__ the other press

 

Farewell From
the Editor

 

 

I remember introducing myself as the
new Editor of the OP last May. I remem-
ber promising to reign with the hard-
nosed journalistic approach of my idol
Lou Grant, and indeed, I have lost some
hair and gained a couple of pounds sit-
ting behind the desk. I don’t know how
the audience would rate this season of the
Other Press, but it has had its share of
gags, changes in cast, conflicts, and
improvements. The Marys, Teds, and
Murrays of the paper have inspired a
medley of frustration, joy, and tears.
And one year later, my naiveté and opti-
mism have the breath of a seasoned
scotch drinker. The reassuring clink of
the bottle in my bottom drawer tucked
between my trusty Gage Canadian dic-
tionary and a box of Kleenex. I loosen my
tie, tap the heater of my stogie, and
reflect on the bittersweet journey.
During my tenure, we redesigned the
look of the paper, negotiated numerous
technical difficulties, worked way more
hours than we were paid for, fortified the
collective with a team of enthusiastic vol-
unteers, added some reader-friendly fea-
tures like the Oracle and the Third
Degree, focused on Douglas related
events, reintroduced the constitution into
the procedure, designed and purchased
OP merchandise, held a pub night, host-
ed the Western Regional Cup
Conference, and published 29 pretty
damn good-looking papers.
A year is not long enough to wear any
grooves in the top of the desk where my
heels have rested on so many occasions. It
is not long enough to leave any indelible
marks in the memories of Douglas stu-
dents, and it is unlikely that I will be
remembered for anything outside of
changing the look of the paper while
shaking the tree of OP tradition.
However, a year is long enough to grow
and learn a hell of a lot, and I will take a
cardboard box full of bittersweet experi-
ences with me into the next furlong of
my career.
As I clear out my desk, and say farewell
to the weekly slapstick of the OP sitcom,
I make room for the new Editor and her
drawer of metaphors, although, I think I
will leave the scotch; I think she will
probably need it.
Sarees Honsinger

 

 

of

llews

_. & Section Editor: Eileen Velthuis

 

_ Sie eileenv@telus.net

April 9, 2003

One Last Thing to Say

The end of another semester is here, and for some of us it’s
the end of our illustrious careers at Douglas College and The
Other Press.

I spent a year here at the OP as proofreader, and another
year as News Editor. My time at the school and with the
paper is finally over—I hope to move on to bigger and bet-
ter things. Not that there could be anything better than the
OP when it comes to learning about newspapers, beer, and
small-scale office politics.

—a

 
    
        

~
_— ‘ae
I ty
cat Lindsay Harding
The Muse

HA

ST. JOHN’S, NFLD. (CUP)—Garth Fletcher, a fish physi-
ologist and researcher at Memorial University, says the pub-
lic has nothing to fear from the manipulation of genes in
their favourite food products. Like it or lump it, transgenic
foods are on the market and they aren't going anywhere soon.

‘Transgenics is the science of gene modification and manip-
ulation. Scientists working in this discipline study the effects
of specific genes, and then try to control them. Their work
can involve enhancing or suppressing the properties of a
species own genes, as well as taking a gene linked to a desir-
able trait from one species and implanting it into another
that lacks the trait, in the hope of transferring the desired
quality.

Fletcher, a retired professor at the university's Ocean
Sciences Centre in Logy Bay, Nfld., performs transgenic
research on fish species used in aquaculture, hoping to
improve the viability of commercially farmed fish.

In recent years, as the practice of genetically modifying
plant and animal species has become more prevalent, some
groups have been raising alarm bells. Some criticize the sci-
entists for “playing God,” while others simply suggest that
not enough is known about transgenic science to make it safe
for use on food crops.

However, as a scientist working in this field, Fletcher says
the public has little to be worried about.

“There’s no question that this technology is here to
stay...there’s a lot of work to be done in some areas, but it'll
get better and better and better. The more research done on
it, the more you can pinpoint accurately how to use genes to
improve products,” he said.

Much of the most vocal protest against the genetic manip-
ulation of food crops has taken place in European countries.
In general, says Fletcher, North Americans aren't as likely to
fear the transgenic boogeyman.

“North Americans...as a whole, don't seem to be...greatly
disturbed by [gene] implantation-there’s not riots in the
streets. You've got...Greenpeace certainly, and some other
active groups that are against everything to do with that kind
of technology—and that’s fair enough. But...nobody’s going
to the grocery store and saying, “Well, is this transgenic?’
They know it probably is.”

What's more, Fletcher says the public does not have much
reason to be worried. A government regulatory body must

We had a bit of a rocky start this year, but new staff and
old staff pulled together and managed to put out a paper
every week. To the OPers: I think that’s called dedication.
Thanks, and good luck wherever you go.

I just have one last thing to say, and that’s a warning to the
next News Editor. Should you go to a CUP conference,
watch your shoes and beware of glass elevators.

—Eileen Velthuis

Consumers have Nothing
— to Fear from Genetically
«> filtered Foods

f Genetically altered foods here to stay

approve genetically manipulated food products before they
land on store shelves.

“All of this has to go through regulatory approval—there’s
a whole regulatory process. [The farmers] are the ones that
have to worry about public perception. I have confidence in
the regulatory bodies in being able to look at the stuff to
evaluate the public’s risk-I have that confidence. Public
opinion? Everybody has an opinion...[biases against trans-
genic science] are very much sociological.”

In terms of aquaculture, the main body of Fletcher's
research has been concerned with solving one puzzling ques-
tion: “Why fish don’t freeze?” Previously, he has already seen
success in enhancing growth and disease-resistance.

Fish species native to cold bodies of water, such as Atlantic
cod, possess a natural resistance to cold temperatures that
protects their cells from freezing in the frigidity of their envi-
ronment. Fletcher has spent 30 years learning how this
process works.

“Most of the work has been focused on how the fish sur-
vive in the freezing waters of the Atlantic. [Fish] do this by
producing proteins that are called antifreeze proteins...they
block the growth of ice crystals and prevent the fish from
freezing,” he said of his research.

“When we started out, in the beginning, we didn’t know a
whole lot about these antifreeze genes...so really, at the basic
science level, we are just trying to understand them and the
nature of them.”

According to Fletcher, understanding how the antifreeze
genes are expressed and being able to manipulate them has
many scientific applications outside of marine biology. He
says the most interesting aspect of this work involves trying
to implant the antifreeze protein genes in species that do not
naturally possess them.

He has colleagues, working in a variety of science disci-
plines, who are making use of his research into the antifreeze
gene. One such researcher, in the field of cryosurgery, is hop-
ing to use the gene to extend the shelf life of transplant
organs. Another is using the information gathered by
Fletcher and other researchers in his field to kill tumour cells.

Fletcher’s work may soon help salmon farmers prevent the
death of millions of dollars worth of the fish they are trying
to cultivate by preventing them from freezing to death.

page 3 ©