Lindaland
  Gaia's Garden
  Genetically modified food, GMOs (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Genetically modified food, GMOs
musica
unregistered
posted June 11, 2004 01:29 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hey Guys!!
what do you all think about cosuming food , (transgenic vegetables, fruits and flowers)that has been modified at genetic level ie a foreign gene of wanted characteristic has been introduced...
for eg tomatoes having longer shelf life, (gene resposible for ethylene syntesis/ripening of the fruit has been silenced by another gene)
or papaya having some viral genes inside it which makes it resistant to the respective viral disease,
or strawberries having some fish gene making it frost resistance....
well there is a whole list of transgenic food which is about to hit our market or alreday has. Personally i don't see any harm in it if the food is properly labelled in detail telling about the source of gene introduced (so that i if i am a vegetarian i don't eat fish gene while eating strawberry) and if its product is an potential allergen....

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: Alaska
Registered: Jun 2010

posted June 11, 2004 01:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I believe genetic modification as it is now taking place to be as radical and potentially dangerous as the invention of the nuclear bomb.

I avoid it like the plague. Unfortunetly it's difficult to do so because labeling is not required here in the U.S. Nor is safety testing by any independant body.
------------------
"This technology is being promoted, in the face of concerns by respectable scientists and in the face of data to the contrary, by the very agencies which are supposed to be protecting human health and the environment. The bottom line in my view is that we are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences. " —Dr Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency toxicologist

IP: Logged

Nephthys
Knowflake

Posts: 941
From: California
Registered: Apr 2009

posted June 12, 2004 12:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Nephthys     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am against GMO's. I recently signed a petition to prevent farmers in my county from using them.

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: Alaska
Registered: Jun 2010

posted June 12, 2004 12:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That's great, Nephthys! Mendocino county became the first in the country to ban the growing of all GMO crops recently. The biotech industry spent a record setting amount of money to defeat it to no avail.
Goddess willing, it will be the first of many!

--------------
"We...strongly object that the image of the poor and hungry? from our countries is being used by giant multinational corporations to push a technology that is neither safe, environmentally friendly, nor economically beneficial to us. " — Statement signed by 24 delegates to the-UN Food and Agricultural Organization from 18 African countries

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted June 13, 2004 05:01 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Do they still sell irradiated produce? It used to have a flower on it (instead of the more applicable skull and crossbones).

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: Alaska
Registered: Jun 2010

posted June 13, 2004 01:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
oh probably. Our food is getting increasingly freakier.

Haven't 'they' ever heard the saying, "you are what you eat"? Who really wants to eat food that has been altered at the genetic level in ways to simply suit the chemical companies who want us to dump ever greater quantities of poison on it, and then as if that wasn't enough, we allow the nuclear waste manufacturers to zap our food with equivalent of thousands of x-rays worth of radiation? This is considered creating a healthy, safe food supply? It's a mad world we live in.


----------------

"(A genetically modified plant is) like an ecosystem. You can always intervene and change something in it, but there's no way of knowing what all the downstream effects will be or how it might affect the environment. We have such a miserably poor understanding of how the organism develops from its DNA that I would be surprised if we don't get one rude shock after another." - Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin, quoted by Michael Pollan in his article "Playing God in the Garden", New York Times Sunday Magazine, October 25, 1998

"Bad ideas flourish because they are in the interest of powerful groups" - Paul Krugman, Economist

"Genetic engineering is often justified as a humane technology, one that feeds more people with better food. Nothing could be further from the truth. With very few exceptions, the whole point of genetic engineering is to increase the sales of chemicals and bio-engineered products to dependent farmers." - David Ehrenfield, Professor of Biology, Rutgers University, USA, from 'A Cruel Agriculture' in Resurgence, March/April 1998

"Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the F.D.A.'s job." - Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications. Quoted by Michael Pollan in his article "Playing God in the Garden", New York Times Sunday Magazine, October 25, 1998

IP: Logged

Nephthys
Knowflake

Posts: 941
From: California
Registered: Apr 2009

posted June 15, 2004 11:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Nephthys     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Harpyr, I agree.

Regarding a mad world, I feel what you said goes the same for animals who are bred and raised only to be slaughtered for human food. That is the most disgusting thing in the world!

IP: Logged

thirteen
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: alberta
Registered: Oct 2012

posted June 30, 2004 03:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for thirteen     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Where is the data that shows me on any level why this is dangerous? To just state we don't know what the future holds is just to plant fear in people. Isn't fear what we are trying to overcome on this planet??

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 67
From: Back in AZ with Bear the Leo
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 01, 2004 12:52 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Here are some interesting facts about GMO's and biotechnology: http://ohioline.osu.edu/gmo/faq.html

I especially like the following quote:

Q. It doesn’t seem like all scientists agree that GMOs are safe. Why don’t we just wait until everyone agrees that there’s no risk to human health?

A. Actually, scientists have come to a consensus that there’s nothing inherently risky about splicing genes from one organism into another. For example, GMOs have been used for years to produce an enzyme required for processing cheese, and no one has called that dangerous. More recently, a genetically engineered rice that could eliminate vitamin A deficiencies in some populations has been met with widespread acclaim.

It’s true that there is some disagreement about some classes of GMOs and their specific uses: Will certain GMOs cause an allergic reaction in some people? Will a GMO crop designed to kill pests have a detrimental effect on beneficial insects? These issues have been studied, and, in fact, at least one GMO (Pioneer Hi-Bred soybeans with a Brazil-nut protein added) has been abandoned because of an allergic-reaction threat. But not all scientists everywhere agree that all GMOs have been studied enough.

Still, most new technologies are greeted in this manner. Either society as a whole or the scientific community weighs the risks against the benefits. Many technologies involve dangers to health (electricity, automobiles and airplanes, for example), but we’ve adopted them anyway because the benefits outweigh the risks. Perhaps the same disagreement was discussed in prehistoric times when fire came under human control: Surely someone said, “The children may burn their hands, so fire cannot be a good thing.”


Although some scientists have expressed concern about GMOs, an expert committee established by the Food and Drug Administration concluded that the safety of a food depends upon its properties, not the process used to produce it. With this definition, the safety of GMO foods must be—and is—considered on a case-by-case basis. But the goal should be decision by consensus, not by unanimity. Waiting until “everyone” agrees is tantamount to eliminating the possibility of marketing any GMO.

More specifically - let's look at the old "Fish gene into a plant"

Q. I’ve heard the argument that genetic engineering is just an extension of traditional breeding. But how can you breed a fish and a strawberry? You can’t. Why isn’t this type of “cross-breeding” seen as possibly dangerous to human health?

A. First, it is usually inaccurate to talk about a “fish gene” or a “strawberry gene.” Many genes, which are merely blueprints for producing specific proteins, are shared among many organisms.

So, while you cannot “breed” a fish with a strawberry, you could theoretically take a gene from a fish—or something else—and introduce it into a strawberry cell, which can subsequently be regenerated into a whole strawberry plant, which will contain an extra gene and an extra protein. (By the way, fish genes have not been introduced into strawberries.)

In traditional breeding, many genes are transferred between related species, without clear control over just which genes are being transferred and which are not. Genetic engineering is far more precise, which is, in fact, one of its greatest benefits. It allows, for example, a single gene from a cold-hardy plant to be introduced into a strawberry to help increase its tolerance to cold weather. Another example: Genetic engineering has allowed the gene responsible for making human insulin to be inserted into a certain type of bacteria. That bacteria now makes human insulin, a product that has been used by people with diabetes for years with no adverse effects. This type of “cross-breeding” between humans and bacteria obviously would be impossible without genetic engineering.

There is a natural precedent for this type of “cut and paste” operation: The bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens performs this type of gene transfer in nature, and is in fact one of the tools molecular breeders use to move genes around.

It’s true that genetic engineering could be used to produce dangerous products. But the same statement can be made about virtually any technology. Scientists generally agree that products from each type of genetic engineering should be reviewed carefully before they are implemented.

------------------
"Lahn dádzaayú nahikai leh ni' nyelíí k'ehge," Goyathlay (Geronimo)

"Once we moved like the Wind"

"Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar." This call and spur to the faithful servants of Truth and Justice was quoted by Churchill in his first broadcast as Prime Minister to the British people on the BBC - May 19, 1940, London.

IP: Logged

thirteen
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: alberta
Registered: Oct 2012

posted July 01, 2004 02:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for thirteen     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Pidaua, that was enlightening.

IP: Logged

musica
unregistered
posted July 02, 2004 06:25 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
hey pidaua...
the matter you have cut and pasted is from the site which advocates GMO food... lets take them / their arguments one by one..
1.example of cheese which you have given has nothing to do with genetically modified organism (GMO)...cheese may be fortified with some enzyme from fungi but whether this fungi is an an GMO remains to be seen. also it is to be seen what kind of genetic modification has been done whether the gene introduced is, from fungus itself or some foreign origin..as i said before , it is very very important to know the source of gene and also the gene product
2.We need not to genetically modify rice not for something as luxurious as 'vitamin A'. c'mmon now these multinationals are advocating handling issues of malnutrition to the children who are starved to death?? please provide them rice as staple diet we will see Vitamin A rich rice later , when our stomachs are full and our docs recommend us vit A suppliments...
3. Genes coding for proteins can be potential allergens ..is a known fact now and need no debate on it..
4. Agreed that new technologies shud be tried and they can have weightage over hazards...but life is beautiful right now .. be contented.. earth is still fertile , make efforts to make it more fertile and provide food for all....we really don't need all these technologies realted to luxury .whatever has been done has been done i am not in favour of doing something silly to get everyrthing perfect.. why the hell do we need to eat rice for vitamin A where are all the carrots gone grow them ..munch them... but no..its so boring isn't it?and it sounds so cool to eat transgenic rice rich in vitamin A. (by the way do we have to eat this rice raw to get maximum vit A or ..i think if we boil it most of the vitamin will be lost (i am being mean now ha haa haa)

4. as about genes getting transferred in traditional breeding the argument is that in breeding the pollen of a fruit/crop falls on flower/ovary of the same crop.. (its not that a mango tree and banana go for breeding together).. so the gene pool gets mix and match within itself. there is no such wild recombination events like animal to plant, human to bacteria, virus to plant and what not. breeding is done in the same species and genera not beyond that. while in trnsgenic you put gene from any source to the plant group unknown for that..
5.as about cuting and pasting of genes by agro bacterium in nature you have to again keep in mind what kind of genes agrobacterium has ? it can only and only cut and paste genes it can get hold of in nature, while when you bring the same agrobacterium to the lab and genetically engineer some genes which can come from virus, plants, humans etc etc from any wild source then the problem starts...
i think research in transgenic should go ahead only in very very specifically required areas and we shud not try to make every crop super crop, every organism super organism.. or these super duper organism will bocome monster one day and eat us all.
and again yes labelling is essential that too in detail.
if we really want to do something good to mankind then please lets grow and more importantly distribute the food evenly across the world.. we have enogh
believe me ...data shows that India is every year having surplus of rice wheat onions and potato.. we have huge success in "operation Flood "so milk is overflowing it is just that it is not going till the bottom of our society. we need to just extract the best of what we have and not imitate western world and become puppets in the hands of multinationals who ironically are influencing major policy decision as well...
namaste.

IP: Logged

BloodRedMoon
unregistered
posted July 06, 2004 08:19 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The other day I was at the store with a friend and there was a display stand in the fruit secion with packages of "Grapples"

They came 4 to a package and looked like regular apples except the package proudly and happily proclaimed "LOOKS LIKE AN APPLE BUT TASTES LIKE A GRAPE!"

That's just... so... wrong.

If I want something that tastes like grapes I'll get some friggin' grapes.

------------------
you came one night, turned my tide
blood red moon that you are

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 07, 2004 01:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Nephthys
Knowflake

Posts: 941
From: California
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 07, 2004 06:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Nephthys     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
BloodRed,

LOLOLOLOLOL Your post was hilarious

IP: Logged

pidaua
Knowflake

Posts: 67
From: Back in AZ with Bear the Leo
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 08, 2004 06:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for pidaua     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
BRM, LOL..that was too funny.


Musica- thanks, but I will stick to the people that have spent a lifetime training, transcribing and decoding genes when it comes to something of this nature. You are entitled to your opinion, I was just offering "thirteen" the other side of the argument.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 09, 2004 09:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 11, 2004 10:26 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What does the "O" stand for?

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Harpyr
Newflake

Posts: 0
From: Alaska
Registered: Jun 2010

posted July 11, 2004 01:59 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Harpyr     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
organisms

---------------------
"The push to redesign human beings, animals and plants to meet the commercial goals of a limited number of individuals is fundamentally at odds with the principle of respect for nature."
Brent Blackwelder, President of Friends of the Earth, Testimony before Senate Appropriations Commitee (January 24, 2002)

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 19, 2004 05:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ahhhhhh...

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted December 03, 2004 01:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
*bump*

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 34716
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted March 02, 2005 11:39 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
*bump again*

------------------
"Never mentally imagine for another that which you would not want to experience for yourself, since the mental image you send out inevitably comes back to you." Rebecca Clark

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted April 24, 2005 10:46 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

GM industry puts human gene into rice
By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
24 April 2005


Scientists have begun putting genes from human beings into food crops in a dramatic extension of genetic modification. The move, which is causing disgust and revulsion among critics, is bound to strengthen accusations that GM technology is creating "Frankenstein foods" and drive the controversy surrounding it to new heights.

Even before this development, many people, including Prince Charles, have opposed the technology on the grounds that it is playing God by creating unnatural combinations of living things.

Environmentalists say that no one will want to eat the partially human-derived food because it will smack of cannibalism.

But supporters say that the controversial new departure presents no ethical problems and could bring environmental benefits.

In the first modification of its kind, Japanese researchers have inserted a gene from the human liver into rice to enable it to digest pesticides and industrial chemicals. The gene makes an enzyme, code-named CPY2B6, which is particularly good at breaking down harmful chemicals in the body.

Present GM crops are modified with genes from bacteria to make them tolerate herbicides, so that they are not harmed when fields are sprayed to kill weeds. But most of them are only able to deal with a single herbicide, which means that it has to be used over and over again, allowing weeds to build up resistance to it.

But the researchers at the National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences in Tsukuba, north of Tokyo, have found that adding the human touch gave the rice immunity to 13 different herbicides. This would mean that weeds could be kept down by constantly changing the chemicals used.

Supporting scientists say that the gene could also help to beat pollution.

Professor Richard Meilan of Purdue University in Indiana, who has worked with a similar gene from rabbits, says that plants modified with it could "clean up toxins" from contaminated land. They might even destroy them so effectively that crops grown on the polluted soil could be fit to eat.

But he and other scientists caution that if the gene were to escape to wild relatives of the rice it could create particularly vicious superweeds that were resistant to a wide range of herbicides.

He adds: "I do not have any ethical issue with using human genes to engineer plants", dismissing talk of "Frankenstein foods" as "rubbish". He believes that that European opposition to GM crops and food is fuelled by agricultural protectionism.

But Sue Mayer, director of GeneWatch UK, said yesterday: "I don't think that anyone will want to buy this rice. People have already expressed disgust about using human genes, and already feel that their concerns are being ignored by the biotech industry. This will just undermine their confidence even more."

Pete Riley, director of the anti-GM pressure group Five Year Freeze, said: "I am not surprised by this.

"The industry is capable of anything and this development certainly smacks of Frankenstein."
24 April 2005 22:07


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story.jsp?story=632444

IP: Logged

artlovesdawn
unregistered
posted July 21, 2005 01:02 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
..

IP: Logged

Hedgewitch
unregistered
posted July 24, 2005 01:29 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
hi artloves ~~

i'm glad that you brought up this thread...i agree, i think this topic is deliberately downplayed -- everywhere.

i believe Whole Foods has a policy of not selling anything whatsoever in their store that is in any way GM. are you familiar with this effort?

and i wonder if any other organizations make this kind of effort. i was thinking of shopping at my local farmer's market, but now i think they may have GM foods that i'd prefer to avoid.

or are GM products mostly from the big industries? i agree, i'd like to learn about and explore this subject further.

IP: Logged

artlovesdawn
unregistered
posted July 30, 2005 10:32 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
..

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2013

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a