Europe Must Listen to Mandelson on GM Food

The European Union (EU) Trade Commissioner, Peter Mandelson, last week, and for the umpteenth time, appealed to European countries to adopt an open approach to agricultural biotechnology and genetically modified (GM) food.

In a speech during the European Biotechnology Open Day in Brussels, Belgium, Mr. Mandelson counseled Europe to embrace biotechnology that “… prioritizes strict science-based health and safety testing but which recognizes that safe biotechnology has a crucial role to play in agriculture and agricultural trade both in Europe and the developing world.”

He warned Europe against stonewalling on biotechnology, and especially genetically modified food.. “We must be under no illusion that Europe’s interests are served by being outside a global market that is steadily working its way through the issues raised by GM food. They are not!” Said Mr. Mandelson.

It’s not the first time Mr. Mandelson is asking European countries to discard their negative and misplaced perceptions about agricultural biotechnology and GM foods. On several occasions, Mr. Mandelson has questioned Europe’s recalcitrant stand on GM foods.

Soon after the World Trade Organization (WTO) issued a ruling that found the EU in violation of international trade rules for placing a moratorium (since lifted) on GM foods in 2005, Mr. Mandelson called for a civil debate on GMOs. He argued that the debate about the pros of genetically modified foods must be anchored on verifiable scientific facts.

In his last week’s speech, Mr. Mandelson moaned that the current GMOs debate disregard scientific facts, and, instead, dwells on generalizations. Nobody can dispute Mr. Mandelson’s assertion that raw politics is what drives the GMOs debate. We have anti-biotechnology activists saying this and that about GM food without adducing scientific evidence. These people see nothing positive in food biotechnology, and this is what has polarized the debate on GM food.

Despite Mr. Mandelson’s protestations, Europe’s stance on GM food, unfortunately, hasn’t changed, which prompts me to ask, “Do European countries believe in their own institutions?” I don’t think they do. If they did, they would have listened to Mr. Mandelson. How comes Mr. Mandelson acknowledges genetic engineering pros, while countries that he represents don’t?

Mr. Mandelson’s views on GM food are not his own. They reflect the official position of the EU, to which countries that oppose them belong. Why they, deliberately, refuse to heed Mr. Mandelson’s advice is really intriguing.

Poor countries excuse themselves from crop genetic engineering on pretext that that they lack mechanisms to test the safety of GM food. The EU, as Mr. Mandelson puts it in his Brussels speech, has such mechanisms, but it has refused to use them, and instead relied on anti-biotechnology advocacy groups such as the Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth to shape policy.

As I have repeatedly stated in this blog, the EU’s policy on GM food hurts not only European countries, but also developing countries. These countries would not dare practice biotech agriculture for fear of losing European markets for their agricultural products. By default, the EU is preventing the developing world to plant GM crops. This is unacceptable. Crop genetic engineering is a reality that won’t disappear just because a scare-monger somewhere is saying this and that about GM food.

A Robust Seed and Biotechnology Program Needed in Africa

In a recent meeting, African Union (AU) Ministers of Agriculture endorsed the development of the African Seed and Biotechnology Program (ASPB). The ministers, meeting in Libreville, Gabon, seemed to acknowledge that Africa is in short supply of quality seeds, and that’s why its agricultural sector remains in the doldrums. This situation is self-inflicted, and has more to do with the politicization of seed technologies. It's encouraging that the AU is making deliberate efforts to promote biotechnology in the continent.

Africa is financially constrained to develop high-yielding seeds. It doesn’t have the technological know-how. Worse, scientists who could have been the force behind new seeds development have fled to developed countries to seek greener pastures.

The reality, then, is that developed countries are the sole sources of high-yielding seeds. Through genetic modification, biotechnology companies in these countries have managed to develop drought and pesticide resistant seeds whose returns have been great. The bounty harvests farmers in the U.S. Canada, and developing countries such as China and India realize from biotech seeds only attest to their productivity.

Biotech companies have always sought to correct this situation, by extending these benefits to farmers in developing countries. But their efforts have been met with resistance. A cabal of anti-technology activists continues to spread lies that multinational biotech companies seek to colonize the seed industry.

I am wondering if AU Agriculture Ministers addressed this issue during their Libreville meeting. If they want the ASPB program to succeed, they must start viewing multinational biotech companies as agents of development. They must extend a hand of friendship to them knowing very well it’s their farmers who stand to benefit.

I note that Malawi and Zambia were represented in this meeting. These two are, perhaps, are the most vocal critics of genetically modified foods in the African continent. How will they be good overseers of the envisioned seed and biotechnology program with their current hostile policies towards genetically modified foods?

ASPB is a good idea, but its architects must demonstrate by words and deeds that they’re genuinely for it. They could do so by initiating agricultural biotechnology sensitization programs in their respective countries. This way farmers will be aware they’re dealing with a progressive technology.

Landing the Perfect Biotechnology Job

The euphoria of graduation day has worn off. You have done it – finished up that degree, made your family proud, and now it is time to strike out on your own. Your love of the field led you to seek and earn a degree in biotechnology, but how do you go about finding a job in such a field? It isn’t as hard as you might think. You can find a job in biotechnology, or any field, with a little bit of dedication and prep work.

Biotechnology – or the use of technology to modify organic (living) material – is a vast field that has been around for years. While there are several subcategories of the field, the main ones are agriculture, industry, medicine, and bioinformatics. The vastness of the field works in your favor, as there are many options for employment. You could end up working in a brewery or winery to make that perfect drink, or working in the field to minimize the damage an oil spill or other chemical spill might have on wildlife, or even working in a lab on pest control, genetics, or pharmaceuticals. All of it is biotechnology.

The vast array of options aside, how exactly do you go about securing that all-important job? In addition to a biology or biotech degree, you will need a strong resume. Post it to every online job bank you can. Really good ones for biotech jobs are www.Biospace.com, www.cleanroomjobs.net and www.Biotechnologyjobs.com. Posting your resume allows employers to find you. When they call, the initial screening is already complete, and you’ll know you passed.

Search the online job bank databases as well. Don’t just stick to popular sites like Monster, CareerBuilder, and HotJobs. Try looking at databases dedicated to the biotech job scene. In addition to the above two, check out www.ihirebiotechnology.com and www.sciencejobs.com. Many universities offer free job placement services and career counseling – take advantage of that while you can. They may have connections or knowledge of listings for entry level jobs that are not posted elsewhere.

Another approach to landing that job is to attend job fairs hosted by companies in the biotechnology industry. You can find out about these by reading newspaper classifieds, visiting the human resources pages of the companies you are interested in, and by checking announcements posted in job forums. Make your social networking time pay off!

Lastly, don’t be afraid to use word of mouth when it comes to successful job searching. Sometimes, the adage, “It’s not what you know, its who you know” proves true. Ask friends, family, or someone “in the know” if they are aware of any jobs that would be right for you. Sometimes, your best tools for job searching are your mouth and ears. Use them wisely.

As vast as the field of biotechnology is, you are bound to find at least an entry level position in a reasonable amount of time. With patience and persistence, the perfect biotechnology job will come your way. Use the resources that are available to you, and watch your career take off.

The Connection Between Best Acne Treatments and Technology

Some of the best acne treatments offered today are based or developed through high technology and scientific innovations. The emergence of high tech medical devices and instruments has changed the way medical and health-related concerns are addressed by specialists and the public in general.

One of the areas of medicine that has benefited from technology is dermatology. The emergence of biotechnology, LEDs and laser has allowed scientists to develop some of the best acne treatments that man has ever seen. Arguably, technology is the best thing that has ever happened to medicine.

The discovery of LEDs, lasers and fluorescent lighting has led to the development of the use of visible light in treating acne, a process better known as phototherapy. This method of treatment has been shown to reduce 64 percent of acne lesions when used twice a week. The method apparently works better when combined with red visible light. The combination has been found to reduce lesions by 76 percent after three months of daily use.

Laser surgery is already used in reducing scars caused by acne and researchers are now focusing on whether the same method can be employed to prevent the actual formation of acne. Laser technology is currently being developed to burn away follicle sac and sebaceous gland and induce the formation of oxygen in the bacteria to kill them. As of 2005, these scenarios remain in the research stage and are not yet established as definite treatment methods.

Another area of high technology that presents a lot of promise for treating acne is biotechnology, particularly the fields tied with genetics. Since acne is believed to be linked with heredity, whole-genome DNA sequencing has been the focus of some research efforts. The aim is to understand the body mechanisms involve in acne formation. The use of gene therapy to alter the DNA of the skin also seems to be a not too far possibility.

Technology has provided us with some of the best acne treatments ever known to man. More possibilities are still waiting to be discovered and 21st century science is on the verge of making all these possibilities a reality.

Kerwin Chang writes for http://www.acnestuff.net where you can find out more about acne and other skin care topics.

Biotechnology – Its Latest Trends And Techniques

One of the fastest growing research areas in the world is Biotechnology as we know it. The basic idea behind biotechnology is using living things to create products rather than the other way around. We often times see that the living organisms are nothing more than parts of DNA structure or code which will help the researcher to develop the idea that he or she has working. The organisms do what the research does not have the power to do, hence their small size. The organisms are used to perform the tasks that are impossible for humans and can only be accomplished by the tiny particles that are working inside everything we see and touch on a daily basis.

The trends in biotechnology are inviting to a good many areas of the world. The industrial sector is extremely interested in biotechnology as they need new ways to develop products without the use of humans. This is generally because the process that is used to make the products can be overtly dangerous to people and the job needs to be performed by something that will not be harmed. This is where biotechnology fits into the process. The particles that are used will set to work doing the only task they know how. This in turn helps the company as they have developed the way to make sure that none of their employees were harmed and the job was done correctly without the intervention of humans to the methods. This is popularly shown with the new one way reactor that is being installed with many of the larger industry areas. Rather than the power having to move back and fourth it comes out and stays out while the reactor continues to make more. This would not be possible if it were not for the biotechnology research that has been done in this area.

The other most important area that biotechnology is present in is the medical or red sector. Using the techniques that biotechnology employs researchers believe that they are very close to having a system that will diagnose and attack tumors in the body without surgery. This would all be done by way of an injection that would contain the biotechnology particles and organisms that are specifically made to attack and diagnose the tumor as it is found in the body. This is very good news for the many cancer patients of the world. When you operate on a cancer patient you run the risk of the disease spreading or missing some of the cancerous material that is contained therein. This will be completely unnecessary if the use of biotechnology reaches a point where it will do the job that it is made to do.

Biotechnology is changing the way that the world is created around us and is working to help cure some of the most horrible diseases that are currently known to man.

Biologist aims to create life from scratch

ROCKVILLE, Md. Biologist J. Craig Venter once raced the United States government to complete the decoding of the human genome. Now career studying the code of life, Dr. Venter has a new goal which is.. life itself.

Along with two other veterans, Dr. Venter hopes to become the first to construct a made to order bacterium. Normally new life is created by reproduction, with each generation passing it's genes on to the next. But Dr. Venter aims to bypass that process by creating a complete set of genes, or genome of a single-cell bacterium in his laboratory. This man made genome would be installed inside a bacterium whose own genes have been carefully removed.

Antonio's article goes on to say, by artificially creating such a life form Dr. Venter's researchers hope they may come closer to understanding what life is and how scientists can manipulate it for the benefit of mankind. New artificial species could possibly open avenues for the industrial production of drugs, chemicals or even clean energy.

"This is the next big step we have all been talking about. We're moving from being able to read the genetic code to actually writing it," Dr. Venter says, with a huge smile.

Spurring on Dr. Venter's latest ambition is a $12 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. Also an additional $30 million being raised by Dr. Venter and his business partners from various sources such as several wealthy private investors will bankroll a new company, Synthetic Genomics Inc. The company will assist funding the research program at Dr. Venter's non-profit research institute and own the rights to any intellectual property the program creates.

A number of researchers are speeding toward similar goals. Teams at Harvard University and teams in Japan are attempting to make new versions of common E. coli bacteria with totally synthetic genes. On many campuses "synthetic biology" is the latest buzzword. Students are now being taught to program the DNA of bacteria as if it were a piece of software running a computer.

Scientists have known for approximately 30 years how to add genes to a bacterium. That is the basic discovery behind the biotechnology industry. For example, insulin for diabetics is being manufactured by splicing an insulin making gene into a microbe. Dr Venter's plan is to take this technology to the next level - to manufacture and combign all the genes necessary for a bacterium to survive. For now, he will still need to utilize the shell of a living microbe, with its genome removed to complete the creation of what he calls the first "human-made species."

The most fundamental hurdle Dr. Venter faces is getting his concoction to work. It's possible that his team could create the genome, place it inside the bacterial cell, and find that nothing happens - analogous to installing a new operating system in a computer and having it crash.

If the cell does "boot up," Dr. Venter believes the creation will have "10,000 applications," providing a template onto which scientists could add and test new functions. He imagines an organism perfected to make clean hydrogen energy from sunlight. Another would chew up cellulose, the raw material of plants, and spit out ethanol that could be used as car fuel which will have massive beneficial effects on the environment and as well as to people.

Tony Blair on Genetically Modified Food Debate

his week, I want to idolize British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, because of remarks he made last week on genetically modified foods.

Addressing a group of scientists last week, Mr. Blair suggested that opponents of genetically modified foods aren’t “rational” when debating this issue.

"Government must show leadership and courage in standing up for science and rejecting an irrational public debate around it [GM food]," said Mr. Blair, referring to “those who have distorted facts to oppose developments such as GM foods.”

Mr. Blair, expectedly, did receive flaks for these remarks. Some challenged him to state if he was openly criticizing Prince Charles, who has openly opposed genetically modified foods [I must, hereby, mention that Prince Charles is wrong to use the privileges of the British throne to make statements that can’t be scientifically substantiated about genetically modified foods].

Others insinuated that it was payback time to multinational biotechnology companies, for millions of dollars donated to the Labor Party.

I found this quite amusing because of instead of addressing real issues, Mr. Blair’s critics decided to dwell on side issues. This, needless to say, has been the hallmark of the debate about genetically modified foods.

Opponents of genetically modified foods dare not attack the science behind genetically modified food because they have no case to make against it. Instead, they go for fringe issues with the aim of confusing the public.

Mr. Blair is right in urging the public to “discuss technological innovations in a more scientifically literate fashion.” Those who genuinely care about food safety should support and not criticize him. Mr. Blair evidently means well for the world.

How else can the world determine the safety of genetically modified foods other than subjecting them to thorough laboratory investigations? This is the premise of Mr. Blair’s argument.

Genetically modified foods have been subjected to rigorous examination by various scientific bodies. The British Royal Society of Science has produced numerous reports showing that genetically modified foods can be beneficial to humans and the environment.

Various United Nations Agencies, notably the World Health Organization (WHO) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) have also published similar reports.

Perhaps Mr. Blair should use his political leverage to prevail upon other European countries to change their attitude towards genetically modified foods. Currently, Europe maintains the most draconian and restrictive laws on genetically modified food. These laws aren’t informed by science, but by populist sentiments