If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BusinessWeek)   GMOPLTPE   (businessweek.com) divider line 57
    More: Scary, chipotles, Chipotle Mexican Grill, genetically modified organisms, soybean oil, designations  
•       •       •

5283 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Jun 2013 at 10:25 AM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-19 09:19:05 AM
I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics. Numerous studies have shown that GMO products are not more inherently dangerous than non-GMO products, and the studies that have alleged that GMO-products are hazardous to human health have generally failed to survive peer review or have been otherwise debunked.

GMO is just a tool - and it will be an essential tool for the next century as populations increase and we need to have higher and higher crop yields to feed everyone.
 
2013-06-19 09:30:40 AM

RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics.


Picture this:  GMO-based HFCS vaccinations!!!
 
2013-06-19 10:17:32 AM
There are diagnostic tools available to the concerned scientist (or lobbying group that hires a scientist) to determine the exact chemical constituents and relative concentrations in material.  It shouldn't require too much effort for someone to publish (and have peer replication) a scientific study that, say, the GMO soybean oil contains significant quantities of hazardous materials or is at least substantially different than non-GMO soybean oil.

I'm willing to believe it, as I have little trust in food processors' claims in general, but breathless Facebook posts do not a scientific argument make.
 
2013-06-19 10:32:01 AM
Well SCMRLVZC to you too, subby
 
2013-06-19 10:34:22 AM

RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics. Numerous studies have shown that GMO products are not more inherently dangerous than non-GMO products, and the studies that have alleged that GMO-products are hazardous to human health have generally failed to survive peer review or have been otherwise debunked.

GMO is just a tool - and it will be an essential tool for the next century as populations increase and we need to have higher and higher crop yields to feed everyone.


Ah, but what if they're GMO products that have been irradiated?
 
2013-06-19 10:35:10 AM
Their tofu filling is delicious.
 
2013-06-19 10:38:37 AM

factoryconnection: I'm willing to believe it


Therein lies your problem. GMO grown foods probably have LESS pesticide and herbacide contamination since they are designed to be more resistant to pests and weeds, and that's part of the deal, increasing yields and decreasing overall costs.

Arkanaut: Ah, but what if they're GMO products that have been irradiated?


Not sure if serious.... you use a microwave, right?
 
2013-06-19 10:42:31 AM

LesserEvil: Arkanaut: Ah, but what if they're GMO products that have been irradiated?

Not sure if serious.... you use a microwave, right?


Only if I want to POISON someone with NUCLEAR WASTE.
 
2013-06-19 10:45:25 AM

LesserEvil: Therein lies your problem. GMO grown foods probably have LESS pesticide and herbacide contamination since they are designed to be more resistant to pests and weeds, and that's part of the deal, increasing yields and decreasing overall costs.


So it is completely outside the bounds of possibility that there could be problems with GMO foods?  I did put the caveat that a legitimate scientific analysis would be required.  Margarine was supposed to be the great, technological leap that freed us from buttery heart disease, until we realized that the artificially-produced trans fats inherent in the hydrogenization process were killing people even faster.

"Willing to believe" doesn't mean "completely unwilling to see any other point of view."  Unlike some.
 
2013-06-19 10:47:40 AM

LesserEvil: Not sure if serious.... you use a microwave, right?


Wait, hold on.  "Irradiation" is a term reserved typically for ionizing radiation exposure used generally in sterilization plants.  Yes, microwave, radio, UV, visible light and all their friends are radiation as well, but they're not ionizing forms.  Huge difference.

And yes Arkanaut was kidding, obviously.
 
2013-06-19 10:48:22 AM
So, what about the black beans, the rice, the cheese?? I hate that article for giving us no information.

/I don't give a shiat about GMOs
 
2013-06-19 10:51:30 AM

xanadian: RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics.

Picture this:  GMO-based HFCS vaccinations!!!


wow, and if they could somehow be delivered via chemtrails, i think i know what will cause the EndtimesTm
 
2013-06-19 10:52:09 AM

factoryconnection: Margarine was supposed to be the great, technological leap that freed us from buttery heart disease


I thought Margarine was supposed to be a cheap substitute for butter. The claims about health were marketing-speak that came about after the fact.
 
2013-06-19 10:56:16 AM
If you're horrified by the prospect of eating food containing genes that were altered by some industrial food giant...

And these same people will take any OTC or prescription drug that might make their dick harder, their stool softer, or help them cope with the everyday stresses of life.
 
2013-06-19 11:04:38 AM

RexTalionis: I thought Margarine was supposed to be a cheap substitute for butter. The claims about health were marketing-speak that came about after the fact.


Margarine as an invention was largely a surprise; they were trying to figure out a way to stabilize non-saturated fats at room temperature.  It was, however, billed for decades as "the healthy option," perhaps strictly by marketing but no doubt with a lot of paid-for science to back it up.  And thus my significant disregard for claims by the food industry.

divgradcurl: wow, and if they could somehow be delivered via chemtrails, i think i know what will cause the EndtimesTm


Wow indeed; I'm going to have to study this one out ;-)
 
2013-06-19 11:05:50 AM

divgradcurl: xanadian: RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics.

Picture this:  GMO-based HFCS vaccinations!!!

wow, and if they could somehow be delivered via chemtrails, i think i know what will cause the EndtimesTm



Alternatively it could be added to the water alongside fluoride and in the press release we can announce that we have made a major step towards full compliance with Agenda 21.
 
2013-06-19 11:19:59 AM

RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics. Numerous studies have shown that GMO products are not more inherently dangerous than non-GMO products, and the studies that have alleged that GMO-products are hazardous to human health have generally failed to survive peer review or have been otherwise debunked.

GMO is just a tool - and it will be an essential tool for the next century as populations increase and we need to have higher and higher crop yields to feed everyone.



This, a million times this.
 
2013-06-19 12:32:10 PM
KHITBASH?
 
2013-06-19 12:33:48 PM
psst, hey stupid hippies, over here


Pretty much everything we eat has been genetically modified through centuries and millennia of selective breeding.
 
2013-06-19 12:35:24 PM
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-19 12:36:08 PM

factoryconnection: There are diagnostic tools available to the concerned scientist (or lobbying group that hires a scientist) to determine the exact chemical constituents and relative concentrations in material.  It shouldn't require too much effort for someone to publish (and have peer replication) a scientific study that, say, the GMO soybean oil contains significant quantities of hazardous materials or is at least substantially different than non-GMO soybean oil.

I'm willing to believe it, as I have little trust in food processors' claims in general, but breathless Facebook posts do not a scientific argument make.


There are published, independent, scientific results out there already that show there is no statistical difference in amounts of various compounds between GMO and Non-GMO varieties. With the exception of the introduced protein of course.

Of course people don't realize there are actually only a few commercially available GM cultivars on the market (although because two of them are corn and soy they are pervasive in other products) and we are usually talking about one introduced protein per cultivar. And that protein is either something already approved for use (Bt, which even passes most criteria as an organic pesticide) or is from another plant that we eat already.

The problem is that for Anti-GMO people their perception just doesn't match reality. And the two studies that came out that showed negative impact from GM food were horrible from a scientific point of view and have been ripped to shreds as being very shoddy work.
 
2013-06-19 12:37:14 PM
I'm willing to bet that 80% of the population couldn't explain at what should be say a high-school level of biology understanding what is a GMO crop is and why it is different.
 
2013-06-19 12:40:40 PM

Arkanaut: RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics. Numerous studies have shown that GMO products are not more inherently dangerous than non-GMO products, and the studies that have alleged that GMO-products are hazardous to human health have generally failed to survive peer review or have been otherwise debunked.

GMO is just a tool - and it will be an essential tool for the next century as populations increase and we need to have higher and higher crop yields to feed everyone.

Ah, but what if they're GMO products that have been irradiated?


Then I gobble them up and wait for the super-powers.
 
2013-06-19 12:53:28 PM
Guess I'm eating at Chipotle more often!

Here's a heads up.  If it doesn't say GMO free or Organic and it has soy or corn in it, assume it has GMO ingredients.

Although no one has been able to tell me how dextrose extracted from GMO corn is different than dextrose extracted from non-GMO corn.

That goes for any form the corn is manufactured into, from dextrose, to maltodextrin, to corn syrup, to beer, to the innumerable spirits made from corn mash...
 
2013-06-19 12:55:36 PM
Chipotle's chicken, for example, is classified as a "responsibly raised meat" grown humanely and without antibiotics or hormones. In some locations, however, the responsible chicken is cooked in soybean oil, nearly all of which comes from modified soybeans in the U.S.-hence the "G" label on chicken.

Oh the horror.
 
2013-06-19 12:59:32 PM

entropic_existence: I'm willing to bet that 80% of the population couldn't explain at what should be say a high-school level of biology understanding what is a GMO crop is and why it is different.


BS.

GMO crops have had their insides manipulated by elitist scientists in the same fashion that Dr. Frankenstein manipulated his creature. Therefore, they are frankencrops which will cause the townsfolk to go mad with fear. This is pretty basic stuff, really.
 
2013-06-19 01:05:37 PM

RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics. Numerous studies have shown that GMO products are not more inherently dangerous than non-GMO products, and the studies that have alleged that GMO-products are hazardous to human health have generally failed to survive peer review or have been otherwise debunked.

GMO is just a tool - and it will be an essential tool for the next century as populations increase and we need to have higher and higher crop yields to feed everyone.


Amen.  Along with being comparable to Anti-vaxxers, I must admit the Anti-GMO crowd can be described as the Global Climate Change Deniers of the Left.(TM)  Because I am also a lefty (as well as the fact  that I have been a biochemist and an environmental scientist back when I was a productive member of society), this likley explains why  they piss me off so much.

Irrational ignorance and vitriolic anti-science sentiments are meant to be their things, guys!  Stop making Fark Independents even minorly correct!!
 
2013-06-19 01:05:57 PM
Oh look, a company that takes enough pride in their products to label them.
 
2013-06-19 01:09:47 PM

meat0918: Guess I'm eating at Chipotle more often!

Here's a heads up.  If it doesn't say GMO free or Organic and it has soy or corn in it, assume it has GMO ingredients.

Although no one has been able to tell me how dextrose extracted from GMO corn is different than dextrose extracted from non-GMO corn.

That goes for any form the corn is manufactured into, from dextrose, to maltodextrin, to corn syrup, to beer, to the innumerable spirits made from corn mash...


To cardboard boxes, to air filters, to prescription medications, to body and clothing care products, fuels, and sanitizers.

/sorry, corn rant
 
2013-06-19 01:14:35 PM

entropic_existence: The problem is that for Anti-GMO people their perception just doesn't match reality. And the two studies that came out that showed negative impact from GM food were horrible from a scientific point of view and have been ripped to shreds as being very shoddy work.


And thus the validity of Rex's Anti-Vaccine analogy, I suppose.

I suppose a real problem with the black-and-white, anti-GMO stance is that the people that hold it also hold valid criticisms of the food industry, like the pitfalls of monoculture, our over-reliance on heavily-processed "food products," our consumption of high-sugar seeds instead of vegetables, the antibiotic/hormone/ethical problems with meat production.

It is just going to make all those concerns seem stupid, which they aren't.
 
2013-06-19 01:20:31 PM

impaler: entropic_existence: I'm willing to bet that 80% of the population couldn't explain at what should be say a high-school level of biology understanding what is a GMO crop is and why it is different.

BS.

GMO crops have had their insides manipulated by elitist scientists in the same fashion that Dr. Frankenstein manipulated his creature. Therefore, they are frankencrops which will cause the townsfolk to go mad with fear. This is pretty basic stuff, really.


Good thing I've seen you in enough of these threads to not fall for it :)

Teiritzamna: Amen.  Along with being comparable to Anti-vaxxers, I must admit the Anti-GMO crowd can be described as the Global Climate Change Deniers of the Left.(TM)  Because I am also a lefty (as well as the fact  that I have been a biochemist and an environmental scientist back when I was a productive member of society), this likley explains why  they piss me off so much.

Irrational ignorance and vitriolic anti-science sentiments are meant to be their things, guys!  Stop making Fark Independents even minorly correct!!


There's a writer, forget his name (Mark something maybe?) who was a big writer about climate change denial and environmental issues. During the 90's he was also one of the leading anti-GMO activists. In the last few years he has had a complete about face and has no published several lengthy articles and given some high profile talks about exactly this issue. The Anti-GMO crowd and environmental groups lobbying on the issue are doing the same thing they vilify the right for doing when it comes to climate change. Being anti-science and speaking out of ignorance.

factoryconnection: And thus the validity of Rex's Anti-Vaccine analogy, I suppose.

I suppose a real problem with the black-and-white, anti-GMO stance is that the people that hold it also hold valid criticisms of the food industry, like the pitfalls of monoculture, our over-reliance on heavily-processed "food products," our consumption of high-sugar seeds instead of vegetables, the antibiotic/hormone/ethical problems with meat production.

It is just going to make all those concerns seem stupid, which they aren't.


They are all valid concerns that unfortunately get brought up when it comes to GMOs, and they aren't GMO issues. The only one that really has any relation is monoculture, because obviously for GM crops to be reliable they have to be in the same genetic background, which means one variety being grown. However it is possible to diversify to at least several strains being out there in use. Of course monoculture long predates GM as a technology. There are some very valid reasons for it, but it has significant risks, like catastrophic crop loss.
 
2013-06-19 01:35:11 PM
Oh look, it's another Fark "anybody who worries about GMO is a moron" gangbang.
 
2013-06-19 01:56:13 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Oh look, a company that takes enough pride in their products to label them.


GMO labels won't do much.  The non-GMO will still be more expensive, and the GMO stuff will still be cheaper.

The few that actually have the money to care will buy the non-GMO stuff, the rest of the people will continue to buy what is cheapest, and life will go on.

Unless the price of the non-GMO comes down, labeling isn't going to do anything but contribute to the smug.

For the record, I'm not really against labeling it anymore, as long as it comes with a disclaimer regarding that there has to date been not a detectable difference in the quality of the ingredient itself, kinda like any pork or chicken labeled "Hormone Free" comes with the disclaimer that regulations prohibit the use of hormones in pork and poultry.

I mean, I really hate those labels, because their intent is to mislead.  The same thing is going to be a problem with any GMO labels as well.  The intent is to mislead consumer into thinking there is something wrong with any food that does not carry that label. (see below).

img.fark.net

The My Little Pony Killer: meat0918: Guess I'm eating at Chipotle more often!

Here's a heads up.  If it doesn't say GMO free or Organic and it has soy or corn in it, assume it has GMO ingredients.

Although no one has been able to tell me how dextrose extracted from GMO corn is different than dextrose extracted from non-GMO corn.

That goes for any form the corn is manufactured into, from dextrose, to maltodextrin, to corn syrup, to beer, to the innumerable spirits made from corn mash...

To cardboard boxes, to air filters, to prescription medications, to body and clothing care products, fuels, and sanitizers.

/sorry, corn rant


Yeah, we use corn a lot.   Waste not, want not.

It's really amazing and a tad scary to ponder what would happen if we have a massive corn crop loss.
 
2013-06-19 01:56:48 PM

Kibbler: Oh look, it's another Fark "anybody who worries about GMO is a moron" gangbang.


That's not what's being said here.

You can't lie about a threads contents in the very thread you're crying about... Well you can, obviously, it just doesn't work.
 
2013-06-19 02:11:38 PM

impaler: That's not what's being said here.

You can't lie about a threads contents in the very thread you're crying about... Well you can, obviously, it just doesn't work.


But he's trying so very hard to be the victim here!  Why won't you just let him be the victim??  Do you hate America?
 
2013-06-19 02:25:09 PM

meat0918: img.fark.net


www.dailyfork.com

feeds2.yourstorewizards.com
 
2013-06-19 02:28:57 PM

Kibbler: Oh look, it's another Fark "anybody who worries about GMO is a moron" gangbang.


What are your specific concerns?
 
2013-06-19 02:39:29 PM

entropic_existence: Kibbler: Oh look, it's another Fark "anybody who worries about GMO is a moron" gangbang.

What are your specific concerns?


The fact that they've driven non-GMO seed stock out of existence, and now farmers are forced to pay for the expensive GMO license.

The fact that a "destroyed" crop was discovered to grow wild where it shouldn't, and Monsanto can't figure out how the hell it happened.

The fact that when this crop was discovered, a new federal bill was in place shielding Monsanto from any litigation or inquiry about their screw up.

But other than that, yeah, nothing to worry about.
 
2013-06-19 02:57:43 PM

Trocadero: The fact that they've driven non-GMO seed stock out of existence, and now farmers are forced to pay for the expensive GMO license.

The fact that a "destroyed" crop was discovered to grow wild where it shouldn't, and Monsanto can't figure out how the hell it happened.

The fact that when this crop was discovered, a new federal bill was in place shielding Monsanto from any litigation or inquiry about their screw up.

But other than that, yeah, nothing to worry about.


Yeah, that's bullshat. I agree.

I'm not going to worry about health problems when eating GMO food though.
 
2013-06-19 03:00:33 PM
A few weeks ago the bible thumper I work with was on a rant about how she wasnt going to buy anymore produce and jsut grow her own because she didnt want any GMO products. I looked at her and said:

Groppet: Where do you think the seeds come from?

Thumper:................O_o
 
2013-06-19 03:15:25 PM

RexTalionis: I equate anti-GMO people who are against GMO products of all kinds on principle to be no better than anti-vaccination fanatics.


Then you're a moron.

Nobody is arguing that the altered DNA is going to hurt you.  The question is, "what that DNA is instructing the organism to produce?".  Not everything in GMO foods is simply an instruction set to make things grow faster.  Also, the entire European Union must be no better than anti-vaccers, because they have very strict regulations for this field.
 
2013-06-19 03:19:34 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Also, the entire European Union must be no better than anti-vaccers, because they have very strict regulations for this field.


And many European scientists disagree with the policymakers. Just because you make laws doesn't make you knowledgeable about the subject.

http://www.euractiv.com/innovation-enterprise/commission-science-sup re mo-endor-news-514072

"EXCLUSIVE: Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are no riskier than their conventionally farmed equivalents, the European Commission's Chief Scientific Advisor Anne Glover has told EurActiv in an exclusive interview, calling for countries impeding GMO use to be put to proof.

The endorsement of GMO safety will rattle member states where bans are in place (see background), and represents the CSA's highest-profile policy intervention since Glover became Commission President José Manuel Barroso's scientific advisor last December."
 
2013-06-19 03:31:45 PM
Let's have a moment of silence for all of those who have died from eating GMO food.

Oh, wait...
 
2013-06-19 03:49:53 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Nobody is arguing that the altered DNA is going to hurt you.


Actually, there are at least some in the anti-GMO movement that does argue this. Sites like naturalnews.com (which is a clearinghouse for all sorts of whackjobbery like the anti-fluoride movement and the anti-vaccination movement) have written several articles claiming that transgenic DNA from food will cause cancer.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Then you're a moron.


I like how your approach to a debate is to automatically go for name-calling. It says a lot about you.
 
2013-06-19 04:25:31 PM

RexTalionis: meat0918: img.fark.net

[www.dailyfork.com image 500x667]

[feeds2.yourstorewizards.com image 275x275]


I now declare this a silly label thread!!

i457.photobucket.com

i151.photobucket.com

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-06-19 04:34:21 PM

Trocadero: entropic_existence: Kibbler: Oh look, it's another Fark "anybody who worries about GMO is a moron" gangbang.

What are your specific concerns?

The fact that they've driven non-GMO seed stock out of existence, and now farmers are forced to pay for the expensive GMO license.


This one is easy to dismiss, because it just isn't true. What crop can I not go and buy seed for where I can't buy non-GM varieties?

The fact that a "destroyed" crop was discovered to grow wild where it shouldn't, and Monsanto can't figure out how the hell it happened.

I am assuming you mean GM canola found growing wild? Yes it is a concern, although ANY crop can spread and grow in the wild. They are plants after all. There are approaches that could be taken to prevent this, such as generating sterile GM varieties. But the Anti-GMO movement is firmly opposed to development of that sort of crop and there is currently a moratorium on it in the US. While this is an issue to monitor and follow, it isn't a "the sky is falling, ecological apocalypse" scenario.

The fact that when this crop was discovered, a new federal bill was in place shielding Monsanto from any litigation or inquiry about their screw up.

I'm not in favour of some of the legislation protecting large agri-business of any sort from litigation. But that is a separate issue from GM as a technology and its safety.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Nobody is arguing that the altered DNA is going to hurt you.  The question is, "what that DNA is instructing the organism to produce?".  Not everything in GMO foods is simply an instruction set to make things grow faster.  Also, the entire European Union must be no better than anti-vaccers, because they have very strict regulations for this field.


Actually most of the Anti-GMO crowd is arguing that. People too ignorant to realize that everything we eat is full of DNA talking about how eating foreign DNA is bad for you.

I did my PhD in molecular evolution, I'm currently working in human genetics. I understand DNA and genetics pretty well. If we look at the biggest GM crops we have Bt production as a pesticide. Bt is approved for use as an organic pesticide BTW. There could potentially be issues related to dosage in terms of human consumption, but there has been a lot of work in that area beginning WAY before transgenic technology was even possible. The other major one is glyphosphate resistance. In both cases we are talking about a gene that produces a single protein or enzyme. We aren't dealing with genes that are involved in complex regulatory pathways or that create whole new metabolic pathways that could generate unexpected byproducts.

The EU regulations were enacted by politicians  played off of consumer ignorance, and it's pretty obvious they were done more because of economic and trade-related issues than anything.
 
2013-06-19 04:42:34 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Nobody is arguing that the altered DNA is going to hurt you.


Really?

The question is, "what that DNA is instructing the organism to produce?".

And the answer is "proteins."
 
2013-06-19 04:45:32 PM

entropic_existence: I am assuming you mean GM canola found growing wild? Yes it is a concern, although ANY crop can spread and grow in the wild. They are plants after all. There are approaches that could be taken to prevent this, such as generating sterile GM varieties. But the Anti-GMO movement is firmly opposed to development of that sort of crop and there is currently a moratorium on it in the US. While this is an issue to monitor and follow, it isn't a "the sky is falling, ecological apocalypse" scenario.


One would think "sterile" genes being released in the wild would sort itself out rather quickly. Survival of the fittest and all that.
 
2013-06-19 05:17:20 PM

impaler: entropic_existence: I am assuming you mean GM canola found growing wild? Yes it is a concern, although ANY crop can spread and grow in the wild. They are plants after all. There are approaches that could be taken to prevent this, such as generating sterile GM varieties. But the Anti-GMO movement is firmly opposed to development of that sort of crop and there is currently a moratorium on it in the US. While this is an issue to monitor and follow, it isn't a "the sky is falling, ecological apocalypse" scenario.

One would think "sterile" genes being released in the wild would sort itself out rather quickly. Survival of the fittest and all that.


Yeah, depending on the approach taken anyway and which particular crop you are talking about. But basically it is meant to prevent hybridization of the crop with wild relatives or from spread of the crop unintentionally. The most common objection is that it locks people in to buying seed every year. Of course that is an objection about GM crops in general, because you can't save seed. But buying seed every year has actually been a common practice in large agricultural settings for awhile now, and predates the use of GM technology. Most varieties large producers were growing (and are growing) are hybrid strains, and only  certain generations of strains are stable in terms of their traits.

I think we do have to come up with new ideas, but people are just equating factors that apply to big agri-business in general (including the large organic businesses) and using it as anti-GMO sentiment. Never mind that there are plenty of GM varieties being developed by independent scientists, non-profits, etc. It is just slow work and requires years of getting through all of the regulatory requirements.
 
2013-06-19 05:30:01 PM

impaler: entropic_existence: I am assuming you mean GM canola found growing wild? Yes it is a concern, although ANY crop can spread and grow in the wild. They are plants after all. There are approaches that could be taken to prevent this, such as generating sterile GM varieties. But the Anti-GMO movement is firmly opposed to development of that sort of crop and there is currently a moratorium on it in the US. While this is an issue to monitor and follow, it isn't a "the sky is falling, ecological apocalypse" scenario.

One would think "sterile" genes being released in the wild would sort itself out rather quickly. Survival of the fittest and all that.


I believe the GM canola that crossed with a close cousin wild radish was also quickly out competed by its pure strain wild cousins.

The very things that we like in domesticated plants make them poor competitors once they are outside the protected confines of a field.

Otherwise, we'd have loads of wild corn and soybeans growing across the country.

As an aside, I found this abstract while searching for "wild soybeans"

"These findings suggest that the IgE sensitization rate to GM soybean extracts is identical to that of wild-type soybean extracts in adult allergy patients. In addition, based on both in vivo and in vitro methods, the allergenicity of wild type and GM soybean extracts was identical. "
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report