Why be concerned?

[Stavro]

Would you go out of your way to avoid buying GM products for your children? How safe/unsafe do you think genetically engineered foods are? :roll:

[Commore]

Would you go out of your way to avoid buying GM products for your children? How safe/unsafe do you think genetically engineered foods are? :roll:

Well Stavro, which foods would you be thinking about.
"man" has been genetically intereferring with food since the year dot,
there are for instance, a variety of foods that are used most days, in most homes, one of them is the humble tattie, it has been crossed with other varieties for years, hence there are so many different potatoes for you and I to choose from.

Are you thinking about GM as in chemically altered?
or what?
:)

[Stavro]

Well Stavro, which foods would you be thinking about.
"man" has been genetically intereferring with food since the year dot,
there are for instance, a variety of foods that are used most days, in most homes, one of them is the humble tattie, it has been crossed with other varieties for years, hence there are so many different potatoes for you and I to choose from.

Are you thinking about GM as in chemically altered?
or what?
:)

A potato is always a potato, so in the gene pool of a potato we have the natural ability to produce variety, which is what you are talking about. Variety within a kind or type.

I am talking of altering the DNA by artificially adding or subtracting genetic material. GM tomatoes are one example of this, such that the object no longer stays within its natural gene pool.

[fred]

Well Stavro, which foods would you be thinking about.
"man" has been genetically intereferring with food since the year dot,
there are for instance, a variety of foods that are used most days, in most homes, one of them is the humble tattie, it has been crossed with other varieties for years, hence there are so many different potatoes for you and I to choose from.

Are you thinking about GM as in chemically altered?
or what?
:)

Selective breeding isn't the same as genetically modifying. In selective breeding you can only breed two organisms of the same or very similar species, a potato with a potato say. With genetic modification it is possible to insert a gene from an entirely different species or to remove a gene entirely.

[redeyedtreefrog]

Watch Penn & Teller's episode on this, its good.

One genetic scientist by the name of Norman Borlaug has saved an estimated one billion people through his use of GM crops in the third world.

GM crops go through a lot more testing than everyday products, so if anything they're significantly safer for consumption.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8

It's easy to complain when you're not hungry.

[fred]

Watch Penn & Teller's episode on this, its good.

One genetic scientist by the name of Norman Borlaug has saved an estimated one billion people through his use of GM crops in the third world.

GM crops go through a lot more testing than everyday products, so if anything they're significantly safer for consumption.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8

It's easy to complain when you're not hungry.

Now for the other side of the story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html

[Leanne]

A potato is always a potato, so in the gene pool of a potato we have the natural ability to produce variety, which is what you are talking about. Variety within a kind or type.

We have also bred out toxicity (or rather the native americans did) to some degree.

[Stavro]

We have also bred out toxicity (or rather the native americans did) to some degree.

Yes, that's true "to some degree," as you point out.

"When potatoes are exposed to light, a chemical called solanin is produced which appears as a green tinge. Green potatoes can be toxic, damage an unborn foetus and cause abortions. Other plants of this family known for their toxic qualities are belladonna, datura and tobacco.

"Farmers have been working for thousands of years to domesticate wild plants like those of the Solanaceae family, to make them safe for eating. Much of this exercise involved breeding out the toxins contained in the wild plants. Scientists too have used careful, selective breeding to "clean up" crop varieties which had good qualities but contained toxins."

(Source - Dr Suman Sahai - http://sumansahai-blog.blogspot.com/2009/11/bt-brinjal-can-awaken-sleeping-poison.html )

Notice what Dr Sahai goes on to say though -

"Disturbing the cell metabolism (by genetic engineering) of species that are naturally genetically hardwired to produce toxins, is likely to call up old plant toxins in these species."

It is this genetic modification through addition and subtraction of genetic material in the plant's DNA that is of concern, rather than selective breeding.

[George Brims]

Now for the other side of the story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html
If you're getting "the other side of the story" from the Daily Wail, that explains a lot about some of your posts.

[George Brims]

There are two aspects of GM foods that I think are relevant to this debate.

There are modifications that affect the food being altered, and don't have much potential to affect other crops or wild plants. Examples of this are the gene inserted into tomatoes and strawberries that make them less susceptible to damage from frost. At least *at first glance* it doesn't seem to me there is much potential for adverse effects if that gene (which already came from a different non-GM plant) "escapes" by cross-pollination.

Then there are genes that could much more easily be foreseen to cause a lot of trouble, if they ended up in related wild plants, especially weeds. The major one of course is the gene that confers resistance to weedkillers, thus allowing farmers to have a weed-free field (with attendant improvements in crop yields) by planting the GM crop, and periodically spraying the whole field with Roundup. The problem is that every crop we grow is a relative of something else that might be growing in the uncultivated parts of the farm. GM maize is still just a great big stalk of grass, and other grasses might well acquire the gene through cross-pollination. So there's the possibility of "superweeds" that have acquired pesticide resistance and then get into both the crop and the wider environment. I think it's fortunate there's no crop plant related to the dandelion. I already fail to understand why the whole planet isn't covered in them, they're so hard to eliminate.

So, I don't see adding genes to crops as *inherently* bad, but it has to be thought through and all the possible consequences considered. Well not just considered. I wonder if some researcher at Monsanto thought of the dangers of superweeds, and was told to keep quiet about it. However I do not think there is any danger in eating GM crops - yet. The idea that bothers me is putting genes to produce insecticidal compounds into food crops. Remember that pyrethrins, one of the most widespread insecticides, are derived from plant compounds from the pyrethrum flower family. What if they engineer food crops to produce those compounds? Does what they do to kill insects harm us? On that cheery note, I'll stop now.

[ducati]

So if we have two sides to the story-the jury is still out. Not sure we want to be experimented on. Of course we might already have been, I understand the tracking of GM, so that it can be properly labelled, where there may be trace ingredients, may have been a bit haphazard . :eek:

[_Ju_]

Well Stavro, which foods would you be thinking about.
"man" has been genetically intereferring with food since the year dot,
there are for instance, a variety of foods that are used most days, in most homes, one of them is the humble tattie, it has been crossed with other varieties for years, hence there are so many different potatoes for you and I to choose from.

Are you thinking about GM as in chemically altered?
or what?
:)

There are actually very few varieties of potato for us to choose from, when looking at the original naturally ocurring varieties. In south america, historically, there were hundreds of varieties that are slowly dying out because the small holdings and subsistance farmers that kept them are choosing more cash crops instead of the economically less rewarding traditional varieties. Industrial farming is preocupied with volume and homogeniety. All the potatoes on our supermarket shelves are closely related high yield cultivars and not really genetically a varied choice.
The genetic variability is important. It allows the plants to adapt to changes in the enviroment. One of the reasons for the potato famine was that the one type of potato cultivated at the time had no resistance to the disease. It can happen at any time with anyone of our monocultures. This is why there are two world seed banks trying to hold onto as many natural varieties as possible, so that genetic variability might be preserved.
GM crops are our way to artificially control genetic variability. We manipulate the genetic makeup of plants to try give them the caracteristics we want such as higher yields, resistance to enviromental conditions or disease or a favorable caracteristic of another plant type.
There was a time that seed companies were developing seeds that were F1 fruitful but sterile. Meaning that the industrial seed bought bore the crop (for example wheat), but that that seed (F2) replanted, would not grow and bare seed. That would mean the company developing that seed would retain control over their product and people would have to continue coming back to them to buy their seed. Imagine that gene cross polinating into nature. :(

[fred]

If you're getting "the other side of the story" from the Daily Wail, that explains a lot about some of your posts.

And if you're sticking your head into the sand and pretending it isn't happening just because the mail says it is I don't think I'll put too much weight on your opinions.

There is one big difference between GM crops and natural crops, the GM crops have either been genetically modified not to reproduce or if they will reproduce the farmer still has to pay Monsanto for the seed he saves to plant the next year. There is no doubt that Monsanto had a huge advertising campaign in rural India making claims about GM crops which would persuade the local farmer to borrow money to buy their expensive seed. The claims, not surprisingly, turned out to be wildly exaggerated leaving farmers with no money, no seed to plant the next year and heavily in debt.

Meanwhile the GM seed companies profits just grow and grow.

http://www.soilassociation.org/News/NewsItem/tabid/91/smid/463/ArticleID/222/reftab/57/Default.aspx

[fred]

So if we have two sides to the story-the jury is still out. Not sure we want to be experimented on. Of course we might already have been, I understand the tracking of GM, so that it can be properly labelled, where there may be trace ingredients, may have been a bit haphazard . :eek:

I don't know about GM food, never ate any but I know their television was crap.

[ducati]

I don't know about GM food, never ate any but I know their television was crap.

And their cars :roll:

[Leanne]

There was a time that seed companies were developing seeds that were F1 fruitful but sterile.


Imagine that gene cross polinating into nature. :(

It's sterile - it can't reproduce and cross pollinate...

[roadbowler]

good topic stavro. Yea, the gm frankenfoods are a bitty scary really from what i've read and i try and keep clear at all costs. George, the mail article is just that, an article in the mail. You`d probably find the same thing reported in every media outlet at some point. I read about it a few years ago...not in the mail. Secondly, dandelions ARE food and medicinal plants. Extremely nutritious too. F1 varieties they are selling in catalogues and shops are outrageously expensive too. I don't buy them. However, my brother-in-law does and i'll say this. Call the bluff and dehybridise them. Pick out the best progeny and let it seed and open pollinate, sometimes it works and sometimes trumps the f1. I've seen it with neeps. You can also create your own f1s' at home pretty easily with some veggies (or with a horse and a donkey) lol I find it interesting we are seeing a big resurgence of the back to the land movement, people growing more food and more demand for allotments. I just hope everyone starts saving their seeds too. The eu, in its infinite wisdom are now blocking and banning a lot of heirloom varieties from sale. If a variety is not on their list it cannot be sold. Period. Some are currently being sold through a loophole in the legislation. But, maybe not for much longer. Thousands of years of careful breeding by our ancestors of food plants may be lost in the space of a decade. We have once again, bureaucracy controlling one of our basic necessities. If they get their way and people don't act now, we'll be slaves to their seedbanks and the articles in the mail won't be just about india either!

[_Ju_]

It's sterile - it can't reproduce and cross pollinate...

Cannot bear fruits, I should have said.

[brandy]

what about carrots there not naturally orange *G*