|
But there is also a lack of foresight with futurists. At first, it might seem that there is too much foresight on their part. They look so far ahead of themselves that they continue to come up empty handed with most of their claims and promises. But the real problem is that while looking forward they often over look all the potential pitfalls of future technology. Realistic, not reckless, anticipation is what the public needs. Consequently, here is my Top 5 Trends to look for in the Not-So Distant Future.
1) Personalized Medicine and Personalized Monopolies. The 21st Century may usher in a revival of the good ol' days when people owned other people. Myriad genetics owns a patent on BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, because these are the genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer it obligates women to seek diagnostics and treatment from Myriad Genetics. There are well over 3 million gene patents pending in the United States, some exercising patent protection over a new species derived from transgenics. Are we prepared to live in a world where Pharmaceutical companies, Biotechs and Universities literally claim ownership over plants, animals and even people?
2) Pinkerton, a private detective agency, will be a fun one to watch – especially since they could be watching you. Especially if you happen to be a farmer using products engineered by Monsanto. In the old days, Pinkerton were the hired guns of corporations to bust up the Trade Unions. Most recently, they are hired by Monsanto to spy on farmers who might be breaking product agreements with Monsanto. Because the practice is forbidden by Monsanto's "Technology Use Agreement" it's not something that Monsanto would openly admit to. Maybe Monsanto's customers should hire Pinkerton's competition to counter-spy and follow up with a law suit for breach of contract. Might as well since Monsanto is quick to sue its own customers. One US farmer, accused of saving seed, was slapped with a $35,000 damages claim that had to be paid to the mega company. The farmer also had to sign an agreement promising to abstain from criticizing the company. Surely, such an agreement means Monsanto has plenty to hide – which gives the rest of us plenty to look out for as their dubious antics continue to leak.
3) NanoInsurance. Advancements in Nanotechnology, and Biotechnology are often heard in futurist press releases. The hype is often so loud and excitable that there seems to be little to no mention about the risks to people and the environment. Proponents, of course, downplay the risks, especially in the case of genetically modified foods. Insurance companies, however, don't seem to share in their confidence – mostly because of the lack of definitive information on how these technologies will impact the environment. Swiss Re, the second largest reinsurer in the world, shied away from insuring biotechnology on the premise that "genetic engineering is potentially one of the most exposed technologies of the future... and very difficult to anticipate." Nanotechnology, which has well over 800 products in the marketplace, is met with the same trepidation. Futurists, should they want to be taken seriously, will have to work harder – and faster – to properly diagnose the risks of this fast-forward technology.
4) Genetic Pollution. Proponents of genetic engineering will often tell you that it's not a new thing, that nature has been doing it long before ourselves. However, nature seems to give itself rules on what it will and won't mix and match. Closely related species will cross-breed on their own, or can be successfully cross bred (although, sometimes creating a sterile offspring which might be nature's way of vetoing the resultant breed). With genetic engineering the genes of completely unrelated species, are introduced to each other. When viruses perform this function naturally, it is either a slow adaptation or a detrimental one. When humans force these adaptations and accelerate them, it is not known what the long-term consequences are. Like pollution from the industrial age, we are just now beginning to see the consequences of our great strides in technology. The same could be true when new and unanticipated species are released into the biosphere: pollution. Genetic pollution. Professor of Genetics at Harvard University, Richard Lewontin has said, "An ecosystem – you can always intervene and change something in it, but there's no way of knowing what all the downstream effects will be or how it might effect the environment. We have such a miserably poor understanding of how the organism develops from its DNA that I would be surprised if we don't get one rude shock after another."
Speaking of concerned scientist, I'll end this Top 5 list on a positive not with a watch-note on a promising alliance comprised of people like Lewontin.
5) The Union of Concerned Scientists. This nonprofit collective of scientists, teachers, students and entrepreneurs are exactly as their namesake says. They are the ethical arm and eye in search of responsible research and science that safeguards, instead of sacrifices, ourselves and our environment. By now the group has reached over a quarter-million members, and have spearheaded information and legislation on the issue of global warming. In many ways, these folks are what futurists should be, since they embrace future technology but take a more controlled and sober view of what it can, can't and shouldn't do.
Hmmmm. Can, can't and
shouldn't do. Now there's a real recipe for Futurist speculation.
|
