FC: Bioengineering, "food for thought," & Mad Cow Culture

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

[I have attached two rather interesting essays on Mad Cow Culture at the
end. --DBM]

********

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:41:59 -0400
From: Simon E Spero <ses () unc edu>

Anyone go out and campaign  against world hunger. It takes a strong man like
Rifkind to campaign for it.

*********

From: Tee Toth-Fejel <ttf () erim org>
To: "'Roland J. Cole'" <cole () spi org>
Subject: RE: IP: Food for thought or something to gag on? (antitrust suit)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:58:21 -0400

Normally, I would say that Rifkin is a luddite fool,
(and his intention no doubt is to stop genetic engineering, period)
but the monopolization of food is disturbing.

The obvious solution is to make genetic code open source (i.e.. BSD, Linux).
That's what the universities (i.e. grad students) are for.

Tihamer "Tee" Toth-Fejel                    Member of Technical Staff
(734) 623-2544                http://www.anteater.ann-arbor.mi.us/ttf/  
Center for Electronic Commerce,                          ttf () erim org 
Environmental Research Institute of Michigan 

**********

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:55:43 -0700
From: Benjamin Ellsworth <Benjamin_Ellsworth () b2systems com>
To: declan () well com, politech () vorlon mit edu
Subject: Re: FC: More on "Food for thought" -- an editorial in Wednesday's WSJ

Since you published the WSJ editorial which is basically supportive of biotech
in farming and specifically supportive of the Terminator technology, would you
please also provide the following links to alternate views:

A technical treatise on the Terminator is at
http://www.bio.indiana.edu/people/terminator.html.

A useful set of links can be found at
http://www.rafi.org/misc/terminator.html.

http://www.rafi.org is a good place to look at biotech in general.

Thanks,

Ben

***********

>     FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                CONTACT:        Kerry Fennelly 
>     Wednesday, September 15, 1999                        (202)224-5171     
>     
>     
>                        *******MEDIA ADVISORY******
>                            JEC TO HOLD SUMMIT II 
>                        Wednesday, September 29, 1999
>     
>        Washington -- Chairman Connie Mack (R-FL) today announced the Joint 
>     Economic Committee (JEC) would hold a one-day Summit on Wednesday, 
>     September 29th at 10:00 in Hart 216 to explore the effects 
>     biotechnology has on our economy, our standard of living and our 
>     everyday lives.
>     
>        "Putting a Human Face on Biotechnology" will give Congress the 
>     opportunity to focus its attention on the more personal aspects of 
>     high technology, in addition to discussing the importance of this 
>     industry to the growth of our economy.  Participants will include 
>     individuals whose lives have been improved or saved by exciting 
>     technological breakthroughs; leaders from several of the country's top 
>     biotechnology companies and representatives from the venture capital 
>     industry.
>     
>        Included on the witness list:   
>     
>        Lance Armstrong, winner of the 1999 Tour de France and testicular 
>     cancer survivor; 
>        Dr. Larry Einhorn, Armstrong's physician; 
>        Henri Termeer, President and CEO of Genzyme Corporation; 
>        Art Levinson, President and CEO of Genentech, Inc.;
>        Hendrick A.Verfaillie, President and COO of Monsanto Company; 
>        Peter Lynch, Vice Chairman of the Fidelity Management and Research 
>     Company; 
>        Lewis Edelheit, Senior Vice President of General Electric Corporate 
>     R&D; 
>        Matthew Andresen, President of the Island ECN, Inc.; 
>        Edward Fritzky, Chairman and CEO of Immunex Corporation; 
>        Carl Rausch, CEO of Biopure Corporation.
>        Ronald W. Dollens, President and Chief Executive Officer of Guidant 
>     Corporation.       
>        *****Additional panelists will be announced at a later date.
>     
>        "Putting a Human Face on Biotechnology" will be live-streamed via 
>     the internet on the JEC homepage at: jec.senate.gov.  --30-- 

*********

From: 76543.1777 () compuserve com
To: declan () well com
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 10:17:13 -0400

"If I Didn't have Brain"
Prince Charlie

It has come to my attention that the Swine Breeders of America have made
considerable progress in breeding the brain out of the beast. Their
advertising agency captures this announcement in  the slogan: "No brain, no
pain." 

This development is so elegant, so simple, one wonders why it has taken so
long to uncover. As has been reported in this space before, noted
psychologist Dr. Z. Meadow Lark has said it would be easier for humans to
consume barnyard animals if they didn't look so cute. This is why, in Lark's
opinion, McDonald's goes to great lengths to dress cows in skirts and Easter
hats and deliver these lovelies to unsuspecting children in the form of
Happy Meals.  Kids are led to believe that the cows are having a picnic.

But Lark has also noted that adults are not always taken in by these tales
of blissful burgers. Some-approximately 1 out of 1.8 thousand-do ask the
pimply faced kids behind the counter where the meat actually comes from. The
answer, learned by rote at McDonald U, is from Happy Cows. That satisfies
most of the queries. Still, some consumers are not taken in by the sight of
cows walking hoof in hoof on the way to Farmer Brown's outdoor swimming
pool.

These are the people the Swine Breeders want to reach. To that end they have
created a pig without a head. That's right. This headless swine does, as
Shakespeare anticipated, actually make the beast with two backs, which face
each other, curly tails at the ready, butts marching  into each other with
meaty abandon. 

As Dr. Lark reminds us, "We are not forced to go eyeball-to-eyeball with a
beautiful young pig or calf that have been plucked from manger scenes.
Instead, we can look at the animal as a source of pleasurable meat.
  
The  animal has no brain and therefore feels no pain. Since the swine
doesn't know whether he's coming or going, we humans are let off the hook.
No longer can we be called murderers."

Though environmental Nazis are already  criticizing the Swiners for
tampering with Mother Nature, this development might have other merciful
developments. We know mad cow disease occurred when unsuspecting happy cows
ate the brains of sheep that was home to a now-diagnosed wooly madness. If
sheep didn't have brains, this terribly disease might not have happened.

There are other environmental advantages. Next to the genitals, heads of
slaughtered animals are very difficult to dispose of. Other than certain
Asian cultures that buy eyelashes and chin hair for sexual aids, there is
not much demand for head.-except as a kind of hamburger helper in certain
down-market brands of cat food (Kitty By Cow and the like).

Some cultures are up in arms about this. Scots, who often have animal brains
with their evening tea, consider the headless swine an attack on their
culture as vicious as when the English crawled over Hadrian's wall on their
bellies.

The Irish don't  like this headless horseman either. Rural Irish fear that
the Sunday afternoon tradition-sitting in a group and picking a hog's head
clean-will soon become a thing of the past.  

Culture might lose this round. Science will soon be in a position to give us
mindless meat from animals without a clue. No longer do we have to feel the
pain associated with slaughtering these innocents. And no more guilt.

The Environmental Nazi Party (ENP) has responded with the slogan: "Animals
also have souls."  Dr. Lark thinks this is a brilliant response and that it
will force marketers to be more sensitive to animal theology. "I suggest
McDonalds build a marketing plan around this idea. Perhaps showing Happy
Cows sauntering down a village lane to church."

Of course, without a head the animals will never actually move. They will be
frozen in time in front of the church, listening to the same old litany they
can neither hear nor understand.

"Perfect," says Dr. Lark. "Now we're talking theology."

*************

From: 76543.1777 () compuserve com
Received: from nt40ny7.hfmmag.com (nt40ny7.hfmmag.com [204.126.251.2])
          by smtp.well.com (8.8.6/8.8.4) with ESMTP
          id KAA21698 for <declan () well com>; Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by NT40NY7 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
        id <S33KXNY0>; Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:51:35 -0400
Message-ID: <3EC2BAEF0FF3D211B3D000A0C9A5DADA045C62@NT40NY7>
Cc: declan () well com
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 12:51:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
 
Cow's Couch

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the term "mad cow" is taking on
meaning, both sacred and profane, far beyond the etymology associated with
that wicked meat. This development all inveterate cheese-lovers should view
with alarm.

We know from sophisticated double-blind research projects that it is not
unusual for humans to go to the animal kingdom when desirous of enlarging a
limited vocabulary. Someone is a "pig" who eats fast and wears his panties
outside his thrice-torn jeans. We use this term though pigs don't eat fast
and, given the river of shit these swine produce, they have little need for
cute, rose-colored underwear.

Animal metaphors fall from the tongue like old lovers. Someone is as brave
as a lion though we know this beast is a slob who lives off the road kill
brought down by the old lady. Someone looks like a dog though, by and large,
dogs look better than people, except when the two creatures live together.
Then both sport a really dreary hang-dog look. This is especially true in
Britain where dogs have learned to swim in the bastard gene pool of a race
in decline.

"Catty" is used to describe a certain feline behavior, though cats usually
don't gossip for hours behind bathroom doors when having their period.
Calling someone a cow or an "old cow" is rarely a compliment except in the
southwest corner of Bombay on Rogue Tuesdays. "Having a cow" is a more
neutral term but is under fire by PC Semantic Police who consider the phrase
cruelty to a barnyard animal.

Our appropriation of the animal kingdom to describe our own stupid behavior
is quite understandable. Psychologically speaking, the habit is called
"bovine banditry."

The "mad cow" usage, however, seems different. In the UK anti-social
behavior, such as displayed by the Leeds soccer louts, is called mad cow.
Even the tabloid press has called for these louts to suffer the mad cow
fate. This tribal justice will probably not work as studies have shown the
beer-sodden brains of these boozing boobs with easily weather the stun-gun.
It would be like shooting into Jell-O.

A Mad Cow nightclub just opened in Berlin. Party goers have been known to
moo and defecate on the dance floor at the same time in a messy parody of
the popular mosh pit routine

We know that the recently outlawed Moo By Chan movement in China almost
brought the government to its knees. Practitioners would simply assume a
wobbly mad cow pose and maintain this lunatic meadow lark for hours.
Powerful as the Moo movement is, one suspects that Chinese officials are
simply projecting their own stupidity on the Moo-ers who are only too happy
to serve as a mirror for government madness. No word yet whether any Moo
people have been run over by tanks.

We can be reasonably sure that the millions worldwide touched by the mad cow
syndrome have never consumed robust British beef. Accordingly, the mad cow
tick seems to have touched spirit as well as body. I have heard of mad cow
worship in places as remote as McKeesport, Pennsylvania and Walhala, Sudan.
Priests apparently wear cow masks and struts across dung-dressed altars with
a clove-footed certainty.

> > From a psychological perspective it appears that the cow has been
appropriated as a sacrificial victim, taking on the dark Shadow forces of
human kind. This is in the tradition of the ancient Scapegoat who takes on
the sins of the village and then, poor bugger, is stoned to death. The cow
is our scapegoat and seems to accept willingly our sins and burdens. This is
an archetypal inevitability. I consider the practice no more dangerous than
throwing salt over the left shoulder three times.


In a way the international identification with this miserable, put-upon
beast indicates that we are still capable of genuine affection.  To identify
with these double-udder innocents, slaughtered because they walk funny and
have cheese for brains, suggests we have not lost the capacity for
compassion.

Psychologically, the mad cow phenomenon has done more to bring man and beast
together since Freud warned those horny shepherds about keeping too close a
watch on their sheep at night. Being called by Freud a "wooly-headed wanker"
is no compliment. 

Dr. Z. Meadow Lark

*********



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to majordomo () vorlon mit edu with this text:
subscribe politech
More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------