Controversial Term
Whether genetic pollution or similar terms, such as "genetic deterioration", "genetic swamping", "genetic takeover" and "genetic aggression", are an appropriate scientific description of the biology of invasive species is debated. Hymer and Simberloff argue that these types of terms:
- "...imply either that hybrids are less fit than the parentals, which need not be the case, or that there is an inherent value in "pure" gene pools".
They recommend that gene flow from invasive species be termed genetic mixing since:
- " "Mixing" need not be value-laden, and we use it here to denote mixing of gene pools whether or not associated with a decline in fitness".
Environmentalists such as Patrick Moore, an ex-member and cofounder of Greenpeace, questions if the term genetic pollution is more political than scientific. The term is considered to arouse emotional feelings towards the subject matter. In an interview he comments:
- "If you take a term used quite frequently these days, the term "genetic pollution," otherwise referred to as genetic contamination, it is a propaganda term, not a technical or scientific term. Pollution and contamination are both value judgments. By using the word "genetic" it gives the public the impression that they are talking about something scientific or technical--as if there were such a thing as genes that amount to pollution."
Read more about this topic: Genetic Pollution
Famous quotes containing the word term:
“Frankly, I do not like the idea of conversations to define the term “unconditional surrender.” ... The German people can have dinned into their ears what I said in my Christmas Eve speech—in effect, that we have no thought of destroying the German people and that we want them to live through the generations like other European peoples on condition, of course, that they get rid of their present philosophy of conquest.”
—Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945)