Technation Fish Stories?
Last week I was listening to TechNation on NPR and the guest was a science wonk of some sort who was speaking on the subject of 'fish farming- good or bad'. This man made the point that various other environmental people and scientists were mistakenly urging people not to eat farmed salmon because their studies had shown that farmed salmon had higher PCB levels than wild salmon. He continued to elaborate that the study, while it had reached that conclusion, failed to mention that the higher pcb levels were still vastly lower than the levels the EPA considers to be risky. Further, he said, the funding for the study had come from people who had an interest in the well being of the Alaskan wild fish industry which was losing market share to farmed salmon. The conclusion, he stated, was that it appeared these interest groups were conspiring to keep us consumers from eating one of the healthiest foods around- farmed salmon- which reduced health risks because of its higher level of fish oils.
Gadzooks! I said to myself. That's odd, I've never heard anyone urge us not to eat farmed salmon because of the pcbs, but I have heard increasing numbers of people say that farmed salmon are a problem because the waste stream from raising them in commercial numbers is causing significant pollution and because farmed salmon don't produce good quality meat when fed grains- they are carnivores and require feeding lots and lots of live fish or a replacement which means that they don't help sustainability in the food chain. (I hope I haven't oversimplified). Neither of these issues were even mentioned by the guest expert and no question was raised by the host.
I left the show with the feeling that, once again, we are simply pawns in a war between Vested Interests who battle each other through the direct manipulation of the populace as well as through indirect manipulation of the political and regulatory and marketplace arenas. As I think about it, the majority of the ISSUES which are battled over daily are not the ones that affect people personally and individually. What is important to the average person? Can I feed my family? Can I pay my bills? Can I afford a doctor if I need one? Can I take care of my parents when they're old? Will someone be able to take care of me when I'm old? Can my kids go to school? Can they get jobs? Is my neighborhood safe? Is my city a good place to live? These are the basic things which become the "symbolic ammunition" for an entirely different set of issues.
"Can I afford a doctor" is the banner under which battles are waged between insurance companies and attorneys and others. One group says the doctor is unaffordable because the attorneys file too many frivolous lawsuits? One group says the doctor is unaffordable because the shareholders of insurance companies have a voracious appetite for dividends. One group says the doctor is unaffordable because he can't get insurance to practice. Another says that the problem is price gouging by medical monoliths. Or that the paperwork is too complicated and bureaucratic. Or that unnecessary drugs and procedures are rife. How is the average person to decipher all this? Which of these groups will tell the whole truth so that we, the electorate/consumers, can make good choices? I think the answer is none. The Vested Interests may win or lose their battle and that may help or harm the average person. But that's not the purpose of the process. Issues are too complex, and we retreat into a desire for simplicity- something that suits the level at which we struggle with what's important in our lives. The complex cannot be simple. And to the extent that these factors operate, we're at the mercy of the great forces around us.
I was disappointed in the discussion on Technation.
DAVIDRITES@ATT.NET
Gadzooks! I said to myself. That's odd, I've never heard anyone urge us not to eat farmed salmon because of the pcbs, but I have heard increasing numbers of people say that farmed salmon are a problem because the waste stream from raising them in commercial numbers is causing significant pollution and because farmed salmon don't produce good quality meat when fed grains- they are carnivores and require feeding lots and lots of live fish or a replacement which means that they don't help sustainability in the food chain. (I hope I haven't oversimplified). Neither of these issues were even mentioned by the guest expert and no question was raised by the host.
I left the show with the feeling that, once again, we are simply pawns in a war between Vested Interests who battle each other through the direct manipulation of the populace as well as through indirect manipulation of the political and regulatory and marketplace arenas. As I think about it, the majority of the ISSUES which are battled over daily are not the ones that affect people personally and individually. What is important to the average person? Can I feed my family? Can I pay my bills? Can I afford a doctor if I need one? Can I take care of my parents when they're old? Will someone be able to take care of me when I'm old? Can my kids go to school? Can they get jobs? Is my neighborhood safe? Is my city a good place to live? These are the basic things which become the "symbolic ammunition" for an entirely different set of issues.
"Can I afford a doctor" is the banner under which battles are waged between insurance companies and attorneys and others. One group says the doctor is unaffordable because the attorneys file too many frivolous lawsuits? One group says the doctor is unaffordable because the shareholders of insurance companies have a voracious appetite for dividends. One group says the doctor is unaffordable because he can't get insurance to practice. Another says that the problem is price gouging by medical monoliths. Or that the paperwork is too complicated and bureaucratic. Or that unnecessary drugs and procedures are rife. How is the average person to decipher all this? Which of these groups will tell the whole truth so that we, the electorate/consumers, can make good choices? I think the answer is none. The Vested Interests may win or lose their battle and that may help or harm the average person. But that's not the purpose of the process. Issues are too complex, and we retreat into a desire for simplicity- something that suits the level at which we struggle with what's important in our lives. The complex cannot be simple. And to the extent that these factors operate, we're at the mercy of the great forces around us.
I was disappointed in the discussion on Technation.
DAVIDRITES@ATT.NET
Comments