Jump to content

GM food...Yes or No...


Koku
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Senator Gaius @ May 29 2005, 08:04 AM)

Personally, i don't mind eating GM food, but there are a lot of people here who do.

 

 

Ever heard that the scientists are aiming for "vaccine" vegetable, when we eat GM veg, we are vaccinated in the same time...what about their side effects..or after effects...what if some batch are toxicated....?

Ever heard that GM veg may open a new channel of "Biological colonization"...?

Ever heard that GM food also alter some of our genes ...leaving problems for our grand children to bare or to solve...?

Ever heard some more wierd stories....?

 

.....Considering the very very complicate genes those make up vegetables or animal, or even human,... We'd better be sure those scientists know what really they are doing.. cutting and editting a characteristic may alter others which current GM technique is not aware of...

 

Am I thinking too much?? dry.gif

 

Let's hear from others... thumbsup.gifpinkelephant23.gifthumbsdown.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

personally i am all for Genetically engineering foods to have properties such as incresed nutrition, incresed yealds, natrual pesticides, and things like that, as the people it will benefit will be the third world people and the farmers, incresed nutriants in foods will lead to better nutrition for the third world and a good solution to the world food problem.

 

GM foods to provide vaccines would be a bad idea in my opinion, what if it gets out as unlabeled? what if somene eats way too much of the vaccine? if a potato is grown that contains a vaccine, whats the chace it has of being stolen from a fireld, and given to someone who doesn't need it? too much vaccine in a normal person can easily kill them.

 

I will post more on this later, as it is a situation i have strong opinions on, mostly i am for GM, but not in all circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am against their use. I don't think enough is known about gene science to acurately predict the risks. Also much of the work is being focused on producing crops to sell to the third world. Yes it will be more productive and disease resistant but they have also been enigneered to be sterile. This means the farmers can't use the seeds for the next years crop and so would be forced to buy new seed every year instead of being almost self sufficient for seed. A rip off designed to boost profits for companies from the world's richest countries. While the motive is so obviously profit what are the garruntees that it is not being rushed into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that is true that the 'exterminator' gene as it is being called is being introduced by those componies into crops, and yes a large factor is to make profit, it is also there to stamp out one of the protestors bugbears that these crops could produce 'super weeds' that are resistant to pesticides or whatever, if the exterminator gene is present, then any offspring will not germinate.

 

I'm not defending the exterminator gene, i dont like it either, but it is not soly a reason to be against genetic engineering.

 

Genetic engineering involves the addition of very specific genes into forign plants, admittidly these genes could not have possibly gotten there by natrual causes, but all these extra genes do is code for a different protien.

 

there has been alot of controvosy in Europe about GM foods, but very little in the US, i think there was an article in a newspaper somewhere that created a massive scare in Europe, but never got to the US. Probobly a bit like the MMR scare in the UK a few years ago, some doctor published a single article saying there may be a link between autism and the MMR vaccination, and a massive scare broke out, despite the fact that he had no single scrap of evidence, his own lab consequently produced test results which prooved him wrong, and every other doctor in the country said he was talking bollocks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having thought about it I think that what it really comes down to for me is that I don't like idea of private ownership of genetic code and its patenting. For me personally I find the morally wrong and I think it could be a bad precedent to set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....I don't think enough is known about gene science to acurately predict the risks. ....

That's the point! ok01.gif

 

The point is that...I happened to came accross an article that says People who were vaccinated for certain disease may prone to a higher risk of some other diseases..?!?!?..

 

Another aspect.. People have been fighting for a clear label of GM food, but the way marketers are doing is differently...

 

Who is to guarantee that a vegetable that grows 4-5 times faster than its normal "species" wouldn't do any harm to consumers...

 

Also, although looking similarly,... Shouldn't they be classified as a sub-species...

like ... Jasminum sambah-G-0012 (as they are different genetically)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something to read about GMO ... cool.gif

 

"Biotechnology Will Feed the World" and Other Myths

http://www.vegsource.com/articles/gmo_feed_myth.htm

 

GMO-free Europe

http://www.foeeurope.org/GMOs/gmofree/

 

GMO FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)

http://ohioline.osu.edu/gmo/faq.html

 

Biosafety Status and Responses

http://www.chinabiodiversity.com/shwdyx/te...port-e/x-5e.htm

 

The power of genes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/...cope/281365.stm

Edited by Koku (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having thought about it I think that what it really comes down to for me is that I don't like idea of private ownership of genetic code and its patenting. For me personally I find the morally wrong and I think it could be a bad precedent to set.

 

this is a large area of controvosy, with the human genetic code, two teams of scientists, one english, one american, were working on it together, the US scientist patented all his stuff, the english guy stuck it all on the internet for free... technically the US guy can charge peopel for using his dna sequences, but after some wrangling from the english guy he didn't in the end...

 

with patenting plant DNA strands, i think that the patents are only on particuler plants with a particuler gene in, the gene itself isn't patented, the plant with the gene in is. This ha been going on for years and years with different breeds of cattle and other livestock, one person breeds a particularely good cow for producing milk, he can charge a lot of money for other people to buy this cow's offspring.

 

 

The point is that...I happened to came accross an article that says People who were vaccinated for certain disease may prone to a higher risk of some other diseases..

 

this was what i was saying about the MMR jab, the doctor claimed, with no evidence whatsoever, just off the top of his head almost, that there was a link between the MMR vaccination and autism, the fact that there was no evidence at all, his own lab produced evidence against it, and every other doctor in the UK said it was a load of bollocks didn't stop the tabloids telling everyone that this was true... and now there is a measles scare in the UK among young kids, as half of them havn't had the vaccination...

 

Also, although looking similarly,... Shouldn't they be classified as a sub-species...

like ... Jasminum sambah-G-0012 (as they are different genetically)...

 

Not neccecerly, do we call this cow a different species than this one, just because they are different genetically? there is massive variation within species and the genetics within species already. Although i do see your point, and i thought all GM foods were supposed to be clearly labled anyway? or am i wrong? huh.gif

 

Who is to guarantee that a vegetable that grows 4-5 times faster than its normal "species" wouldn't do any harm to consumers...

 

this is the other thing i don't like about todays world, everything contains things that are harmful, Oxygen is poisinous for goodness sake, in todays culture, unless somthing has been prooved to do 0 harm to anyone or anything you get peopel campaigning agaisnt it. Imagine if Peanuts were invented today, they would never be allowed on the market because some people have massive anyphalactic(sp) shock when they even touch them. Everything is slightly harmful, there is no getting around that, and some things will be slightly more harmful than others, but there is no eveidence, for or against, that GM foods are eny better or worse for you than normal foods, it is just people getting massivly paranoid over every tiny thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the "genetically engineered food"-discussion is just another hype.

 

When the cows went mad, the "experts" said, that thousand woulds die. When dioxine was in chickens, the "experts" said, that thousands would die. When SARS came up, the "experts" said, that thousands would die.

 

Sometime I think, these "experts" say that to get a nice spot in the newspaper or the TV news...

 

During the "mad cow"-discussion in Germany, I heard a comment from a WW2-veteran:

 

"After the war, we ate everything that didn't eat us. This can't be worse than that."

 

Humans have eaten all kinds of weird and possibly dangerous stuff for hundrets of thousands of years. We will survive this and adapt, as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

555...Tamurin...I like that veteran's saying... tongue.gif

 

"The power of genes" BBC.

....Above all we must not become intoxicated by our power to manipulate genes. We have only just leaned to do it in a very crude and simple way. Nature has been doing it for billions of years.....We must remember that our past is full of man-made disasters. Will the new genetic agricultural revolution mimic the disasters of the industrial age?...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/...cope/281365.stm

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote Phil :...the US guy can charge peopel for using his dna sequences, but after some wrangling from the english guy he didn't in the end...

- That incidence was well resolved as the US met his match... What I concern is selling patented seeds to 3rd world, with good "marketing" strategies, with good PR and governmental involvement as win-win deal.... Those farmers just have to take it or leave it...years and years...

 

Quote Phil :.......one person breeds a particularely good cow for producing milk, he can charge a lot of money for other people to buy this cow's offspring.

It's decent earning for such people who breed good hourses or cattle... and the price for such "certificated" animal is worthwhile its quality...

On the other hand, it is often seen that larger scale of production never make the producers price down their products, or price them according to the purchasing power parity. Also, GM products is about the very few players in the world those advance enough to stay in such wealthy oligopolistic competition...

 

Quote Phil : ......Everything is slightly harmful, .... there is no eveidence, for or against, that GM foods are eny better or worse for you than normal foods, it is just people getting massivly paranoid over every tiny thing.

^....Above all we must not become intoxicated by our power to manipulate genes. We have only just leaned to do it in a very crude and simple way. Nature has been doing it for billions of years.....We must remember that our past is full of man-made disasters. Will the new genetic agricultural revolution mimic the disasters of the industrial age?...

 

Personally, I'm not against GMO but I'd rather choose while I still can choose to eat...and I'd rather know well enough on what I'm eating... tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^....Above all we must not become intoxicated by our power to manipulate genes. We have only just leaned to do it in a very crude and simple way. Nature has been doing it for billions of years.....We must remember that our past is full of man-made disasters. Will the new genetic agricultural revolution mimic the disasters of the industrial age?...

well, nature hasn't been doing this sort of thing, that is partly the whole point,that bbc report was written by a reporter, not a scientist, i'm not sure he grasped Genetic engineering that well, nature hasn't been doing this, it's part of the whole point, nature swops genes around WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES, genetic engineering involves the transplant of a gene from one organism to a completly different one, a fish gene to a crop plant for example.

 

People have visions of mutated plants, with toxic fish thig in, but that won't happen, we know how DNA works, all a gene codes for is a single protien, whether it is for a protien that breaks down pesticides so the plant is not affected by them, or a protien that produces a higher nutritioanl content in the plant.

 

And while our past may be full of man-made disasters, it is full of a hell of a lot more natrual disasters, and really, what is worse, a bit of genetic engeneering to create plants and animals that can help to save human lives, or the same old plants as before, and with a booming world population, less and less food per capita. I know there is enough food in the world already to feed everyone, but alot of that is in the west, and i don't see many mcdonalds eating westerners wanting to give up their lifestyles anytime soon

 

and yes, big componies will make a profit out of it, but that is how capitalism works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^....Above all we must not become intoxicated by our power to manipulate genes. We have only just leaned to do it in a very crude and simple way. Nature has been doing it for billions of years.....We must remember that our past is full of man-made disasters. Will the new genetic agricultural revolution mimic the disasters of the industrial age?...

well, .... nature hasn't been doing this, it's part of the whole point, nature swops genes around WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES, genetic engineering involves the transplant of a gene from one organism to a completly different one, a fish gene to a crop plant for example.

Well..either a patient is having his cyst cut off or his kidney transplanted, It's a "surgery"...

... By nature, bacteria can "cross the strains" (in otherword, specie) exchange their ability to react to anti-biotics...

....Men those could stand the extremely cold temp can survive well, known as Eskimo (through generations, slowly as nature works)...

...the ability to resist or stand a challenging condition, not only recognize as natural endure state, but many are deep down to their "gene"...

...It doesn't mean only a "cross species" swap.. Gene alteration..disabling a bad gene, or triggering an "inactive" gene, or "completion" of some missing genetic sequences are all "Genetic engineering"... smile.gif

 

....a bit of genetic engeneering to create plants and animals that can help to save human lives, or the same old plants as before, and with a booming world population, less and less food per capita....

Agree. There is an old saying that "Sword has 2 edges"...you know...good and bad..it depend how we use it... make a saint or evil out of it.. satansmokin.gif

 

...and yes, big componies will make a profit out of it, but that is how capitalism works....

Capitalism...I do not argue of the system...but the people who using it ...

I admire those who operate generously, and with decent profit margin..but not those who take too much advantage on others... dry.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont' think I can add much without repeating other points except:

big componies will make a profit out of it, but that is how capitalism works
It doesn't mean they should be allowed to unchecked or unregulated or that they always should.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... By nature, bacteria can "cross the strains" (in otherword, specie) exchange their ability to react to anti-biotics... 

 

yes, this is between the same species, it isnt genetic engineering, just, well, sex...

 

....Men those could stand the extremely cold temp can survive well, known as Eskimo (through generations, slowly as nature works)...

...the ability to resist or stand a challenging condition, not only recognize as natural endure state, but many are deep down to their "gene"...

 

this is all just evolution, the person with the strongest set of genes for the conditions survives, it is not the same as genetic engineering, which is predesigning a plant for a specific purpouse, evolution is random, GE is targeted.

 

...It doesn't mean only a "cross species" swap.. Gene alteration..disabling a bad gene, or triggering an "inactive" gene, or "completion" of some missing genetic sequences are all "Genetic engineering"... 

 

ok true, GE can be between the same species in some examples(but all of the replacemtn DNA sequences were made in a test tube in the lab, and inserted into the patient via a modified virus...) but it still wouldn't occur in nature, which is what the article was saying.

 

 

 

anyway, why are we arguing over the wording of an article... rolleyes.gif

 

it appears all we differ on is our opinion of how he big componies work their GM food program, i agree, corruption in the componies wil not be a good thing, but in western componies, especially massive US corperations like Monsanto it is inevitable there will be some. We just have to try and limit the damage through laws and the suchlike...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wink.gif Yep, no point arguing on "wording" ...

 

Talking about corrupt! It is quite ambiguous to tell whether it's the company's hidden policy, or it's their "employee" 's....

 

Any comment from others?? cheerleader.gifsquirrel.gifpinkelephant23.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, nature hasn't been doing this sort of thing, that is partly the whole point,that bbc report was written by a reporter, not a scientist, i'm not sure he grasped Genetic engineering that well, nature hasn't been doing this, it's part of the whole point, nature swops genes around WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES, genetic engineering involves the transplant of a gene from one organism to a completly different one, a fish gene to a crop plant for example.

 

saying this... there was an article in this weeks New Scientist about a plant gene being found in a Hydra (hydra are tiny microscopic animals, behave similerly to sea ananames) so it seems nature has been doing interspecies genetic swopping...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting...

ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE

...how do bacteria develop a resistance to antibiotics?

"The bacteria acquire resistant DNA elements from other bacteria. We may have the transfer of an individual gene or we may have the transfer of a block of genes so that bacteria acquires resistance not only to the antibiotic in question, but also to other antibiotics as well."

"Resistance to an antibiotic is coded by one or more genes in the bacteria. Now these genes for resistance can be transferred from one bacterium to another bacterium. It can cross species lines, and there's indication that it can pass from man to animals or animals to man. So, the bacteria don't really care who the host is."

So if antibiotic resistance can pass between humans and cattle, for example, the effects could be far-reaching. We'll hear more in future programs.

http://www.pulseplanet.com/archive/Jun96/1250.html

 

Recent Evidence Confirms Risks of Horizontal Gene Transfer

I have been drawing our regulators? attention to it at least since 1996 [1], when there was already sufficient evidence to suggest that transgenic DNA in GM crops and products can spread by being taken up directly by viruses and bacteria as well as plant and animals cells. .....

The health risks of horizontal gene transfer include:

-Antibiotic resistance genes spreading to pathogenic bacteria.

-Disease-associated genes spreading and recombining to create new viruses and bacteria that cause diseases.

-Transgenic DNA inserting into human cells, triggering cancer. .....

It turns out that Agrobacterium injects T-DNA into plant cells in a process that strongly resembles conjugation, ie, mating between bacterial cells; and all the necessary signals and genes involved are interchangeable with those for conjugation [14].

That means transgenic plants created by T-DNA vector system have a ready route for horizontal gene escape, via Agrobacterium, helped by the ordinary conjugative mechanisms of many other bacteria that cause diseases [15]. ......

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/FSAopenmeeting.php

 

A diet for your genes

by Norwish Research Park.

Scientists at the Institute of Food Research on the Norwich Research Park are setting out to find out how the food we eat might alter the activity of our genes. Our genes act as the blueprint that our bodies follow to develop and function properly. But not all of our thousands of genes are active at the same time, as genes are turned on and off at different stages in our growth and in different parts of our bodies. And the IFR scientists are wondering if our diet can also affect which of our genes are active. If they are right, it could pave the way for understanding exactly how diet can affect the health of our bodies.

In a revolutionary approach, different chemicals in food, such as vitamins, minerals and ?phytochemicals? (known to have help reduce risks of some kinds of cancers) are being tested for their ability to affect gene activity.

http://www.nrp.org.uk/enews/edpgenomics.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...