Eddie Adams from Torrance: Just about everything we eat is genetically modified.Do you really think that supermarket style tomatoes exist in nature?
shtychkn: This shouldn't raise the cost except for companies that want to sell to "smug hippies" who care about GMOs.
snocone: Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification, is the direct manipulation of an organism's genome using biotechnology. New DNA may be inserted in the host genome by first isolating and copying the genetic material of interest using molecular cloning may be inserted in the host genome by first isolating and copying the genetic material of interest using molecular cloning methods to generate a DNA sequence, or by synthesizing the DNA, and then inserting this construct into the host organism. Genes may be removed, or "knocked out", using a nuclease.Selective breeding, the intentional breeding of organisms with a desirable trait in an attempt to produce offspring with similar desirable characteristics or with improved traits.Oh yea, pretty much the same thingie. eh?
Ambivalence: Up until a couple centuries ago, carrots were all purple, not orange. Orange carrots are a result of a genetic mutation that made carrots more popular. Mutations are a natural part of biology.That being said, terminator plants (that, when grown produce sterile seeds that cannot be replanted) are an abomination. There is nothing inherently wrong with genetically modified food. What is right or wrong is how and why genetics are modified. Modifying genetics to allow marginal lands to be abundant is fine. Modifying genetics to force market dominance as a seed supplier is not.
shtychkn: Simple,IF producers don't want to show that they don't have GMOs, them make them put the label "Contains GMOs". Companies that have shown they don't use GMOs can advertise that they don't.This shouldn't raise the cost except for companies that want to sell to "smug hippies" who care about GMOs.
AlanSmithee: Kahabut: There was a time that you could say this about Cigarettes, alcohol, and artificial sugars. Take a wild guess what happened?What happened: Scientists studied these and determined that cigarettes and alcohol are bad, though industry tried to spin those studies away.
netgamer7k: I'm eating GMO food as I'm typing this./mmm..., GMO is tasty//have a bite, foodie
Gway: Google is your friend: nih.gov/gmos, cancer
alowishus: HairyNevus: Monsanto (and Cargill and Pioneer and Dow...) all suck because of other business practices, like suing farmers whose crops got their "proprietary" DNA strain via cross-contaminated. Or even patent the DNA of a plant and then sue the farmers who have been farming it for years (happens more in South America).When and where did this happen?
snocone: give me doughnuts: snocone: AlanSmithee: snocone: And black is the new whiteYou really think producing new varieties by dosing the organisms with high radiation or by bathing in harsh chemicals was 'white'?I think you need an education and time to convert that to wisdom.With all due respect.Gamma radiation, x-rays, and mutagenic chemicals have been used to product new strains of edible and ornamental plants since the late 1930s.Point? Supposed to be examples of selective breeding?Granted, sticks have been poked into the Dark for a few years.Forgive me if my lifetime of experience watching the half life of "science fact" become ever shorter advises caution and does not favor lies, misrepresentation, half truthyness, corporate greed, bluster and bully tactics.
neongoats: The flip side to that though is releasing genetically modified strains of plants into the wild, where they could impact the natural ecosystem. That kind of sucks. And selling farmers sterile seeds or whatever to prevent it sucks too, forcing farming to be dependent on Big Seed Companies. Remember when a prudent farmer could save enough seed to plant the next years crops? Do we really need to destroy that in the name of Monsanto profits or whatever? Civilization might need the ability to farm without the benefit of some seed manufacturer at some point
AlanSmithee: The science is very solid on the safety of GMOs. The few scare studies that the science-illiterate paranoids like to quote are either non-existent, or don't support their claims, or are of Wakefield caliber.Labeling is expensive --not the label per se, but the infrastructure required separate and to keep track of what ingredients may or may not be GMO. All that to pander to dumb chicken-little douchebags.There's a town in Ontario that has a by-law saying new houses cannot have the number 4 in the address, coz 4 scares the superstitious immigrants of Chinese origin. Putting GMO labels is stupider than that by-law by a factor of 100.
PunGent: Caution /= fear.
GonzoNihilist: I always found it ironic that the same people who rail against religion and call on the virtues of logic and science are the ones that seem to be so skeered of gmo foods.
AlanSmithee: And meanwhile, the anti-GMO douchetwats are doing their best to block the intro of Golden Rice, which will save millions of children from blindness and death.http://www.allowgoldenricenow.org/I swear, the anti-GMO fart-brains are worse than the anti-vaxxers.
shtychkn: Free Market.Give people the information on what they are purchasing and let the Free Market play out.
itcamefromschenectady: My understanding is that in the famous Monsanto case, the farmer was deliberately trying to gather the GMO plants by applying pesticides, he wasn't being sued for accidentally getting seeds blown onto his property. So the basis for Monsanto being outrageously evil is a myth being spread by people who don't care about the truth as far as I know
HairyNevus: Monsanto (and Cargill and Pioneer and Dow...) all suck because of other business practices, like suing farmers whose crops got their "proprietary" DNA strain via cross-contaminated. Or even patent the DNA of a plant and then sue the farmers who have been farming it for years (happens more in South America)
Trocadero: If it's not that big of a deal, why are the food suppliers so hell bent and spending millions and millions of dollars fighting labels? Slapping a GMO label on something doesn't cost as much as they claim. It always bugged me that booze was somehow exempt from nutrition labels; if they cut gin w/ turpentine, I'd like it clearly labeled, so I serve that first at a work party and save the good stuff for me.
vpb: Pretty much any domesticated plant or animal is genetically modified. If you live in the US you are already eating GM food, even if you mean modified by something other than artificial selection.
itcamefromschenectady: grokca: How heavy do they think the labels will be?They're initiating the process of deciding whether to start to investigate considering weighing the labels.If the labels have the complete genetic code for each ingredient, those are going to be some heavy labels.
grokca: How heavy do they think the labels will be?
If you like these links, you'll love
Come on, it's $5 a month, just do it.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Dec 17 2017 05:58:16
Runtime: 0.469 sec (469 ms)