Compensate the poor
Your short news item on British plans to spend 拢65 million helping Indian farmers develop their land presented differing views about whether the development will actually help the people it displaces (23 March, p 17). The developers claim that farm labourers will find other jobs, and will be better off as there will be more money in the economy for them to share in.
There are several problems with this鈥攑retty much the same ones that were associated with the enclosures in England or the Highland clearances in Scotland. After the “improvements” Indian GDP will increase, but all of that increase and more will go to the developers and the state. People displaced by the developments will grow poorer. It is no good claiming that increased wealth allows compensation. What counts is whether compensation actually happens. It didn’t in the British cases.
Correction
The story about using biological scaffolds to repair cartilage (30 March, p 16) referred to “Volker Musahl and his postdoc Savio L-Y Woo”. In fact Musahl is Woo’s postdoctoral fellow.
Doping and driving
You report on an investigation of the relative effects of drinking and cannabis consumption on driving ability (23 March, p 4). While the article is right that there is no known test specific for impairment caused by cannabis, it didn’t mention other tests which have been developed to assess the overall ability to drive, one of which measures the subject’s ability to find and focus on intermittent lights. This test and others look for impairment from whatever source.
The opponents of substance testing rightly point out that the effects of different substances vary between individuals, and in the same individual over time and in different circumstances. When the authorities begin testing for impairment rather than the presence of substances in the body they will be on the right track.
Effect of oestrogens
I’m not sure your story about shampoos causing early puberty is entirely accurate (6 April, p 6). Exposure to exogenous oestrogens could trigger the development of secondary sexual characteristics, such as breasts and pubic hair, but they would not cause puberty.
Puberty implies the maturation of the reproductive system and, in women, ovulation and the appearance of menstrual cycles.
All the same, you are quite right to blow the whistle on this.
Letter
Your report did not mention the potential health consequences for boys. They might also use such shampoos and, if these products really are causing changes in the development of girls, they could also have an adverse effect on boys.
My daughter deserves the chance to live
As the mother of 16-year-old Laura Cowell, featured in the Research Defence Society campaign, I would like to respond to Chris Nay’s attack (23 March, p 54). Laura was just one of six people featured鈥攖he others being a surgeon, a family doctor, an animal technician, a vet and a medical researcher. As the patient, Laura simply ended up in the media spotlight.
Yes, the campaign is an emotive one, but the anti-vivisectionists are never afraid to use cuddly bunnies and so on when they attack the use of animals in medical research.
Far from being “campaign mascot” or “helpless victim”, Laura is proud to have been part of the campaign on behalf of thousands of seriously ill patients who share her views. She is a real person willing to tell her story. Were it not for medical research using animals, she would not be alive today and anticipating a future and a career.
When Laura was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis her prognosis was poor, and she might well have died before her first birthday. Cystic fibrosis is Britain’s most common life-threatening genetic condition, affecting over 7500 babies, children and young adults. Today, because of medical research, the average life expectancy is 31 years. However, three young people die from the disease every week.
If the life of a child is not more valuable than that of a mouse then there is something very wrong with our society. It is because of ongoing research using transgenic mice with cystic fibrosis that the quality of life for thousands of people like Laura is improving. 杏吧原创s will one day find a cure for her condition. Surely she deserves the chance to live鈥攁nd to live a full and productive life?
Science and faith
We write as a group of scientists and Bishops to express our concern about the teaching of science in the Emmanuel City Technology College in Gateshead. Evolution is a scientific theory of great explanatory power, able to account for a wide range of phenomena in a number of disciplines. It can be refined, confirmed and even radically altered by attention to evidence. It is not, as spokesmen for the college maintain, a “faith position” in the same category as the biblical account of creation which has a different function and purpose.
The issue goes wider than what is currently being taught in one college. There is a growing anxiety about what will be taught and how it will be taught in the new generation of proposed faith schools. We believe that the curricula in such schools, as well as that of Emmanuel City Technical College, need to be strictly monitored in order that the respective disciplines of science and religious studies are properly respected.
This letter was originally sent to the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, on 22 March鈥擡d
Limited power
James Hammerton expressed several fears about the British government’s Export Control Bill which are unfounded (23 March, p 54). Yes, the bill gives powers to issue new controls, but the same bill also requires that Parliament scrutinise all such secondary legislation. I cannot agree that governments should not have the power to control exports that might have such serious consequences as the carrying out of breaches of human rights or acts of terrorism.
That said, unlike existing primary export control legislation, the bill imposes limits on what governments can control. These limits can only be altered with the express approval of Parliament. Moreover, the power to amend other legislation in clause 6(2)(b) does not allow arbitrary changes to any other act. This power鈥攊ncluded in other legislation鈥攃an only be used narrowly, in direct connection with controls under the bill.
Section 6(1)(a) does not allow licensing of overseas students, and could not be used to do so. The bill is compatible with the Human Rights Act. The imposition and operation of controls under it must also be compatible with the Human Rights Act鈥攚hich protects the right to freedom of expression鈥攐r they face being struck down by the courts.
The bill provides a necessary modernisation of our export control regime. It will not damage academic freedoms, either now or in the future.