top
California
California
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Let's encourage critical thinking on biotech and the role of the commons

by Bill Simpich
Successes and lessons learned from within the Reclaim the Commons convergance - and a look at the role of the bio-pharm industry, genetic engineering, stem cells...the focus is to fight corporate power and encourage critical thinking.
A number of good questions are being asked on the Indymedia posts.

One good question is about the role of the bio-pharm industry.

Another good question is why there was a relatively small turnout for the June 8 action.

“SF Anarchist” posted a chart of bio-pharma drugs that offer positive outcomes. But who is going to buy these drugs?

Most of these drugs are going to rich people to extend their life for a year or two, while poor people around the globe are priced right out of the market for drugs they need for survival.

Billions of taxpayer dollars and assets are being poured into the bio-pharma industry. Who decided that these designer drugs would be the national priority, as opposed to universal health care?

If we're serious about fighting corporate power, we have to use the best of our critical thinking.

Bayer and many of big corporations are spreading pesticides and toxins around the world.
Should we be surprised when they turn to bio-pharma to cure the diseases that they have created?

Check out: http://www.reclaimthecommons.net/article.php?id=93

It's such an American solution, to poison the planet and then sell the antidote.

It's very reminiscent of the "bioremediation groups", made up of polluters doing an ersatz clean-up after they've poisoned the land and water. This way they profit twice - both times, using the commons for their own gain (the first time the earth itself - the second time from the public treasury)

The RTC organizers knew from the beginning that most of the delegates were bio-pharma, not bio-food. Not all of us are rigidly anti-biotech on the pharma side - I'm not. But the fight is against corporate power - these people have to be given the toughest scrutiny imaginable.

When you get right down to much of what is happening, the corporate powers are trying to patent the life-force itself for private gain. This privatization of the commons has to be fought - and fought hard now.

RTC has some really good material on this subject at the website: Go to http://www.reclaimthecommons.net and look at the articles.

We were totally broke until shortly before the first of June - we had completed pamphlets that we couldn't afford to reprint between early March till late May. And I personally was pushing for a call for "disruption" rather than "shutdown", which I didn't think we had the numbers for - but we could have had more numbers. What might have been ideal would have been a call for "no business as usual" - then we could have claimed victory and left ourselves a lot of room as to our strategic goal.

We could have done a much better job with our leafleting and posting - we relied too much on e-mail. It also would have helped if we had called for a second wave of people at noon rather than focusing solely on 6:30 am.

But, despite our mistakes, we got some things right too. People all over are getting the news about the food side of biotech. The biotech organizers publicly lamented that they "are losing the battle for US public opinion". We're all getting educated on the complex issues of bio-pharma and the not-so-complex issue of who profits from this technology. We're fighting to make the connections between the global justice movement and the racial justice movement - reclaiming the commons means tearing down the enclosures that keep us apart, and recognizing that we've got to work together. And our plant allies - just like our puppet allies - will be joining us at future actions. We're building something new - and we'll make more mistakes along the way - but the metaphor of "the commons" can be a great aid in bringing us together.

Check this article out for some good background:

Will Genetic Engineering, Stem Cells and other Biotechnologies Cure Diseases?

by Marcy Darnovsky, Jesse Reynolds, and Brian Tokar


Download this Fact Sheet as a .pdf

Miracle Cures For Human Ills

1. The biotech industry has always promised miracle cures for human ills. It has spent countless millions of research and venture capital dollars with very limited success (not just in therapies — also in terms of return on investment). Many biological processes are simply too complex for their interventions to work as planned. Even their ‘successes’ have serious problems: for example, genetically engineered 'human' insulin causes more serious side effects in many diabetics.

Gene Therapy

2. A specific example is gene therapy. The biotech industry has been promising cures through gene therapy, but hundreds of trials and almost 15 years later, it is still to deliver. Worse, gene therapy trials have injured some patients. One such trial caused the death of Jesse Gelsinger, aged 18 (1999). That tragedy revealed many dozens of unreported “serious adverse effects” in other gene therapy trials, despite what some call “robust regulation.” It also revealed the conflicts of interest that have become typical. In the Gelsigner case, the principal investigator stood to reap substantial financial benefit from a successful outcome. Many observers believe that such conflicts can cause safety considerations to be underemphasized.

Industry's Influence Over Government and Academia

3. The industry's influence over government and academia has led to a very narrow focus on genetics in many areas of medical research. This has starved other, sometimes more fruitful, research needs of essential funds. While the biotech companies are fed millions, basic public & environmental health, and preventive medicine are being starved out.

Genetic Medicine Often Blames the Victims

4. Genetic medicine often blames the victims, focusing on why someone may or may not be susceptible to a disease, instead of focusing on the underlying, systemic problems. Do we want to solve our basic environmental and public health problems, or single out people who may be more susceptible to various diseases?

Industry’s Rare Successes

5. The industry’s rare successes are to be applauded, but do not mean that biotechnology or genetics hold the 'answer' to most of our critical public health problems. The companies most actively promoting biotech medicine are the same companies that are furthering corporate control over our health care.

Being Skeptical About Biotechnology Is Not 'Anti-Science'

6. To be skeptical about biotechnology is not 'anti-science.' True science is fundamentally skeptical. The tools of genetic engineering may be useful in controlled laboratory settings, where they can aid the study of basic cellular processes, but commercial products of biotechnology always need to be viewed with skepticism. There still needs to be a re-balancing of research priorities that have become far too narrowly focused on genetic interventions and genetic explanations of all human problems.

Genetically Engineering Plants To Produce Medicines For Humans

7. The biotech industry now wants to genetically engineer plants to produce medicines for humans. But modified DNA spreads. Do we want other people’s medicine in our food?

Genetic Modification Of Future Children

8. Some renowned researchers and biotech industry figures are openly advocating the genetic modification of future children. Do we want a world of designer babies for the rich?


Stem Cells and Research Cloning
Medical Promises About the Miracle Potential Of Stem Cells

9. The latest medical promises are about the miracle potential of stem cells. Stem cells may hold cures for illnesses, but there are no therapies yet. We support stem cell research, but not at the expense of research on basic public & environmental health issues, and preventive medicine.

Biotech Industry Is Asking California Taxpayers For $3 Billion

10. Yet the industry is asking California taxpayers for $3 billion — which amounts to $6 billion including interest — to subsidize their research in an upcoming bond initiative. This at a time when millions of Californians are uninsured, and the state is billions of dollars in debt.

“Independent Citizen Oversight”

11. The initiative is problematic for other reasons as well. It promises “independent citizen oversight,” but in fact actually sets up a system that actually prevents public oversight—not to mention any regulatory mechanisms.

Bush Policy On Embryonic Stem Cells

12. The Bush policy on embryonic stem (ES) cells is wrong, and is motivated by the administration’s need to accommodate its anti-abortion constituency. ES cell research should be publicly funded and publicly regulated.

Issue Of Research Cloning

13. The issue of research cloning has become politicized both by religious conservatives who oppose abortion and medical research on human embryos, and by biotech and biomedical researchers who resist any oversight or regulation of their work. Research cloning may or may not be needed for any stem cell treatments that are developed. It poses special risks and needs to be carefully regulated.

“Boutique Medicine” or “Designer Medicine”

14. Current scenarios for using research cloning in therapies involve individually tailored treatments that are likely to be far too expensive for the vast majority of people. This would be a “boutique medicine” or “designer medicine” available only to the elite.

Research Cloning In Therapies Requires Millions Of Women’s Eggs

15. Current scenarios for using research cloning in therapies would require millions of women’s eggs, posing the likelihood of exploitation. Women are paid up to $50,000 for eggs for fertility purposes, if they meet certain physical and intellectual demands. In the case of eggs for research purposes, the characteristics of the women would not be an issue.

Therapy Scenarios Based On Research Cloning Are Impractical

16. For these two reasons, leading biotech industry figures (who are key supporters of ES cell research) have acknowledged that therapy scenarios based on research cloning are impractical. One called it “a commercial non-starter.”




Add Your Comments
Listed below are the latest comments about this post.
These comments are submitted anonymously by website visitors.
TITLE
AUTHOR
DATE
pointer
Sun, Sep 12, 2004 3:29PM
Pirate Prentice
Fri, Jun 11, 2004 5:30PM
The Gipper
Fri, Jun 11, 2004 2:29PM
pointer
Fri, Jun 11, 2004 10:33AM
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network