They’re baaaack!
Yep – another post on Frankenfoods – the miserable mutant offspring of ancient crops…and the white-coat rapists from Biotech who jam alien species’ DNA into the germplasm of our familiar staples.
Reagan/Bush and Grover’s Club For Greed paved the way – or more accurately, pulverised the institutions – by destroying the Federal research funding which ensured America’s basic science led the world in our species own ancient effort to better know ourselves and our living world. Slashing the constant funding stream for basic science, the Gipper, the Spook, and the Grover impoverished US basic science to the point that they could force "Shock Doctrine" revolutions through America’s basic science insitutions – and culture.
Now every good revolution needs a symbolic (and sometimes actual) rallying point. India had Gandhi.
Poland had Lech Walensa. South Africa had Mandela. El Salvador had Archbishop Romero – well, until our client-rulers assasinated him as he clebrated Mass. We Americans’ had G. Washington: despite his real shortcomings, he had the foresight to foster a Republic, not a monarchy (pardon me if I’m letting him off easy – residual maternal pride…I’m descended from his mom, Mary Ball). Czechoslovakia had Vaclav Havel. Cuba had Fidel and Che. Feudal Mexico in the early 20th Century had Zapata. Feudal Mexico in the late 20th Century had has Subcommandante Marcos and the Zapatistas – stay tuned for freedom coming to a nation very near U…(S).
And the brave bloated warriors of Monsanto – those tireless voices of the vat – who was their hero in their fight against 2,500 years of empirical observation? Who came forward to defend them in their hour of need decades of greed? Who was their Lysenko for the 21st Century?
Why none other than that noted naturale philosophere – Dane Quayle.
Yep – the guy who couldn’t figure out how to spell "potato" is the intellectual father night-soil carrier of the steaming pile of ideology that permits BigTestTube to give the BigLie that mutant foods are safe. Without even having to go to the bother of testing them.
Of course, even here Quayle is unremarkable – just one in a series of Presidents and Veeps who chose to turn America’s post-WWII Federal health and safety shields into spittoons for the megacorps and the corporatist saboteurs they employ.
Before the Orange County frat boys who later decomposed into the Young Rethuglicans selected him as their instrument, Reagan had already shown his hatred of the factual world as CA Governor, when he tried to punish the University of California for – perish the thought – actually conducting research, rather than supporting Rethug/corporatist propagnda. Reagan – the perfect tool for corporatists who never met an inconvenient fact they couldn’t try to belittle or ignore – was a natural enemy of empirical data and public research.
Reagan’s Revolution against empricism spawned the "White House Council on Competetiveness" – a new venue for the old Rethug trick of evading duly enacted Federal Law by creating Executive Branch abattoirs in which hard-fought Congressional victories against the corporatists could be hoisted up by one hoof and have their throats slit – all out of public view.
And you thought making laws was ugly?
So what does this have to with Naturale Philosophere Quayle? Simple – as the designated figurehead under Bush the Elder, Daneeee sat atop the WHCC. By Royal Executive Branch Decree, the vapid Veep simply declared Frankenmutants to be the same as the rest of us.
So by Executive decree, that GMO corn with alien genes with alien genes from other critters is the same as natural corn with only corn for parents.
This is the biological equivalent of declaring humans assimilated into the Borg to be equivalent to all humans.
Quayle’s decree of equivalence also flew in the face of the Supremes’ ruling that GMO organisms were so distinct form natural lifeforms as to be patentable. As both the Supremes’ ruling and Quayle’s decree suited Big Test Tube just fiine, however, industry was happy. And therefore so were the Reaganites.
Clinton came along and abolished the WHCC, but otherwise fellated Big Test Tube and the Lords of Frankenfood. Bush the Insane simply bent what remained of America’s regulators over for the exclusive enjoyment of the GMO pimps industry.
So WTF does this have to with potatoes?
Well, the Decree of Equivalence – like the Trade Tyranny rules known as WTO and NAFTA – is simply a concept created by the megacorps to enable the biggest industries on the planet to do whatever the fuck they please.
In Europe, public hatred of GMO’s is so strong that simply labelling foods as containing GMO’s is the kiss of marketing death. Knowing this, the Lords of the Vats have rigged the EU’s decsion making-process so that a inconclusive vote among Agriculture Ministers allows GMO mutants to go forward for approval.
EU law provides for rubberstamp GMO authorizations when ministers are unable to agree after a certain time. Since 2004, the Commission has authorized a string of GMOs — nearly all maize types — in this way, outraging green groups.
And last week BASF’s mutant potatoe got the inconclusive vote require to punt the question of allowing the Frankenspud to be dug up and interred at the EU’s Executive – the European Commission. Just as in the US, the Executive branch of the EU was the corporatists’ first target for sabotaging democracy. And, just like in the US, the corporatists have succeeded:
Officials at the European Commission, the EU executive, already have deemed the potato safe. These officials want to introduce more gene-altered products into the EU to normalize trade relations with countries like the United States, and to lower costs for farmers.
But many governments in Europe are extremely wary of continuing distrust among those citizens who consider gene-altered products to be "Frankenstein" foods. Experts say that some countries may even be hardening their longstanding opposition to the technology.
Who cares?
Well, right now BASF claims the mutant spuds will just be used in industry – and hence won’t enter the food supply. That is, as long as we don’t consider cattle and other critters food: BASF also seeks approval to use the Frankenspud in animal food.
So what?
Well, to make the Frankenspud, BASF included a few genes that tell bacteris how to destroy a couple of antibiotics. BASF says the antibiotics don’t matter- I guess that’s the European version of "Old Science". Europeans disagree:
The potato contains an antibiotic resistance marker gene (ARMG)(1) known as nptII, which conveys resistance to antibiotics and which should already have been phased out under EU law since 2004(2). Despite this and despite a number of legal concerns, the European Food Safety Authority gave a positive opinion on the BASF potato, paving the way for Monday’s vote.
“This potato is blighted by too many inconsistencies for the Council to legally approve it. The EFSA opinion upon which the Commission proposal is based contradicts the scientific opinions of other international institutions and also EFSA’s own previous opinions on the same issue. Therefore, the Commission proposal is unlawful,” said Marco Contiero, Greenpeace EU GMO policy director.
Both the WHO and the European Medicine’s Agency (EMEA) contradicted EFSA’s decision and found that the families of antibiotics affected by the potato gene (kanamycin and neomycin) are “critically important”(3) for veterinary and human use and “cannot be classified as of no or only minor therapeutic relevance”.(4) EFSA subsequently recognised that the BASF potato ARMG confers resistance to antibiotics of critical importance but failed to modify its position. Crucially, an EFSA opinion of 2004 declared that products containing ARMGs affecting “highly relevant” antibiotics should not be placed on the market.(5)
Oh – and who are the big powers at the EFSA? Why – lordy me – Big Pharma, Big Ag, and Big Test Tube.
And who says Old Europe won’t learn from the New World?
Lift a fork to Comissar Lysenko – and his acolytes Dan Quayle and the EFSA.
Bon Appetit, Comrades.
[photo credit: azrainman]
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
KIRK! Thank you!
hmm
yum!
Actually, Quayle didn’t know how to spell potato…apt, eh?
What’s up, Doc? ;-)
Fork – the stupid, it burns my memory!
Thanks for catching my blunder, Laura – duly corrected.
Hi to you, TB, CT, and argos
Wait so by eating a tater we could be giving all the germs in our body immunity from a certain Antibiotic? Why is this *cough* improvement added to the potato?
Yeah, that’s what I was wondering– why did they add that gene?
Of course, the alternative is growing your own, but then you have to know what is actually in the ground you’re using.
I absolutely despise Monsanto, ADM, and Cargill, amongst numerous others! But, interestingly, a major bone of contention here in the Isles is the frankenfood Taro, or more commonly referred to as Kalo here, developed by the UH Dept. of Tropical Ag, in conjunction with the USDA… Many Hawaiians have chained themselves to doors and aggressively protested the usage… GMO and the patent procedures need to be thoroughly upended, with an eye cast particularly at the ‘Terminator’ seed practises… 8-(
Good gawd. And I’m fixing fried chicken and mashed potatoes for supper as I type. Can you smell it?
I am not against genetically altered foods. However, all such foods should be rigorously tested and only released into the market when true scientific testing deems them safe.
Posted this on the last thread, but here’s a great slide show (NSFW, written words) that describes the subprime mess.
“the families of antibiotics affected by the potato gene (kanamycin and neomycin) are “critically important”(3) for veterinary and human use and “cannot be classified as of no or only minor therapeutic relevance”.(4) EFSA subsequently recognised that the BASF potato ARMG confers resistance to antibiotics of critical importance but failed to modify its position. Crucially, an EFSA opinion of 2004 declared that products containing ARMGs affecting “highly relevant” antibiotics should not be placed on the market.(5) “
http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-u…..uncil-vote
So we intend to give antibiotic resistance to a whole class of antibiotics that we are still using? We intend to feed these potatoes to cattle which I’m sure will help the spread especially if the meat has E coli in which case the affected antibiotics would be useless in cases of E coli food poisoning.
I want Ralph Nader as head of the FDA now.
a critical question for our times is what do we do now that the planet is a garden.
folks, we’re responsible for the whole thing now … there ain’t no real wilderness left. what’s left is a play ground that we manage — like the corner of my property in the back that we leave “wild” where the foxes live. but, it’s our property, it’s not really wild, it’s not bigger than we are.
so …
how is genetic engineering different than breeding tomatoes and trading seeds?
it’s not, in any fundamental way.
the difference is in risk. and how much we can foresee. no big problems from trading heirloom tomato sees. but, possible big problems from genetic engineering.
but only if we act like children.
time to grow up. and take responsibility for shitting in our own back yards. and admit that we manage the planet now.
Things and Riesz, the genes for antibiotic resistance are added as “markers” that allow the VatLords to distinguish which cells “took” the mutant genes (genes that alter starch metabolism in the potato) that BASF wanted to cram in the natural potato.
Noonan, fortunately we also have the alternative of selecting organic produce.
Sadly, even organics are under threat from pollution by Fraknenpollen from GMO crops.
And CT, I hope our most recently conquered colony shows the rest of the US the way to freedom! How do I say “good on ya” in Hawaiian?
We grow most of our veggies, chicken, eggs, pork and beef. We freeze and can. But we water all these things with ground water. Ground water which may contain contaminants. Like farm fertilizer, and pesticide runoffs.
Isn’t that like having the fox guarding the hen house…? Think about it! The Corvair will be small potatoes in comparison…! *g*
I wonder if the Big Pharma companies have a new antibiotic that they want to launch with a bang. If we lose a class of antibiotics then we would be forced to buy the new antibiotic at whatever price because it would be the only antibiotic that works.
oh please don’t let that be the case!
Shaka, Bra! Loosely translated…! ;-)
Sure can! Served with frozen peas?
Hey Kirk. I’m thinking of doing a vege garden. It’s not an inexpensive proposition, though. I’m thinking gopher proof mesh on the bottom, build up a wooden enclosed area bringing in good soil, and fencing all around to keep the rabbits out, and a gate so I can get in and out. Also the expense of changing the sprinkler system so it will water the goodies. I don’t know whether it would be worth the expense…
You paint too broad a brush when you talk about all genetically engineered food as being ‘frankenfoods’.
First of all, Darwin included a number of crop genetics practices in his work to demonstrate that people had already been long manipulating genetics in order to benefit themselves. We’ve been doing this for a long time; wild wheat is just not as useful as the wheat we currently have. We have provided evolutionary pressure to activate certain genes which, on wild wheat, just aren’t as helpful. Resistance to certain antibiotics and other chemicals come at a price, just as bacterial resistance comes at an energy price.
To explain: When a bacteria (or wheat, or rice, or whatever) becomes resistant to a chemical, it must generate its own compound which counteracts the original chemical. In the case of bacteria, most antibiotics attack the cell membrane of the bacterium, so the bacterium will tend to introduce something into the membrane to make the bug more resistant to the antibiotic. Similar processes occur in plants; herbicides attack the fundamental ways in which the plants are held together and produce energy. Resistant genes can be turned on, but at a price, and that price is the cost of producing the resistance chemical.
In the wild, where exposure to antibiotics (and pesticides) is minimal, activating genes to provide resistance is actually an evolutionary disadvantage, because the organism is spending energy on a resistance it doesn’t need. That doesn’t mean the strain won’t propagate, it just means the strain is at a disadvantage. However, in the presence of the pesticide, any plant with the gene turned on will have a distinct advantage, because all of its competitors will be dead. Similar with antibiotics; this energy cost turns out to be a great investment on the part of the bacteria, and it will survive in the presence of the antibiotic while the other bacteria will not, and the survivor will get to pass on its genes.
(as a side note, that’s why antibiotic resistant bacteria are typically not found outside of hospitals; the cost of making the antibiotic is too much of a disadvantage without the antibacterial agent there).
Similar processes occur in plants. Turning on genes which allow the plant to be resistant to chemicals is a great boon to farmers, because then they can get rid of weeds very easily, using standard pesticides, rather than cycles of pesticides which try not to harm the target plant.
So, for instance, take a look here:
http://www.checkbiotech.org/gr…..foId=16899
Providing an antifungal into rice would be of great benefit to those communities that depend on rice. Note that the work here was done at research universities, not companies.
While I understand the irritation at Monsanto and other biotech companies, consider this. While the top-down approach to farming has greatly destroyed what was the ‘American way of life’ in the middle of the last century and previously, we need that large infrastructure to support our population and many other populations that depend on American aid. Yes, there are inefficiencies built into the system, but the fact is that the oranges which only cost me $1.50 at Whole Foods (Paycheck) only come about because it’s profitable for someone. Diverse farming comes at the price of food costs going up everywhere.
This problem is a complicated one. If doing this kind of engineering turns on already latent genes in organisms, provides cheaper food for people who need it, and, if open sourced, allows for a non-mega-corporate farmer to get his hands on the genome and genetic product, then I’m all for genetically engineered foods.
I don’t believe the use of the words frankenfood, frankenspud, mutant and alien are constructive.
lee5, bless you and your family for leaving space for the First Creatures.
though I agree with your conclusions, I would disagree with:
The fundamental difference between biological plant breeding (seed saving, hybridization, even directed mutations via radiation/chemicals) is that all the foregoing methods only recombine the genetic information within one species.
Genetic engineering, in contrast, allows the combination of genes from organisms that are not only from different species, but (in the case of Frankenfoods like the Frankenspud) from entirely different phyla.
(in biology, “phyla” are the basic divisions among groups of living creatures – kinda like contintents are the basic divisions in geography. Along with salmon, we live in the animal phylum; bacteria that contain the genes for antibiotic resistance live in a different phylum; our crop plants (and other plants) live in yet another phylum.
Frankenfoods combine the genes from entirely different phyla into creatures never possible with bilogically based breeding.
And – simply by reproducing – the Frankenoffspring act as little natural Xerox machines that spread the mutant genes across the planet.
Now you’re lookin’ at a man that’s gettin’ kinda mad
I had lot’s of luck but it’s all been bad
No matter how I struggle and strive
I’ll never get out of this world alive.
My fishin’ pole’s broke the creek is full of sand
My woman run away with another man
No matter how I struggle and strive
I’ll never get out of this world alive.
A distant uncle passed away and left me quite a batch
And I was livin’g high until that fatal day
A lawyer proved I wasn’t born
I was only hatched.
Ev’rything’s agin’ me and it’s got me down
If I jumped in the river I would prob’ly drown
No matter how I struggle and strive
I’ll never get out of this world alive.
These shabby shoes I’m wearin’ all the time
Are full of holes and nails
And brother if I stepped on a worn out dime
I bet a nickel I could tell you if it was heads or tails.
I’m not gonna worry wrinkles in my brow
‘Cause nothin’s ever gonna be alright nohow
No matter how I struggle and strive
I’ll never get out of this world alive.
good for you and L, kiddo.
we don’t grow most of our food, but we grow a lot of it. still eating a lot from last summer’s garden!
same deal — organic gardening, but using groundwater. which given all the farmers around us is definitely not organic.
I think it frames it nicely… I don’t object to drought resistance, but, terminator and poison friendly seeds is pushing the envelope too far…
This argument is commonly in attempts to stifle fundamental criticism of the Frankenfood industry.
In reality, Frankenfoods are not at all necessary to support our popualtion or populations that rely on American food exports.
The problem of global access to food has repeatedly been demonstrated to be a problem of maldistribution.
As for the assertion:
any suggestion that the crop genetics addressed by Darwin are the same as the Frankengenetics created in labs was addressed in # 25 above.
Plants evolve slowly animals like us evolve along with the plants so we can keep eating them as they evolve new tricks. A sudden shift in plant makeup that only effects a small population after longterm exposure redheads, AB negative bloodtypes whatever might slip through our testing procedures.
Especially with the GOP in charge of testing these foods, more testing should be done. Or imagine the legal liability Monsanto if we don’t test more.
Hey kirk–
great post…potato and mansanto…and Dan Quayle. You gotta love it!!
Yeah, those’re just vicious and nasty practices, terminator and poison friendly.
Hence the desire to have the genomes open sourced and the tools available to anyone. Of course, then you run the risk of a farmer making some especially virulent strawberry that wipes out the local plant population; that’s a risk that’s a bit minimal and one I’d take over the risk (certainty?) of Monsanto developing trickery to keep the world population under its thumb via termination seeds.
Plus, anyone remember when the potassium markets got fixed?
http://www.competitionbureau.g…..1185e.html
Control the food sources, and you’ll control the game. Starcraft taught me that.
seeds that are illegal to breed for the next year are a bad thing.
releasing gmos into the world w/o understanding what the impacts of them will be is a bad thing.
pretending that we’re not responsible for our actions is a bad thing.
these statements seem obvious.
now … we live in colorado. is a potato that is resistant to the colorado potato beetle a bad thing?
i dunno — i plant organic seed potatoes pick the beetles by hand and kill them (with the most compassion in my heart that i can summon). does this make me, who flies across the continent most weeks, a better person? what impact does my choice of potato seeds have on someone in latin america? how does it compare to wearing leather shoes, burning jet fuel, writing code that can be used to monitor internet communications (although none of my clients do that, the software i work on can be used to do that), or creating products that let individuals publish their ideas (this is what my software does)?
no easy answers … promises made by dark of night dissolve by light of day …
You might consider using soaker hoses instead. Not only will you use less water, there are things (tomatoes, for example) that don’t necessarily like getting their leaves wet. Soaker hoses and mulch work a treat, for happy plants and a smaller water bill.
You have managed to sidestep the central argument I presented, namely, that genes can be turned on that aren’t naturally on, and by doing so, provide the plant with resistance.
To which you say?
Or simply rename everything a frankenfood and be done with it?
Like the attempts to engineer a cassava plant resistant to the mosaic virus?
http://www.tropentag.de/2005/p…..de348.html
I mean, it’s only 600 million Africans which could benefit from that.
And if you live where I live you can hook up an illegal greywater system like I did!
USDA is backpedaling on their original stance in HI’s District Court, that they had actually followed the EPA’s, and, their own USDA protocols on safeguards for seed testing! When in fact, they had failed to establish a ‘proper’ buffer zone around a GMO corn field on Maui… The research was for seeds bound for Africa…
Those cheap oranges you like so much taste like shit. Which is what they are. Wake up fool and realize that the rest of the world sez no to GMO for most excellent reasons. Hast heard of ‘mad cow disease’ or did you miss that one to watch American Idol.
Honestly, this is just plain stupidity. Please go back under your bridge.
ease up
Not peas tonight. We love all kinds of legumes though. Breaded in cornmeal, and fried okra tonight. From last season’s garden. This is afterall, ‘Okrahoma’. ;0)
i believe you mean an “undocumented” grey water system ;)
OOOHHH…. How? I’ve got a water barrel, but if there’s a reasonably efficient way to use graywater… (There are certain laws that just cry out to be broken, you know!) FB or e-mail info, please? (Not fair to hijack the thread!)
I’m not against Franken foods but spreading antibiotic resistance to antibiotics that we are still using is wrong.
In Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs survival is the first step, we need antibiotics to survive more than we need a new potato.
Anyway what is so special about this potato anyway? Why risk losing a class of antibiotics? The Benefit/Risk scale of this potato would have to be very impressive to justify that.
There it is!
They do evolve slowly, but targeted breeding is much, much faster than natural evolution. A farmer deciding to propagate only 5 or 2% of their crop to the next year is highly selective; there’s usually way more genetic transferance to the next generation. That selection means that certain traits will show up faster and be emphasized more quickly. Hence why we can enjoy delicious beer, because without generations of farmers in the fertile crescent trying to get hammered, we would not have developed the basic ingredients.
So what about just turning on the genes, if they are extant?
But yes, we should still test. Designing that kind of experiment would be tricky, at the best, because you’d have to determine first what the variables are to test for. Would it be acceptable to have some people be allergic to the food, as some people are now allergic to peanuts and develop sprue with respect to glutens? Would we want the plants to only be able to cross pollinate with their own genetically engineered brethren, or with the rest of the population? It’s still a very tricky territory, and I do agree with the fundamental thrust of the good doctor’s post– the GOP should not be in charge of it. But neither should we be so quick to reject this advance in farming either.
Good point. Hoses that just water the plants.
Sorry for pointing out that the world isn’t as black and white as you’d like it to be.
But maybe you’d like to stew in your own bile a bit more, so enjoy.
yet another reason that I eat raw and try to shop exclusively at a Farmer’s Market. Even when we are pressed to shop at a grocery store, we pay attention to those SKU numbers on veggies and fruits as they tell you whether they are organic, standard or genetically modified.
Don’t forget the apples in illinois the store bought apples well suck. Coming to Seattle though Mmmm! I learned to like apples again.
thank you mmroden. this isn’t an easy subject (sez the organic gardener …) beware of all easy answers. but ask the hard questions!
We have an orchard of Tangelos grown by a local that produces the largest, sweetest orange orbs known to man! The size of grapefruits and as sweet as tangerines… No pesticides, and, No fertilizer used, except lime to sweeten the volcanic soil…!
Isn’t graywater they water from washing clothes and dishes? Wouldn’t that kill the veges from too much soap/detergent?
Lahoma says hello, lee5.
okk
Just a friendly reminder…
If you have an argument with the facts or science, state it.
But disparaging persons here is prohibited.
“So what about just turning on the genes, if they are extant? ” I have no problem with that as long as we test designing a good test would be the next step.
Hmm. Ideology meets empiricism, chapter 412:
uh – your comment reflect ignorance of the fact that over 90% of the antibiotics used in the US are used outsdie of human medical care – mostly for feedlot cattle.
as you evinice ignorance of this basic concept – and draw fallacious conclusions as a result – I give you an “A” for ideology and rhetoric..,
but I’ll move on to commenters who demonstrate more intellectual substance.
when time permits, I’ll look forward to demolishing more of the Frakenpropaganda you’ve shared with us this evening.
drip irrigation. attention to water. centered mind as you work the ground by hand. awareness of where all the ingredients came from …
oops, that drip irrigation is all plastic. oil. death in iraq. what’s the planetary impact of extracting oil to get my drip irrigation supplies, refined in the third world, vs. wasting local water …
how does that compare w/ possible decrease in hunger from gmo potatoes?
no easy answers …
The amount of soap used isn’t that great, and if you consider that one of the things to use to combat bug critters in the garden is dish soap in water it seems almost like a gift…
and hi back to Lahoma. it’s nice to be hanging back here on the lake after a couple month’s break. interesting to see how the more it changes, the more it’s the same.
looking forward to voting for the same candidate this fall ;)
please see comment #54, immed’ly about yours …
best,
me
oops, that was supposed to be in response to #55 …
What you are describing, Things, is the Precautionary Principle in action.
Good thing, that PP.
I look forward to seeing it become the basis of US regulatory law.
I’m thinking of investing in a garden not only for healthier food, but for food in general if the economy truly tanks. I have almost four acres, but can’t afford to water it. (I’m thinking of a small garden, enough to feed about three or four)
I suspect that you’ve become too emotionally involved with being right to actually be worth arguing with, but I’m the champion of lost causes, I guess.
I’m not defending everything that Monsanto does, nor any other large biotech company. They’ve done nasty things in the past (as I said, regarding potassium fixing, termination seeds, and poison vulnerable seeds), so they don’t get a clean slate.
The fictitious, straw-man-argument woman in Iowa lost her farm because she couldn’t compete, as you pointed out. That’s why Monsanto exists– they can compete very well. You can complain about it, or you can understand the scope of the problem, and realize that allowing local farmers to have similar control over the crops would certainly help them counter such occurrences.
And you also fail to realize that there are many, many people involved in this effort, as I was pointing out with the Casava example (work by a German group, but there are many others out there). That there are people who really are trying to help others in the world, even if it’s through genetic engineering, doesn’t seem to fit within the possibilities of your world; what a sad and bitter place you must inhabit.
Cross pollination of wild crops with modified crops is another problem to consider.
Instead of plastics, concentrate on cellulose products… Hemp, Switchback grass etc…
Kiddo and I are going upstairs to watch “The Ghost and Mrs. Muir”. On PBS. The kiddo and I absolutely adore this 1947 movie. Good evening dear friends.
L and okk.
we live in the arid west (which I think you do too, if i remember correctly)., and it takes surprisingly small amounts of water to keep a significant garden in play. just be careful about it. we’ve got 3 acres, most in pasture, that we irrigate maybe once or twice a year (in a good year). garden from a well, about 1/3 acre. waaay more vegetables than 3-4 can eat. if you try to grow yr own protein, it’s a different story. but think seriously about chickens, a milk sow, and goats … i do beans (vegetarian scruples and all) and it’s a daunting task to think about growing yr own protein. we’d be eating chickens in a second if we had to do this for real.
It’s a lovely movie. Enjoy! Night, night.
do they make drip irrigation supplies from cellulose? we’d use that in a second.
Once again, you take a side point, and fail to address the central point of my argument.
OK, so most of the antibiotics used in the US is in feedlots– and then what happens to the groundwater goes ahead to prove my point, that in the presence of antibiotics, those organisms with resistance are favored to survive. My exact point! But, bacterial generations are on the order of 20-40 minutes, while plant generations are longer, so they take longer to develop the resistance, time that farmers generally don’t have.
So perhaps you could bend your mighty intellect to my original point– that you’re being too broad in your characterization of genetically modified foods, and that they can be used for good things in the world.
lee5, good on ya for raising those big questions about the ecological footprint of all our choices.
the last trade-off, however, is the equivalent of dividing by zero: the BASF Frankenspuds aren’t even marrketed with the promise of reduciing hunger – they are market as feedstock for inidustrial processes.
Despite the best efforts of the FrankenCourtiers (and those in academia know to suck up the Frankenteat of funding, GMO’s haven’t actually reduced hunger. They have been instrumental in increasing our exposure to the herbicide Roundup (aka glyphosate) – which has been shown to be associated with increased lymphoma risks.
Oh – and associated with vastly increased profits for Monasanto.
The “choice” between Frankencrops and solving hunger is every bit as false as the “choice” between nuclear power and “expensive” energy.
Amazingly enough, the megacorp “answer” that requires the greatest megacorp involvement proves to be the most expensive public policy choice.
That they do… I’m sure a quick google might locate a purveyor, it might be a foreign producer tho…! ;-)
Dang, Doc! Ya really know how to piss on one’s parade, eh? *g*
so, we live next to a big corn field. the farmer’s grandmother grew up in the house across the field. the corn he raises is harvested by the good ol boys down the road and feeds the cows on their family ranch. i don’t know what happens to the cows — whether they’re dairy cows or meat cows.
i do know that i’m happy when cliff sprays pesticides in the spring. it means he’s farming for another year — not gonna turn that field into a subdivision — and not gonna grow a field of weeds.
are those pesticides bad?
ok — cool. we’ll be looking for cellulose-based tubing this spring. thanks!
mmorden, your rhetoric is as amusing as it is irrelevant.
The rhetorical trick is to use one area of plant science in which only the extant genome is manipulated, cite theoretical benefits from such work…
and then use that as a putative basis for dismissing concerns about the artificially created genomes (created by combining genomoes from multiple organisms) discussed above as Frankenfoods.
I’m sure that’s a useful rhetorical device when overlooked.
Here, it didn’t work.
This needs its own post. I take it that we Americans are breeding plants to withstand or contain their own pesticides. But we are not creating multivitamin rice, potatoes with protein etc. Is anybody doing this research?
Building plants with pesticides is not a good use of research money. This is a great example of companies creating a market that we don’t need.
Normally I don’t care but by doing this we are ignoring world hunger. GOP freemarket polcy DOGMA is way wrong on this one.
sorry CT!
kirk, the sad thing is that i think both you and mmorden are trying to raise real issues. would certainly be better for both of you to acknowledge those issues, take each others intentions as good, and try to move forward. i don’t see either of you as the bad guys, but somehow, you’ve set yourselves up as that. (see post #54 above, please).
why is that? (serious question.)
Ah! Now a presentation of what I was asking for!
Apparently, I was hiding it behind too high a shield of ideology and rhetoric (really just taken from freshman biology, but hey). And so you have evidence from a group of organic farmers who themselves are incredibly not disposed to believe anything that comes out of any corporation’s mouth that has more than 50 employees. But hey! Rhetoric aside….
I see a much more disturbing trend in what you’ve presented– this problem is, as it always is with the GOP, about control. If Monsanto can make every plant require roundup, and then start to develop plants that are resistant to what they spray on roundup-ready plants, then they’ve got a vicious cycle started that will be hard, if not impossible to break. Termination seeds for the poor farmers, ever growing expenses with pesticides for the more well-to-do.
That GM foods haven’t been used for any good purpose can be attributed to a number of causes, not least of which is constant fearmongering that the food will somehow turn you into a shambling collection of cancers. I, for one, would be extremely excited if the work on casava actually managed to work. Furthermore, given the speculation that the wars in Nigeria might have been precipitated by extremely destructive drought the previous few years, drought resistant plants would also be a great boon.
You dismiss all GM foods out of hand, and by so doing, ignore a large amount of work being done by plant biologists around the world. It is you, sir, who are condemning yourself to irrelevance. While I understand the letters after your name give you some level of expertise, they do not make you the master of logic you would like to believe you are. Please, don’t make the mistake that most of your medical brethren make– learn that you are not the master of all that is human learning, and humble yourself to know that there are still things to learn.
and this is the fundamental sin … monsanto acting like a selfish child … no room for that on this garden-of-a-planet anymore.
we need to grow up!
I thought Barbara McClintock in 1950 showed that organisms naturally transfer genetic information between phyla using intermediate bacterial vectors. That natural process is actually what these geneticists are using to transfer genetic units between taxa.
In nature, of course, this is subject to rare transferance of particular genes and natural selection. Humans are doing it in a more directed manner and in larger quantities.
It seems you are using an “it’s not natural” argument (when in fact it is) and using that to generate the “Frankenfood” argument, which is one based on emotion, rather than reason. There are certainly issues with genetically-modified foods and organisms, particularly in adequate testing for safety and impact on the environment, as well as centralized control of the food industry. But I don’t see these types of crops much worse than sterile hybrids that have been selected to do similar things and yet are under the complete supply mode of agribusiness supplying them.
To answer your question, Lee5@80, I think you’re seeing an extension of this:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19
(warning, curse words there)
Basically, Kirk started to call everything I was saying as rhetoric and empty of any sort of rational or intelligent argument, and that he would save his breath for those who didn’t raise points he didn’t like. Kind of hard to keep the discussion above the belt with that kind of ad hominem attack going on.
oh, that’s funny …
but i still do mean it, i think we’re all teasing around trying to find the right way forward here. i just don’t think there are simple answers (GMOs = bad, nobel tie-dye wearing dreadlocked hemp children growing organic vegetables = good).
to quote myself above (#75), is it good when cliff sprays his fields in the spring?
You’re not talking about Al Franken, are you?
Ah, that’s why I don’t really try to think about ‘good’ vs ‘bad’. I try to think in tradeoffs, like why in some conditions, it’s ‘good’ for a bacterium to have resistance, ‘bad’ otherwise– but good or bad for the bacterium isn’t the same thing as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ for me.
Cinnamonape, the objection is not the process is not natural – conventional breeding techniques could be used to select for pest species with traits far more aggressive than current extant traits.
The objection is to the fact that we humans display an optimism that we can control unforseen consequences of novel technologies – yet our actions continue to belie that confidence.
You state:
The fundamental difference between Frankencrops and sterile hybrids is that the sterile hybrids don’t have the opportunity to use sexual reprodcution to spread artificially mutated genetic information through our food (and seed supply).
Frankencrops do have that capacity – and as we have found, the capacity has resulted in contamination of natural genomes, IN the US, the genetic contamination is so severe as to make cultivation of non-GMO stains of some staple food crops increasingly problematioc – can’t keep the Frankenpollen off the regular plants.
Oddly enough, the same biotech industry whose avatars just happen to pop up whenever we discuss GMO’s here assured us this would not happen.
Hmm.
I seem to recall similar assurances from the nuclear power industries. And the fossil fuel industry – why lead in fuels can’t possibly be a problem.
Except, of course, that nukes have failed to keep that future appointment with safe, clean power: we don’t know what to do with the ones we already have, but at least neither the reactors nor the waste can simply jump into conventional plants and replicate.
UCSB trained engineers for the nuke power industry. One of their favorite arguments was to insist the technology was really terrific – but the silly humans’ objection to their technology just stood in the way of all those benefits.
I’ve seen surgeons sincerely insist the new procedure they’d developed really was superior – and then, after the new procedure was shown to be more lethal than what they sought to replace, insist the problem was with the way the technology was applied.
I knew the surgeon, and I was acquainted with the wanna-be Homer Simpsons at UCSB. I’m convinced they really beleived in the technologies of which they were so enamored, and into which they had poured so many years of training and work.
And they were singularly, spectacularly deluded.
We’re still dealing with the lead we’ve spread all around the industrialized world through vehicle use.
We don’t have any way of putting the lead back uderground, but we can at least stop spreading more about the land.
With Frankencrops, genetic pollution shows we have no way to capture the Frankengenes once they have left the vat.
The only wat to control this pollution is not to release it.
Although I look forward to some nebulous future in which public regualtors are free to assess potential benefits and risks without megacorps’ iinterference, the Thalidomide tragedy illustrates that even good-faith efforts to anticipate the risks from new technology can fail.
And unlike Thalidomide, the Frankencrops can’t be stopped by keeping them out of our pharmacies.
Once they are in our fields, they and their genes are in our biosphere – forever.
Also, although the term “natural” clearly lives in many different worlds, I marvel at the concept that it can be extended to artifical technologies. Laureate McClintock has clearly demonstrated the natural biological mechanism for one form of gene transfer; the propagation of genes for microbial resistance thoughout our biosphere generates another.
Yet the Monsantos and BASFs of our planet seem to have very large industrial efforts created to bring about combinations of genomic material from multiple organisms which – in toto – were hitherto unknown outside the lab.
To put it another way – despite generations of anglers tossing their sandwiches into streams for “chum”, we didn’t get fish genes in a tomato until Big Vat did it for us.
I never eat anything grown commercially anymore unless something creeps onto my plate at a restaurant now and then…best just to eat what you grow or what your friends and neighbors grow. Small and local is best and that goes for eggs and nuts and fruit. No commerial seed either.
a seed’s a star
oops that’s commercial
In his book In The Absence of The Sacred: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations Jerry Mander discssses our species’ technophilia and – IIRC – looks at the substitution of faith for empiricism therein.
One of the themes he develops is the “false choice”:
embrace new technology “A”..
or forever forego theoretical benefit “B”.
With nukes, the benefit was “power to cheap too meter”
With chemical ag, the benefit was ending global hunger.
Of course, benefit B never happened.
What the apostles of the new techology du decade leave out is the option to be free of the new technology, the option to find a solution to the proffered “benefit B” that doesn’t require the technology and learning into which the apostles have poured years – and their colleagues and funders have poured fortunes.
Repeated structural assessments of global hunger before and after the Green Revolutin have shown the basis for persistent food scarcity is maldistribtion: the haves don’t share with the have nots.
Even if the answer to structural maldistribution of foodstuffs is narrowed to consideration of finding better crops, the premise that that goal may only be accomplished by transgenic organisms (Frankencrops or Frankenfoods or Frankenspuds) is a false premise.
While false premises are invaluable in industry PR, they fail to offer solutions: the premise is chosen to drive the desired result.
As an example, alternative approaches to selection of desirable traits in food crops can include microassays that identify cultivars from plants free of other critters’ genes. These non-GMO cultivars offer the opportunity to select desirable traits already present in the plant’s native genome.
Of course, these non-transgenic products aren’t what BASF and Monsanto and the rest of BigVat keep foisting upon us and our fields.
So whenever objections to the transgenic mutants known as Frankenfoods and Frankencrops are set forth here – or in other public fora – they’ll continue to attract the apostles of the new tools.
Many will come from industry, many will come from trade groups. Many will come from universities and research facilities. As discussed above, Reagan’s slashing of basic science allowed the megacorps to basically purchase whole area of research – and the illusion that their corporate funded research is somehow indpendent of their funders.
Yet just as been demonstrating in medicine, industry funding produces industry friendly results. One of the best examples – or most egregious examples – was the fate of the US Berkeley researcher who demonstrated the spread of Frankengenes through the indigneous maize (corn) cultivars in Mexico: the home of our planet’s corn. His findings are threatening to Monsanto – and he was denied tenure. Fortuantely, public pressure forced the UC to recant.
So even academic affiliation is no guarantee that those evaluating a new technology will use empirical criteria, rather than assessment of where the next grant funding may reside.
Cute. Lots of obliques about being a plant for biotech, but nothing that actually suggests that you read anything I said.
You remind me of why I came to this site in the first place– excellent legal analysis of the Valerie Plame case. Now you make an excellent case to leave– a self satisfied doctor who makes straw-man arguments (now everyone who supports GM foods is making the same mistakes as nuclear technicians? Nice one! And the comparison with HOmer Simpson is a beautiful rhetorical flourish) and then accuses anyone else with a valid point of being too unintelligent to be worth responding to, rather than explaining the invalidity of the argument.
If you want to play the game with nuclear power as being your substitute argument, so be it. It’s another strawman, assuming that what happened once in another field will happen again. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t– but rejecting the technology out of hand, rather than trying to learn from the previous failure, is pretty illogical, in my mind. For someone who accuses others of rhetorical devices, you’re pretty well versed in most of the misleading ones.
Similar to when, a few years ago, someone from Daily Kos crossposted here, something filled with emotion and no substance. Alfonso? Alberto? I can’t remember his name, and he doesn’t post here or there anymore. I said it then, and I’ll say it now: that’s not why I come here. I came back after a few year hiatus, but I can see it’s not much better. Stop being so emotionally invested in winning, and realize that sometimes you have to adjust your sights to make sure you know what ‘winning’ is.
Nooo – if you leave now, you’ll miss my 91!
clutches pearls
heh. No, I saw it.
But I can tell what will happen if I stick around– I’ll be labeled a troll, because I’ve dared to contradict such a wise person. No point in battling my way up too many streams; I’m already doing that in grad school, for chrissakes. I’ve got enough doctors to deal with as it is, to add another one on the list of egos to stroke.
“The fundamental difference between biological plant breeding (seed saving, hybridization, even directed mutations via radiation/chemicals) is that all the foregoing methods only recombine the genetic information within one species.”
This is completely false. There is a crop that we all eat every day that is the product of massive, UNdirected radiation mutagenesis and interGENERIC hybridization.
“Genetic engineering, in contrast, allows the combination of genes from organisms that are not only from different species, but (in the case of Frankenfoods like the Frankenspud) from entirely different phyla.”
Yet I’ll bet my house that you are a rank hypocrite who won’t campaign against the crop that is derived from massive, undirected radiation mutagenesis and the combination of genes from plants that are not only different species, but different genera. IOW, you aren’t following any principles at all. You have no hope of explaining why the aforementioned crop is perfectly fine for us to eat, but transgenic (the only real distinction you make, but lack the honesty to state) crops are evil.
Oh, and that “entirely different phyla” BS? Look at yourself; you have mitochondria, derived from symbiotic bacteria, in every cell in your body. They have their own little genomes, too, so your concern about combining genes from different phyla isn’t a principle either.
“(in biology, “phyla” are the basic divisions among groups of living creatures – kinda like contintents are the basic divisions in geography. Along with salmon, we live in the animal phylum;…”
You, sir, are an intellectual fraud who has yet to master junior-high-level biology. There’s no such thing as “the animal phylum,” because animals are divided into 38 phyla. We are in the phylum Chordata.
“… bacteria that contain the genes for antibiotic resistance live in a different phylum;…”
Um, bacteria are in a different phylum (as were the bacteria that colonized the cells of our common ancestor), but there are plenty of eukaryotic antibiotic resistance genes, too. You really don’t have a clue.
our crop plants (and other plants) live in yet another phylum.
“Frankenfoods combine the genes from entirely different phyla into creatures never possible with bilogically based breeding.”
Yet here you are, a combination of genes from entirely different phyla, snarfing down a crop derived from massive, undirected radiation mutagenesis and intergeneric hybridization every day, selling your lies about the evils of combining genes from different species and throwing around the word “mutant” in an entirely dishonest way.
“And – simply by reproducing – the Frankenoffspring act as little natural Xerox machines that spread the mutant genes across the planet.”
And the same thing happens with the mutant genes of the crop you eat every day without thinking about it, so you can’t possibly really be concerned about mutant genes–that’s just a dishonest rhetorical device you use because you love to demonize.
Before you ignore the biology in my post and launch your ad hominem attacks, note that I don’t approve of many of Monsanto’s business practices. I’m a scientist who does noncommercial cell biology on NIH grants, and I’m disgusted by your dishonesty and ignorance, which downgrades an excellent blog.
But hey, I’m sure you’ll ignore that and come up with some dishonest way to demonize me. But it’s clear that if you think that animals are a phylum, you are arguing from rank ignorance.
Another friendly reminder…
Attack the message – not the messenger. Civil discourse is encouraged, and name-calling advances nothing.
“Civil discourse is encouraged, and name-calling advances nothing.”
I agree. So why is Kirk posting?
He does nothing but name-calling, and his names aren’t even accurate. He can’t be bothered to use the only name that accurately describes the only real distinction he is trying to make because it isn’t frightening enough.
as one of the moderators here at the lake, i must point out that you are name calling with this comment.
continuing to do so will result in offending comments being removed.
Smokey – if you would like to address the substance of the post or the comments, or both, please do so.
If all you have is charges directed at people, it’s best to take a breather.
TheLurkingMod,
Everything in my comment addressed the substance of the issues here.
Every label that Kirk employs in his namecalling diatribe is based on a false distinction. That is about substance.
We, the descendants of a combination of organisms from different phyla, all eat a crop derived from undirected radiation mutagenesis and interspecific hybridization virtually every day, so concern mutants and combining genes from different species cannot possibly be valid criteria for opposing transgenic crops.
Would you like to know the identity of that crop, or would you like to pretend that the person who employs:
Frankenfoods
white-coat rapists
bloated warriors
GMO pimps
mutant potatoe
Frankenspud
alien genes
wanna-be Homer Simpsons
commenters who demonstrate more intellectual substance.
Frakenpropaganda
…is not name-calling, and the person who challenges those false distinctions (coupled with massive ignorance of the most basic biology) is name-calling?
After all, mmroden made similar objections, and Kirk didn’t address the substance of a single one of ‘em. Isn’t hypocrisy one of the most despicable characteristics of the right-wing cabal presently running this country?
“But I can tell what will happen if I stick around– I’ll be labeled a troll, because I’ve dared to contradict such a wise person.”
You already were @38.
wow. this is like seeing a Creationist post show up. i hope it’s not a harbinger of directions for the site….
What kind of “moderation” was that supposed to be? Looks like we need someone to moderate the moderators. Smokey’s comment was full of substance compared the the ad hominem’s and name-calling of the original poster. I hope this kind of thing becomes a trend here at FDL.
Left out the “not”
You have focused our attention on genetically-modified foods. WHY haven’t you, or any of your medical brethren (in the United States) spoken out about FRANKENINSULIN? Since 1983, diabetics have seen their access to natural animal insulins withdrawn from the market. Last year, the final natural insulin was withdrawn from the U.S. market. Diabetics now have NO CHOICE of natural insulins. A few who have the means, and at least a bit of assistance from a physician, can import natural insulin. Otherwise, the only products available are GENETICALLY-MODIFIED insulins. Many have been guinea-pigs for more than two decades. It is unreasonable to think that if GM foods pose unknown health hazards, GM-insulin—which is often used several times a day, 365 days a year—has a cumulative and deleterious effect. Yet no health professionals have voiced concerns. Those voiceless, powerless individuals, who know with something more than a gut-feeling that all is not well when they inject these products into their bodies, are ignored. Neither doctors nor the broader associations of which they are members have lifted a voice to aid those needful of animal insulin. As you so aptly noted, the FDA is apparently asleep at the wheel (or in more realistic terms, has a political agenda that is forwarded by enabling pharmaceutical producers to continue foisting their Franken-insulin on a captive patient base.)
You raise the warning flag that consumers of GM food are in peril because producers are not required to label their products as containing GMOs. We have KNOWN that we were using GM products . . . we have no other alternatives. We can find neither an interested doctor or researcher willing to investigate the long-term effects of these products. When rDNA insulin received approval from the FDA, a requirement imposed on Eli Lilly was to complete an 18-month post marketing study of “long-term” effects. While I hardly consider 18-months an adequate term to evaluate long-term consequences, I have yet to discover if Lilly even complied with this regulatory demand.
Without studies to verify our anecdotal tales, we remain voiceless victims. Since the FDA adverse events reporting system is dysfunctional and totally voluntary, there is no cumulative ‘body of evidence’ pointing to dangers experienced by users of rDNA insulin. The only tangential “evidence” may be that despite the insulin-manufacturers’ claims, hawking their ‘latest and greatest’ rDNA products (at least till they are removed in favor of pricier, newly-patented, insulin-like analogs) may be that morbidity and mortality of insulin-dependent diabetics have not declined. Despite “improved” treatment protocols and a plethora of technological tools (monitors, pumps, injector-pens, etc.), complications have not lessened, nor has life-expectancy increased because of these Franken-insulins.
You do not understand the difference between hybridization and the injection of DNA into a gene sequence. Mutation occurs within a family of similar genetics. Injecting genes into an organism that are completely foreign is not mutation, it is the creation of a unique entity, which is why they can be patented.
Let’s set aside the frankenfoods moniker and talk about where the real problem exist. Monsanto has a corporate mandate to become the gatekeeper of plant and animals in the world. The GMO corn is not corn is a patented product that is to be protected by rule of law. Early on Monsanto sent up a trial balloon that they were going to ask for a patent fee from everyone who used their product in the chain of food processing. That is they would charge the farmer for the seed, charge the processing plant for changing the seed to different marketable products, Meal, Feed, Oil etc.; then they would charge the manufactures a fee for using the products from their patented product and finally they would charge a fee to the retailers for selling the finished products to consumers.
This concept was met with derision from all parties but it was not withdrawn only set aside until their patented products were more ingrained into the market place.
So from a pure economic point of view do you want corporations to own most of the food in the world?
“You do not understand the difference between hybridization and the injection of DNA into a gene sequence.”
Please, George. I do this stuff for a living, but with mice to understand basic biology–no corporate connections whatsoever.
You do not understand that one of the crops you prize as organic comes from massive, undirected radiation mutagenesis, which causes far more mutations and rearrangements (i.e., injections of DNA into gene sequences) than any transgenic insertion ever will.
“Mutation occurs within a family of similar genetics.”
I’m sorry, but I can’t parse that. Mutation creates totally new sequences, but you don’t care. Why?
“Injecting genes into an organism that are completely foreign is not mutation,”
Actually, transgene (why can’t you use the correct word?) insertion into host DNA does cause mutations. Back in the ’80s, many mouse geneticists made careers of cloning genes that they had mutagenized with transgenes. My most important paper exploited a retroviral insertion to clone an important gene, so your claim that I don’t understand these things, coupled with your description of integration as “injection,” is pretty damn funny. In fact, pretending that these mutations pose a grave danger is one of the favorite dishonest scare tactics used by those who rant about “Frankenfoods.”
“… it is the creation of a unique entity, which is why they can be patented.”
All of us are unique entities, and genes are move from one species to another by many different mechanisms in nature.
“Let’s set aside the frankenfoods moniker…”
I agree completely. Kirk’s reflexive namecalling short-circuits any reasoned discussion.
“… and talk about where the real problem exist. Monsanto has a corporate mandate to become the gatekeeper of plant and animals in the world…So from a pure economic point of view do you want corporations to own most of the food in the world?”
Absolutely not, but I’m not so cynical that I believe that all transgenic plants are inherently dangerous and that all people who make them are evil corporatists, which is what Kirk is trying to sell here. Do you agree with me?
Again:
1) Concerns about insertional mutagenesis by transgene insertion are bogus if there are not far greater concerns about the radiation-mutagenized crop we all eat virtually every day.
2) Concerns about mixing DNA from different species are bogus if there are not concerns about eating the same radiation-mutagenized crop, because it is the product of intergeneric hybridization.
3) Concerns about mixing DNA from different species are bogus if there are not equivalent concerns about the horizontal DNA transfer that occurs naturally on a much larger scale.
4) Concerns about mixing DNA from different phyla are bogus because we are the product of an endosymbiotic relationship between organisms from different phyla.
George, there are huge problems with corporate control of our food chain. Let’s not muck up efforts to address them with ignorant appeals to fear that are completely hypocritical in light of what we (actually I, but apparently you don’t) know about what nature does with genetics, as well as our long record of performing much more massive genetic modifications to common crops. Every single criterion Kirk claims as cause for grave concern is amplified there, and he could care less.
Do YOU know the crop to which I am referring, Organic George?
What a difference a night makes! Glad to see that there are others here who wouldn’t let Kirk get away with his approach to debate– and I can honestly say I’ve learned quite a bit. I last took an advanced biology class some ten years ago, so I’m a bit rusty on specifics.
But, George, if you look at what I said in @81, I agree with you– Monsanto and other such entities should not be given control so readily, and the threat is a nasty one. Maybe that’s what Kirk was trying to get at in his original post, but seems to have missed that and neglected to take the point to clarify.
Smokey@107– he was referring to me, not you. I take all responsibility for any biological facts I may have mungled (though I think my fundamentals are still correct, though I see I have much to learn when I read what you’re saying). Since my knowledge is apparently at least a decade out of date, could you recommend a good, concise source for reading up on this?
“You have focused our attention on genetically-modified foods. WHY haven’t you, or any of your medical brethren (in the United States) spoken out about FRANKENINSULIN? Since 1983, diabetics have seen their access to natural animal insulins withdrawn from the market. Last year, the final natural insulin was withdrawn from the U.S. market. Diabetics now have NO CHOICE of natural insulins. A few who have the means, and at least a bit of assistance from a physician, can import natural insulin. Otherwise, the only products available are GENETICALLY-MODIFIED insulins.”
Yep. I would also ask Kirk, WHY haven’t you, or any of your medical brethren (in the United States) spoken out about FrankenGH? Since 1985, children with growth deficiencies and their parents have seen their access to natural human insulins withdrawn from the market. Children with growth deficiencies now have NO CHOICE of natural growth hormone. The only products available are GENETICALLY-MODIFIED, RECOMBINANT HGH.
I wonder if there’s a grassroots movement advocating going back to natural HGH purified from the pituitaries of cadavers? The massive numbers of cadavers needed resulted in some batches being contaminated with prions (prion diseases occur spontaneously and are inherited, too, so you can’t blame that on Big Ag), so some of the patients died of iatrogenic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3306455
Do we go back to the good ol’ days?
I missed a substitution:
“Since 1985, children with growth deficiencies and their parents have seen their access to natural human insulins withdrawn from the market.”
should be
“Since 1985, children with growth deficiencies and their parents have seen their access to natural human growth hormone withdrawn from the market.”
Do YOU know the crop to which I am referring, Organic George?
I don’t. What is it?
I’ll tell you, but first I need a commitment from you to intellectual consistency–that if your opposition to transgenic crops is based on unknown mutations and mixing of genes from different species, you promise that any public efforts decrying specific crops will be directly proportional to the number of unknown mutations and interspecific gene transfer that humans have induced in them.
I have no clue about all that. With no background in science,I just have the responsibility for feeding children, whose bodies are still developing, the safest food I can provide. My inclination is to err on the side of caution, but that is mother-love, not science.
“I have no clue about all that.”
Nor do Kirk or Organic George, but that doesn’t stop them from pretending that they do.
“With no background in science, I just have the responsibility for feeding children, whose bodies are still developing, the safest food I can provide.”
That’s reasonable. Whom should you trust? The one who calls scientists “white coat rapists,” or the one who says that things aren’t so simple?
“My inclination is to err on the side of caution, but that is mother-love, not science.”
If you believe that not eating mutant plants or interspecific hybrids is a proper expression of that caution, shouldn’t you be far more concerned about the crop that you feed your children virtually every day that is the product of undirected radiation mutagenesis and indiscriminate mixing of genes from different genera?
Hell, in one event, the two were even combined:
“A very elegant way to obtain [desired characteristic] in [crop X] was demonstrated in [year Y] by [famous botanist Z]. Z made use of a radiation-induced translocation following hybridization to transfer a resistance gene from a species of a related genus…”
Kirk pretends that this never happened because it shows that the world is not as black/white as he wishes it to be. At least Organic George is interested enough to want to know.
What about you? How about just taking a stab at guessing the year in which this allegedly dastardly deed was performed? Was botanist Z a corporate scientist, or an academic who made his modifications freely available?
You’re playing a game here, and I’m not interested in that. It’s getting towards dinner time; I have a deadline.
What is it that I feed my kids every day that is “the product of undirected radiation mutagenesis and indiscriminate mixing of genes from different genera”?
So far you sound like that business about the chemical that we all consume and we all die anyhow and it’s got the sinister name of dihydrogen monoxide, which is water. Cute for 15 year olds who think they are ever so bright, but old news for grownups. Are you 15?
“You’re playing a game here, and I’m not interested in that. It’s getting towards dinner time; I have a deadline.”
I’m not playing a game. If I simply stated the name of the crop, it would get lost in Kirk’s deluge of dishonest namecalling.
“What is it that I feed my kids every day that is “the product of undirected radiation mutagenesis and indiscriminate mixing of genes from different genera”?”
Wheat. Now, how about if you answer my questions about the year and the affiliation of the botanist?
“So far you sound like that business about the chemical that we all consume and we all die anyhow and it’s got the sinister name of dihydrogen monoxide, which is water. Cute for 15 year olds who think they are ever so bright, but old news for grownups. Are you 15?”
Nope. You are sounding more like someone who needs to demonize others than of someone who is truly concerned about what her children eat. Will you be protesting at your local bakery now?
Sorry I am late to this party. I was over at an econ blog discussing Blinders proposal for a Government Mortgage Corp to buy up the bad loans so that people can keep their homes. When in effect the proposal is just a bailout of the banks and brokerage houses. I bring this up because I am NOT an economist but the economists on the blog treat my ideas and responses with respect.
Smokey just because you do gene splicing does not mean you have the moral authority to tell me I’m wrong only that you disagree with me.
Well let me tell ya big fella I know a little about this issue and I can tell you that there is a lot to be concerned about.
Just so you know I do NOT agree with Dr. Kirk, I think he does a great disservice to this blog when he tries to talk about food. He only knows what he reads and he only reads extremist. I work off a different set of standards, “Just the facts, Ma’am, just the facts”
Fact: Dan Quayle in his capacity as the head of a Technology Taskforce decided that GMO’s must be fast tracked, read not going through the rigorous federal testing protocols, so that the US would not be eclipsed in the world market.
Fact: GMO’s still do not have to meet the federal testing protocols
Fact: GMO’s have not make crop yield higher not did they reduce the overall crop loss to insects
Fact: GMO’s are out crossing to plants not the same family or genus. Bt is now found in plants that are the main source of food for butterfly’s. Bt is a physical killer, it forms crystals in the gut of the larvae and shreds their digestive system.
Fact: GMO’s have out crossed to weeds making then immune to Roundup. Farmers have to buy a very expensive herbicide to kill the Roundup weeds, that herbicide is sold by Monsanto
Fact: There has been no long term testing to see what if any effects GMO’s will have on humans or the environment.
Fact: Developing countries are moving rapidly to organic farming, India just announced a 150 mn Euro program to develop and support the growth of organics, much the same for the Philippines and Indonesia. These countries have finally figured out that if they use renewable resources they do not have to pay for imported chemicals and expensive seed.
Remember the green revolution? Well what happened is that developing countries got higher initial yields but the rice and grains had less protein than the old seed varieties they used to grow. They had to grow more food to meet the same protein demand and at higher cost to the governments.
GMO’s are being help out as the great savior of the world food supply. You and I both know that is a bogus claim.
It’s about profits and a corporate mandate to control the world’s food supply.
So you see there are many reasons to be wary of GMO’s. Is there a possibility that they can do good for human kind, YES but let’s test the products to make sure they will not pose a threat to the world’s food supply through unintended consequences.
I’m here all week please be sure to try the red veal, not from confinement boxes
The Frankenpriests who show up here and at other public fora when the risks of their pet technology are discussed do everything possible to obscure several simple facts:
1) The Frankencrops they tout are toxic – and have already contaminated our food supply.
GMO corn, soy, and potatoes show toxic effects on living animals. The GMO soy (Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready soy) we grow and eat in the US is so toxic that more than half of baby rats fed with the stuff die in just three weeks.
Hey – it’s only 85% of the US soy crop, right?
2) In America, the Frankencontamination may be irreversible. GMO crops are perpetual pollution machines. GMO crops released out of the lab spread Frankengenes into the entire gene pool for that crop. The potential for eternal genetic pollution sets Frankencrops aside from all other uses of recombinant DNA technology.
Frankenpriests, our future food supply is too important to be gambled on an untested technology – even one you’ve fallen in love with.
The specific history of Monsanto’s lethally false assurances that their deadly products were “safe” illustratess the fallacy of trusting Frankenpriests or the industrial technologies they peddle. The fact that GMO crops already released in the US and already contaminating our food supply have now been shown to cause toxicity and death in mammals underscores this fact.
If you Frankenpriests wish to conduct experiments on human beings, seek legal permission from the human subjects committee at a university. Don’t make us, our children, and our agriculture helpless subjects for your technology. Neither you nor the technology of which you are so enamored merit our trust.
With regard to Frankencrops in the US – the chief result has been massive increases in our exposure to Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup (glyphosate) – now known to be associated with increased risks of Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. Rates of NHL are rising in the US.
If you wish to poison yourselves, Frankenpriests, that’s your choice.
Don’t poison us – or our kids.
3) If you Frankenpriests were intellectually honest, we wouldn’t be reading here about medications such as HGH produced from recombinant DNA. Children and adults who receive insulin, HGH, or a whole range of live-saving medications don’t suddenly start producing HGH. They produce little or none of the insulin or HGH tmeselves. That’s why they need it – as you PhD’s know quite well.
If human beings did somehow become factories for producinng recombinant HGH, we’d see whole baseball teams bulking up, not just the HGH injectors.
The attempt to confuse lay people by falsely equating voluntarily administered recombinant medications with the genetic pollution from Frankencrops is beneath contempt.
The saddest thng about this FrankenFirm talking point is that every single PhD who uses it – or hears it and remains silent – demonstrates they are wholly devoid of ethics and intellectual integrity on this matter.
4) As OG above points out, the “high yield” crops resulting from the wheat genetic alteration the Frankenpriests attempt to conflate with recombinant DNA technologies have already been shown to be nutritionally inferior to the strains they replaced. Yields went up – nutritional values went down. Concurrently rates of apparent allergic reactions to the wheat prodcuts appear to have increased.
The experiment in non-recombinant plant breeding you Frankenpriests attempt to use to confuse laypeople about recombinant (Frankenfood) technology has already made the public involuntary subjects in an experiment to which they never consented.
What arrogance could lead you Frankpriests to attempt to force us to be subjects in yet another massive experiment with our food supply?
5) The basic cause of malnutriton is maldistribution. Frankencrops have not significantly increased food availablity – anywhere. Frankenfoods have done nothing to relieve malnutrtiton – but they have exposed Americans and others to far higher levels of glyphosate and other toxic chemicals in Roundup.
Monsanto has eaten better, and Americans have been exposed to more toxins. I am unable to imagine the moral depravity that would attempt to sell such an outcome with the cynical, empty promise that Frankenfoods will feed the poor. Of course, I’m not dependent on pleasing the Frankenpriesthood for the research grants required to stay in academia, so I probably look at this differently.
6) A whole variety of toxins are now known to directly affect human eggs and sperm. Adequate testing for human toxicity would require generations – some genentic damage (like that of DES) doesn’t show up in the first set of children, but only becomes apparent in their children.
No Frankenfood has been assessed for human toxicity over one generation, much less three. The assertion that Frankenfoods are safe for humans is an article of theology, not a tested hypothesis.
Of course, theology – the profession of opinions unsupported by facts and not testable by hypotheses – is what PR is all about.
Tobacco had their PhD’s and MD’s; Agent Orange had their PhD’s and MD’s; Monsanto’s deadly PCB’s had their PhD’s and MD’s – and all of them colluded to serve industry – by deceiving us.
Today’s Frankenpriesthood follows the same despicable tradition of using the trappings of science in the service of commerce – to close off empirical assessments of the technology they push on the rest of us.
Just as the nuclear priests pushed the technology they worshipped upon us. While telling us not to worry – we were just too ignorant to understand. And actaully, they were simply lying.
Just as the Frankencorps have been shown to be lying in concealing the results showing Frankencrops already on the market – and in our food supply – are toxic to mammals.
Given the immense personal and ethical liability today’s apologists – the Frankenpriests – assume for their collusion, I hope they are well paid. At least they’ll be able to buy whatever will let them sleep at night.
With their active, deliberate complicity in making the rest of us the involuntary subjects of the recombinant food experimentation they have chose to serve, the FrankenPhD’s who flack for these toxic creations will need the help.
And if they don’t need tools to sleep, they always use the money for more kneepads. Worshipping technology is hard on a body.
Just ask the nuclear priesthood.
7) Frankenpriests seem to forget the obvious fact that – across the world – human beings don’t want to eat this toxic crap. In Europe – where Frankeningredidents show up on the food label – people don’t buy it. Here in the US, the Frankencoprs have paid their political whores to prevent labelling – yet survey anfter survey shows the majortiy of American’s don’t wnat to eat this crap – and wnat the right to know what foods have it…precisely so they don’t have to eat them.
Why are the grant-dependent and/or salaried Frankenpriests so eager to collude with the megacorps that deny US the right to choose NOT to eat this shit? What career or advancement opportunites do they protect by misleading us about the stuff we don’t wnat to eat – and wouldn’t eat if we had a choice?
Bon appetit!
PS – the attempt to equate wheat crops created among closely related species via radiation with Frankencrops (like tomatoes with fish genes) very closely follows the arguments set forth in the book
. The Heartland Institute tells us it’s “the Only Book You’ll Need on Plant Biotech”.
Those of us outside the Frankenpriesthood who seek technology assessment – not technology worship – are wearily familiar with the attempt to misconstrue the recombinant Frankenfoods with the products of radiation-created wheat crop development.
Of course, the radiation-induced wheat strains ended up with genes from their evolutionary close cousins – not fish, fungus, or other non-plant genes.
For those outside the Frankenpriesthood, the good news is that the apologists for the Frankenindustries have basically run out of tricks except the ones we’ve seen here. And those tricks aren’t working in the Eu, and are increasigly likely to fail here.
Oh – and the Heartland Institute?
Well, our Frankenpriesthood would fit right in:
PPS: otchmoson, I respect your concerns about access to medications you have found effective. When working with a renal/pancreatic tranplant progam, I encountered many patients with diabetes who reported they had far better clinical results with purified insulin than with recombinant insulin. Some endocrinologists told me they thought these concerns were valid. (Others disagreed.)
Efforts to address your concern are not mutually exclusive with separate efforts to adress the toxic risks from our involuntary exposure to Frankentechnologies. The fact that I am devoting time and energy to the latter concern does not prevent (and shuold not prevent) endocrinologists who work directly with patients with diabetes from the advocacy you describe. I hope you find a physican (or physicians) who can be allies to you in that matter.
Oh – forgot the URL for that nifty book – and the terrific review.
The only book we’ll ever need – unless we want to be troubled by emprical observation. And what Frankenpriest would trifle with observations, when Dan Quayle has already reached the conclusion?
Facts are stupid things.
What’s it like to spend decades learning about and professing to practice empirical enquiry – the foundation of the testable hypotheses that lie at the core of scientific inquiry – and throw it all away to be part of the club?
On second thought – I don’t wanna know.
Though I need to diet, appetite suppressants are another failed – and lethal – technology.
Don’t want to go there, either. Contaminated crops are bad enough.
Bon appetit!