[Cato in PA]

I work in IT. I build computers and use Arch Linux. I’m part of an Android development team. Trust me, there’s no anti-technological mysticism here.

I won’t bother trying to have a serious conversation with someone who doesn’t bother to read what I’ve written and resorts to such crude descriptions. I didn’t call for a US ban on GMO crops; I simply said it’d be nice if the ingredients were labeled so that people could exercise good old-fashioned choice.

[allmendream]

You said ‘good for them’ in regards to Hungary and their ban on GM foods.

I was wondering what you thought was “good” about a ban, in Hungary, or possibly elsewhere.

You did call for labeling in America - but that wasn't the issue I addressed - I addressed you saying it was “good for them” to have a ban on GM crops.

I work as a Molecular Biologist. If you think working with advanced technology in developing cutting edge therapeutics would inoculate one from anti-technological mysticism - you haven't talked to some of the sillier people I work with.

Anti-technological mysticism is the idea that a beaver dam built for a beaver's purposes is a wonderful part of nature - while a human dam built for human purposes is an attack on pristine nature and certainly not a part of it.

Anti-technological mysticism posits that a ‘natural’ crop is going to be better than a GM crop - because ‘natural’ in and of itself is good and wonderful and anything that would detract from that is bad.

I see anti-technological mysticism as a major reflexive thought pattern. Once you know what it is you will start to notice it in more and more places.

Just remember - humans dying of cholera is perfectly “natural”. Humans being treated for cholera using advanced technology is not “natural”.

I know which I prefer.

[aimhigh]

it’d be nice if the ingredients were labeled so that people could exercise good old-fashioned choice.

Oh, we can't to that. It might lead to evidence of problems related to GM foods.