fears of genetic contamination of Mexican native corn varieties. Since then, farmers have also been found liable for "gene drift" or cross-pollination contamination from neighboring GM fields.

Monsanto is currently suing more than 450 farmers in the United States and Canada for saving patented Monsanto seeds.

Our language has come to include phrasess like “gene drift" and new words, like “Bioprospecting” (a term applied in attempt to create a more positive light on a process commonly used by those responsible for the commercialization of traditional medicine).

Then there’s “biohybrid technology”- touted as a promising, new field of modern biotechnology. Combining biosensor development, nanotechnology and microelectronic chips. Biochips and microarrays are expected to revolutionize high-throughput multi-parametric protein and DNA/RNA analysis.

Through the binding of specific oligonucleotides or antibody-like aptamer molecules, complete labs can be functionalized on a single chip, which can be designed to specific requirements. Scientists and biotech companies are currently exploring new and exciting applications in pharmaceutical research, medical diagnosis, food analysis and gene technology.

Top-level research groups have formed in the fields of biosensor research; bioanalysis and molecular biology are focusing on the development of DNA-chips for medical diagnosis (humans, animals), biochips for proteomics and biosensor-chips for health care applications.

No wonder we're so confused.