Genetically enhanced plants and food

[Lyon_Wonder]

We may not have genetically enhanced superhumans like Khan or 1990s Eugenics Wars, but we do have genetically modified food and plants.

And like "Augments" and genetic enhancements for people in the Trek universe, Genetically modified plants for food is causing controversy in the real world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57459357/gm-grass-linked-to-texas-cattle-deaths/

 

[Deks]

Genetically modified foods are a recipe for disaster to put it mildly.
Instead of using aquaponics in vertical farms (none of which requires use of toxic chemicals, pesticides, etc.) which btw can be fully automated, need a fraction of water, has 0 need for soil and can grow foods 5x faster (using Omega gardens premise) that are even more nutritious than regular agriculture, they still resort to genetic modification... because its profitable - with genetically modified crops, you end up with food that has almost no nutritional value that directly affects our health (plus that of animals), and in turn, people who develop issues are forced to turn to pharmaceuticals (that treat the symptoms and not the cause and incidentally have a tendency to kill a lot of people - which of course is rarely blamed on the drugs themselves).

In theory, genetically modifying crops could be beneficial if you can produce plants that are healthier, stronger, nutrient rich, etc... however, results are actually more of the opposite.
And now of course something like this that kills cattle (of course, we still don't know if GM was what resulted in this, but ultimately I wouldn't be surprised if it were).

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Genetically modified foods are a recipe for disaster to put it mildly.
Instead of using aquaponics in vertical farms (none of which requires use of toxic chemicals, pesticides, etc.) which btw can be fully automated, need a fraction of water, has 0 need for soil and can grow foods 5x faster (using Omega gardens premise) that are even more nutritious than regular agriculture, they still resort to genetic modification... because its profitable - with genetically modified crops, you end up with food that has almost no nutritional value that directly affects our health (plus that of animals), and in turn, people who develop issues are forced to turn to pharmaceuticals (that treat the symptoms and not the cause and incidentally have a tendency to kill a lot of people - which of course is rarely blamed on the drugs themselves).

In theory, genetically modifying crops could be beneficial if you can produce plants that are healthier, stronger, nutrient rich, etc... however, results are actually more of the opposite.
And now of course something like this that kills cattle (of course, we still don't know if GM was what resulted in this, but ultimately I wouldn't be surprised if it were).

lolwut? So GM foods are a conspiracy to make people sick to boost the profits of the healthcare industry?

Got any actual evidence for this or did Alex Jones tell you it's true?

 

[Libertarian]

What is scary is that Monsanto is trying to patent all our food.

 

[PlixTixiplik]

We have been eating genetically modified food for thousands of years. Some of the most familiar foods are not naturally-occurring species. For example, the orange (like the navel orange) is a man-made hybrid of two of the ancestral citruses (possibly pomelo and mandarin). It makes no difference whether you mix genes from two citrus species or a citrus species and a fish, because genes are just genes. Star Trek DNA aside, genes aren't these things that worm their way into your bodies and do stuff. The FDA already tests food safety (the efficacy of that is debatable, given their low funding and manpower), so there is in theory already a framework to ensure that food - whether genetically modified or not - is safe for consumption.

The grass poisoning has nothing to do with genetic modification, at any rate. First, the grass is just a conventional hybrid, not a lab-modified GM grass (in the scare-tactic "Franken-grass" sense). Also, many plants produce chemicals like cyanide to protect against grazers. Usually those are at low levels so they don't harm large animals like livestock, but when the plants are stressed - like in a drought - the concentrations can rise. There have been other cases of naturally-occurring livestock poisoning by cyanide.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Several thoughts against the inane hysteria against genetically modified organisms:
1. There's no scientific evidence that they are harmful in any particular way. None whatsoever.
2. Genetic research and engineering is important for the progress of our civilization. We need to learn to better understand and control the world around us. Going against that can cause only harm, and genetically modified foods are where there are most money for this research to happen.
3. If you use the word “frankenfood” in a serious context, your opinion on anything doesn't count ever.

Several thoughts in support of the same hysteria:
1. Monstanto's attitude is downright repulsive and borderline scary, and laws regulating the monopolies over genetically modified seeds are definitely a concern.
2. There is no evidence for harm caused by GM species, but there is enough evidence that any introduced species lead to unexpected and often unwanted effects in the environment. The GM species aren't immune to that, and given that they can be created pretty quickly, this is a real concern. It has nothing to do with the fact that they are GM, only with the fact that they are new and that could be potentially many.
3. GM food as a solution to hunger is a temporary – if you're relying on increased yield, you'll only run out of food later, and then you're back to square one. Call me when you have some progress in increasing the crop yield on Mars.

And no, GM species are different from species that evolved naturally and species that were created through artificial selection. The comparison is unfair. Different time frame, different mechanism, different amount of possibilities, and different driving forces. They are about as similar as a BBS on a 9600 baud line and Facebook.

Um, actually, BBS is too close, it's more like carrier pigeons.

 

[Talosian]

Well Yellow Submarine when you stated accurately that: " There's no scientific evidence that they are harmful in any particular way. None whatsoever," you could have stopped right there.

That's enough. There has not even been a single public health crisis resulting from GM crops. Mind you, I don't buy into the precautionary principle because I don't prioritize the harms done by action over those resulting "naturally" from inaction. So, for me, even if there was a GM scandal like thalidomide it would need to be weighed against all the benefits of the science.

But, of course, there is no such scandal. The opponents of GM crops should be called out for the luddites and anti-humanists they are.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Well Yellow Submarine when you stated accurately that: " There's no scientific evidence that they are harmful in any particular way. None whatsoever," you could have stopped right there.

That's enough. There has not even been a single public health crisis resulting from GM crops. Mind you, I don't buy into the precautionary principle because I don't prioritize the harms done by action over those resulting "naturally" from inaction. So, for me, even if there was a GM scandal like thalidomide it would need to be weighed against all the benefits of the science.

But, of course, there is no such scandal. The opponents of GM crops should be called out for the luddites and anti-humanists they are.

The "precautionary principle" as you put it is designed to keep us safe by requiring those who want to introduce a new thing to our lives to make the affirmative case that it is safe.

We have every right to assume it is NOT safe unless and until proven otherwise. The consequences are just too great to take the risk.

Here is a very good article about the evidence for harm caused by biotech foods and organisms, both direct and indirect (note the very numerous links to supporting documentation within this article):

http://www.raw-wisdom.com/50harmful.

 

[MacLeod]

Well I suggest as a precation, we don't go out of our homes. Might get knocked down.

As a precaution I suggest we stop using mobile phones, in case they cause cancer.

Everything we do carries some sort of risk.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't see a problem with genetically modified foods per se.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Well I suggest as a precation, we don't go out of our homes. Might get knocked down.

Pretty much. If tried to prove that everything is safe without any good reason, we'd probably be extinct by now. What's worse, if you spent too much time focusing on the things that are low on the list, you would have less time to deal with real problems that do cause significant harm.

Even the extraneous problems of GM species are insignificant compared to... Practically everything else. I'd make a bet that street lights are more harmful.

So they are best left to the scientists who actually do work in the field.

 

[Deks]

lolwut? So GM foods are a conspiracy to make people sick to boost the profits of the healthcare industry?

Got any actual evidence for this or did Alex Jones tell you it's true?

http://www.naturalnews.com/033784_GMO_animal_feed.html

I'm not an American, and I'm only superficially aware of Alex Jones (by name mainly).
Assuming much?

Also... where did I even mention the phrase 'conspiracy'?
Its business, nothing more, nothing less - it's how the economy works (mutual interests converging).

Humans use pesticides, artificial fertilizers and various chemical compounds in food cultivation.
You DO realize that these toxicities are extremely harmful to the soil (what with humans successfully destroying 30% of arable land on the planet over the past 40 years) and eventually end up in our bodies, right?

As for gene modification of plants... plants as such have natural toxicities in very small quantities that don't produce adverse effects in humans (or they do so very rarely in exceptional cases).
Start introducing DNA from other species into the mix and you start increasing toxicity of plants which increases chances of issues, and of course coupled with lower nutritional value of foods (highly processed ones especially - which is practically everything today), you simply don't get enough nutrition from food alone anymore -http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37396355/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/t/nutritional-value-fruits-veggies-dwindling/#.T-irNbUe7EA

As for the omega gardens (more info here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCTOR6m3k9w) and fully automated vertical farms... the idea is an old one actually (technology was viable for some time now)... and a far better/healthier option (which doesn't require pesticides, GMO or various chemicals of any kind) than the garbage being pulled today and sold as 'food' (oh right, nevermind the premise that we have been producing over 17% more calories per each person on the planet for over 30 years, and we still have close to 1.3 billion who are starving, of which 15 million children die annually).

Yeah... what a 'wonderful' world we live in - so 'wonderful' in fact I'm getting nauseous at the very thought of how people allowed it to get to such a miserable state.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

lolwut? So GM foods are a conspiracy to make people sick to boost the profits of the healthcare industry?

Got any actual evidence for this or did Alex Jones tell you it's true?

http://www.naturalnews.com/033784_GMO_animal_feed.html

I'm not an American, and I'm only superficially aware of Alex Jones (by name mainly).
Assuming much?

Also... where did I even mention the phrase 'conspiracy'?
Its business, nothing more, nothing less - it's how the economy works (mutual interests converging).

Humans use pesticides, artificial fertilizers and various chemical compounds in food cultivation.
You DO realize that these toxicities are extremely harmful to the soil (what with humans successfully destroying 30% of arable land on the planet over the past 40 years) and eventually end up in our bodies, right?

As for gene modification of plants... plants as such have natural toxicities in very small quantities that don't produce adverse effects in humans (or they do so very rarely in exceptional cases).
Start introducing DNA from other species into the mix and you start increasing toxicity of plants which increases chances of issues, and of course coupled with lower nutritional value of foods (highly processed ones especially - which is practically everything today), you simply don't get enough nutrition from food alone anymore -http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37396355/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/t/nutritional-value-fruits-veggies-dwindling/#.T-irNbUe7EA

As for the omega gardens (more info here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCTOR6m3k9w) and fully automated vertical farms... the idea is an old one actually (technology was viable for some time now)... and a far better/healthier option (which doesn't require pesticides, GMO or various chemicals of any kind) than the garbage being pulled today and sold as 'food' (oh right, nevermind the premise that we have been producing over 17% more calories per each person on the planet for over 30 years, and we still have close to 1.3 billion who are starving, of which 15 million children die annually).

Yeah... what a 'wonderful' world we live in - so 'wonderful' in fact I'm getting nauseous at the very thought of how people allowed it to get to such a miserable state.

I'll take that as a total walkback from what you said previously.

 

[Deks]

Care to clarify what you mean by 'walkback'?
I'm not too familiar with certain idioms... so you have to be specific.

It seemingly alludes to the notion that I retracted everything I stated.
If that is what you implied, then I have to say: 'no'.

 

[JarodRussell]

There's also that strange idea that genetically enhanced food is altering your own genes when you eat it.

Well I suggest as a precation, we don't go out of our homes. Might get knocked down.
As a precaution I suggest we stop using mobile phones, in case they cause cancer.
Everything we do carries some sort of risk.

It's not stupid to try to reduce risks as best as possible.



The biggest problem with GM crops are patents. Companies patent their creation, but the stuff spreads naturally. And then everyone who accidently uses them has to pay for it.

 

[Cutter John]

I don't see a problem with genetically modified foods per se.

This. Its all in how they're modified. Making something more nutritious, easier to grow? Good. Creating a plant simply to claim ownership of a food type, making it easier to ship but taste like cardboard, or a plant type that potentially harms the local environment? Bad.