Glofish reminder

[Cian McLiam]

Just a reminder that I am going to keep my promise to post any replies from the Glofish people to the email I sent them posted in This Thread.

Open & Informed Discussion: We recognize that new opportunities available through increased scientific understanding must be weighed against potential risks. We will regularly consult with leading experts through our Scientific Advisory Board and with appropriate state and federal agencies in support of comprehensive scientific research. We encourage an engaged and informed public discussion surrounding these issues, and provide information about our fish to enlighten that debate. To become a part of this dialog, we invite you to visit the GloFish™ Fluorescent Fish FAQ section of our website and send us your comments or questions anytime

This is from their paltry 'Ethics' page which is a mere four paragraphs. I have seen more informative cereal boxes. They say in the quote they want to encourage open and informed debate, yet the discussion board is still non-existent and they still have not responded to any of the four emails I sent them over the last week, not even the courtesy of an auto-response.

Just to be clear, I did not attack them and was in no way abusive, I simply requested some information to add to an 'informed' public debate, and their opinion on what I had written here.

Today I have sent an email under the guise of a 'trade enquiry', giving the name of a ficticious wholesaler in a European country. It will indeed be interesting to see which emails get a response first.

It is my opinion that this company are no more interested in public debate as they are about the decision of the Californian regulators. I am very pleased that the debate on this forum is still open and people on both sides are making interesting and useful points. I for one hope this continues.

Ken