 |
|
 |
|
| Biotechnology |
 |
 |
|
Earl Sneed Centennial Professor |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Professor
Drew Kershen, who joined the Oklahoma University law faculty in 1971,
teaches courses on agricultural law, legal history, professional responsibility,
and water rights.
After receiving his juris doctorate in 1968, he joined a private practice in Atlanta. In 1973, he was named a fellow in law and humanities at Harvard University. He has held visiting professorships at the universities of Kansas, Illinois, and Arkansas Little Rock. During the summer terms and semester intersessions, he has taught at the University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Oklahoma City University, the University of Texas, and Texas Tech. Kershen is coauthor of Farm Products Financing and Filing Service, written in 1990 with J. Thomas Hardin. Admitted to the Georgia Bar in 1969 (inactive) and the Oklahoma Bar in 1972, Kershen is a member of the Oklahoma Water Law Advisory Commission, the Order of the Coif. Kershen is a past member of the Board of Directors and past president of the American Agricultural Law Association. He served as a trustee to the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation from 1991-1995. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
E-mail:
dkershen@ou.edu
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prof
Drew L. Kershen of Oklahoma University
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Prof
Drew L. Kershen of Oklahoma University has the following opinion
on the acceptability of biotechnology:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Biotechnology
is the latest historical example of a scientific discipline creating
enormous cultural, social, and public policy controversies. By comparing
biotechnology to these past controversies, and by comparing biotechnology
to present-day computer technology, Professor Kershen argues that
acceptance or rejection of biotechnology will ultimately occur as
a result of ideological and political beliefs and pressures. He
argues that the debate about biotechnology will not be resolved
primarily based on expanded knowledge and understanding of biotechnology
as a science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
underlying philosophical debate about the concept of natural seems
to me to be crucial to understanding the debate about biotechnology.
Furthermore, the policy implications that I discussed with respect
to Bt have similar echo's with respect to issues relating to the
safety of foods from conventional farming as compared to the safety
of foods from organic farming and with respect to the safety of
pharmaceutical products as compared to the safety of dietary supplement
products. In each instance, how the product is viewed (as natural
or unnatural) significantly affects the regulatory policy applied
to the product. Concurrently, how the product is labeled as natural
or unnatural depends on the world view of the concept of natural
of the person who is applying the label.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| What is your views? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| You can print out the papers and study it. Then join the discussion with Prof Kershen by registering on the list group. Supply your e-mail address underneath and click on the logo. You will then be able to send your view to agekon@listbot.com . Amongst others, your meaning will also reach Prof Kershen who will comment on it through the list group during June 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Please note! Don't register if you are already registered to agekon@listbot.com . This is the monthly newsletter reminding you of Agekon's updates. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
