My biggest concern with cyclop-eeze is environmental as well as ethical. If=
in fact they do have a bioengineered organism it truly concerns me that th=
ey have released it into the wild regardless that this lake sustains no oth=
er life but then they mention the food that grows in the lake (? sustains n=
o other life) what is Food but living organisms? If these are bioengineered=
organisms they have made a huge environmental mistake. It should have neve=
r left the lab. Maybe it is a good fish food but it should be raised in the=
lab not in nature no mater how remote it is. Man messes with his environme=
nt enough we don't need to make new organisms and release them. At some poi=
nt I'm sure these organisms will find a way into other lakes and then the p=
roblem begins but in my opinion it has already begun.
Brad Jackson
----- Original Message -----=20
From: finsen at optusnet.com.au=20
To: r_m_l at yahoogroups.com=20
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [RML] Re: rainbowfish diets N Planted tanks
Out of interest, I wonder how you get a "shallow, saline, artic" lake.
Doesn't "shallow" and "artic" together imply "high precipitation" (relati=
ve to volume) and=20
this in turn implies "not saline"?
Jut curious and wondering out loud if there is a bit of "sales pitch" goi=
ng on?
caio
Graeme
> > Sorry guys, I was just going by the text on the label, which states
> > that Cyclop-eeze are bio-engineered and culutured micro-crustaceans,
> > grown in a pristine, shallow, arctic salt lake. Perhaps this
> > information is erroneous.
>=20
> Cyclops are naturally occuring but the ones in cyclop-eeze are in fact=
=20
>=20
> bio-engineered. http://www.cyclop-eeze.com/ Bioenegineered doesn't mean=
=20
>=20
> "dangerous".
> Liz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C540B5.6D2337D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
My biggest concern with cyclop-eeze is environmental as well as ethical. If in fact they do have a bioengineered organism it truly concerns me that they have released it into the wild regardless that this lake sustains no other life but then they mention the food that grows in the lake (? sustains no other life) what is Food but living organisms? If these are bioengineered organisms they have made a huge environmental mistake. It should have never left the lab. Maybe it is a good fish food but it should be raised in the lab not in nature no mater how remote it is. Man messes with his environment enough we don't need to make new organisms and release them. At some point I'm sure these organisms will find a way into other lakes and then the problem begins but in my opinion it has already begun.Brad Jackson----- Original Message -----Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 2:36 AMSubject: Re: Re: [RML] Re: rainbowfish diets N Planted tanksOut of interest, I wonder how you get a "shallow, saline, artic" lake.
Doesn't "shallow" and "artic" together imply "high precipitation" (relative to volume) and
this in turn implies "not saline"?
Jut curious and wondering out loud if there is a bit of "sales pitch" going on?
caio
Graeme
> > Sorry guys, I was just going by the text on the label, which states
> > that Cyclop-eeze are bio-engineered and culutured micro-crustaceans,
> > grown in a pristine, shallow, arctic salt lake. Perhaps this
> > information is erroneous.
>
> Cyclops are naturally occuring but the ones in cyclop-eeze are in fact
>
> bio-engineered. http://www.cyclop-eeze.com/ Bioenegineered doesn't mean
>
> "dangerous".
> Liz
------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C540B5.6D2337D0--