The reason those tomatoes in your grocery cart are so plump and those apples are so golden is due in part to biotechnology. But while science has improved certain qualities of the foods we eat, some experts are concerned about the possible health risks in these ‘new and improved’ foods. Should you be worried?
at some point i am worried because its like mutating or evolving. we wouldn't know what will be its content if this new and improved foods are still developing.
key lime pie recipes = http://www.recipebridge.com/r/key-lime-pie-recipes
Welcome to our Louis Vuitton Outlet. We all know that Louis Vuitton Outlet Online are very famous all over the world, for Louis Vuitton Factory fashionable design, beautiful appearance, and suitable for all ages of man and women, ladies and gentlemen. Now Louis Vuitton Sale has become the representative of wealth and taste, we can find any where that Louis Vuiton bags were take by famous stars, successful business men, or fashionable girls. Louis Vuiton bags will always in the trend and never out of fashion. And we are very dedicated to the provision of fashion Louis Vuitton bags which are all in highest quality and the most competitive of prices.
pink herve leger dress
canada goose down jacket
discount herve leger dresses
herve leger clothing
So no wonder everyone desires cheap jordan shoes to get their hands on it.In the year 1985 Peter Moore and Nike came up with a brand of shoes for the all Air Max Fusion
time great NBA player Michael Jordan which revolutionized the NBA accessories' world. Since then Nike is producing Jordan shoe every year under the Jordan Brand as Air Jordan series. Nike Shox Sparq Until now there has been twenty five
Air Jordans 10 Retro online
series of Air Jordan starting from Air Jordan I to Air Jordan 2009(XXV).What makes the Air Jordan so special? Yes, it is in the name of a legend,
Jordan 2 Max Fusion
but there is much more to the Jordon shoes than the name. When Jordon was approached by Nike, he wanted the perfect shoes for the basketball players who never compromise the quality, comfort and style a player deserves. These are the exact features Air Jordan Fusion 5
with Jordon shoes that make it so unique and attract everyone towards it, and if it's a cheap Jordon shoe, is a definitely done sale.For all fans of Jordan, Air Jordan shoes are a cheap nike shox part of ""must have"" collection list. So Louis Vuitton for Cheap now it has become more economic Air Jordans outlet
as you will find cheap Jordan shoes for sale; starting from the range of $45 to $55 for individual shoes and $33 to $46 if you take in bulk. You can find many websites that will offer cheap Jordan shoes for free shipping.
When fighting broke pandora charms bracelets out, oil was trading at around $84 a barrel. It quickly spiked above $93 and kept thomas sabo charms rising to a high above $110 at the end of April. Demand from emerging london sweetie bracelet markets including China was also a factor in the rise. Oil has fallen recently along with stocks tiffany bangles because of concerns about the global economy. Libya used to export about chanel earring 1.5 million barrels of oil per day.
Critics say they would raise prada handbags costs unfairly for solid countries and could even deepen debt troubles. "Solving cheap prada the current crisis will not be possible with eurobonds, and so eurobonds prada shoes are not the answer," Merkel said in an interview with ZDF television. She added that prada outlet she didn't know whether things might change "in the prada sunglasses distant future.
feiduting
We are the best soccer jersey supplier, all the soccer jerseys on jerseybbs.com are REPLICA SOCCER JERSEYS, but their quality are good, because many soccer jersey shopping websites are selling our discount soccer jerseys, espcially the thailand quality cheap soccer jerseys, They are the same as the official jerseys
According to a figure that most of the luxury brands consumer in China range frome 2os to 30s.
wholesale polo shirts are all young Women's love, wearing the designers will attract passerby glance, it make them be in good mood all the day.
With the increase in printing needs all over the world, manufacturers of Ink Cartridges are hard pressed to meet the ever-increasing demand. Consumer satisfaction ranks highest in the quest to fulfill company priorities. Buying printers is relatively cheap nowadays, but unfortunately, the Ecco Key West Mens same thing cannot be said about the CISS or cartridges that require to be replaced often.
The online store to buy replica Louis Vuitton bags, wallets and purse of top most designer
R4 Series,r4i Series,R4DS,R4i SDHC,R4i Gold,R4i Card for NDSi XL/NDSi/DSL/NDS - UseeGames.Com
cocogamer.com is one of most reliable sellers which engage in r4i gold and r4i sdhc , including all the most popular R4i and R4 3DS Cards at favorable price
feiduting
BrandDream, Top designer apparel supplier, FREE SHIPPING(for orders of 10pcs to US, UK, CA and AU), louboutin shoes, Cheap Ralph Lauren polo shirts, Cheap Ed Hardy Wholesale, juicy couture tracksuits, Cheap Christian Louboutin Shoes, Discount Sheepskin Boots, Wholesale Abercrombie, Christian Audigier Clothing and Shopping
wholesale designer clothing, accept Credit Card and PayPal, Quality Guarantee, Good Discounts and Trusty Business.
Do you know the different between the replica and fake watch? In fact the replica watches is made from the similar material and parts with the orginal one,the more important it is legal, however the fake is illegal.
A wide range of high quality and excellent perfermance wholesale Jerseys, wholesale nike shox, Cheap Nike airmax Shoes wholesale and Cheap Nike airmax Shoes in our shop welcome your visit.wholesale Jerseys, wholesale nike shox, Cheap Nike airmax Shoes, Cheap Nike airmax Shoes wholesale.
cheap soccer jerseys,replica soccer jerseys are very high sales volume, and many people liked to buy it replica soccer jerseyscheap soccer jerseys.
We mainly deal with handbags, shoes, garment, promotions and gifts. wholesale designer handbags, Wholesale shoes from china, wholesale fashion accessories, wholesale designer sunglasses, wholesale products from china. For many years' experience, our companies has been always complying with the contract and attaching great importance to good faith.
Newest styles and brands of hats & caps including baseball caps, new era cap, DC fitteds, fillipino flag hats and sports team caps.
We specialize in shower head andtowel rack of high quality and favorable price .The shower head that we provide has many advantages: 1. They quickly bring water; 2. The handles of environmental protection are in favour of our health;3.The color and style are wonderful. At the same time ,towel rack that we provide is durable and beautiful.We are sure that we will offer you satisfactory products and service
Anviz Biometric manufactures a complete range of biometric products including Fingerprint Time Attendance , fingerprint access control, fingerprint lock, USB fingerprint reader, OEM fingerprint module Fingerprint Access Control etc.
Is it safe to walk? Is it safe to drive? Is it safe to sit and talk with a friend? Yes, there are very many risks involved with biotech foods, but the same could be said of any activity.
Biotech foods are wonderful. Pesticides are not needed (in most cases), food production can reach a peak (bringing down costs), health benefits are very numerous, as nutritional needs can be met with these. They are not only safe, they are very, very beneficial.
Please, please before you post could you do a little research. You sound like you are reading directly from Monsanto's website home page. Would you be their PR friend?
Pesticides are needed. Food production can reach a peak at what cost? Sure in the short term this is attractive to farmers but the payoff is in the negative many times over. They are NOT safe. Your government did not require any REAL scientific studies. They are NOT beneficial but harmful.
I have boycott Kellogs, General Mills and host of other companies. Our family avoids GMO's. I refuse to be a participate in this "study" and also refuse to let a company dictate what I eat.
Monsanto continues to buy up seed companies left and right. Does this not concern you? Patents on seeds? Besides the health costs the environmental concerns are just as great.
YouTube: The World According To Monsanto (10 clips)
YouTube: Bad Seed: The Truth About Our Food (if you do not know the people in this clip then google them. They are not idiots. They are people who we should listen to.)
YouTube: Fox News cancels Milk story
So go ahead and trust your biotech company since it has such a great track record of being trustworthy. Anyways if you choose to believe in the mythology of GMO's then go ahead and feed this to your baby, your grandchildren. Eat it up..yum. So beneficial for you...
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/gmfood.shtml
Let's start with a government sponsored site, shall we (I try to stray away from "YouTube"s or ".com"s, though they never show bias in any shape or form).
Now, it seems that there are very many beneficial things to what GMOs can provide (I'm assuming you've read it, and did not just scroll past it). In case you haven't read it, I'll point out a small chunk of the story.
"In 2006, 252 million acres of transgenic crops were planted in 22 countries by 10.3 million farmers. The majority of these crops were herbicide- and insect-resistant soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, and alfalfa. Other crops grown commercially or field-tested are a sweet potato resistant to a virus that could decimate most of the African harvest, rice with increased iron and vitamins that may alleviate chronic malnutrition in Asian countries, and a variety of plants able to survive weather extremes."
But, who knows, this could very much hurt the balance of things. Who are we to play with nature? We need just to let evolution take its course. You know, rid ourselves of things like vaccines , conservation efforts, even building on nature.
Not only will I feel safe feeding GMOs to my loved ones, I will feel safer. Tell me, do your loved ones use vaccines? Medicine? Houses? Cars? Electricity? Soap? Detergent? Anything that is not "natural"?
There are scientific limitations in this new frontier of biotechnology . There is so much excitement in this field, but the unavoidable issue raised by scientific authorities is the fact of the unknowns. Greedy companies are disregarding the "unknown" and forging ahead for no other purpose but to create profit and this has now diminished the excitement.
Let's say that the existing biotechnology to this point will have no future negative consequences. Would this still excuse the fact that these companies put yours, mine, all of our health at risk? Who wants to trust or support a company like this? It is time consumers stood up to a company like Monsanto. Who will? I have.
Once again these "benefits" that you claim are only for the seed and biotech companies. The risks, they are all ours. Bioengineered foods are a "benefit" (the oft-repeated ad-exec GMO power punch adjective used by Monsanto (as well as "beneficial")) that I neither want nor need.
Recently it has been pointed out that Monsanto falsified their reports of the number of acres of transgenic crops grown in the EU, where in fact only 0.21% of agricultural land is GM crops, and this has actually been declining since 2005. I will again refer you to view the documentary "THE WORLD ACCORDING TO MONSANTO" to learn the truth on how these crops are allegedly "helping" the world. However you do not wish to utilize YouTube in any of your "research" so you would need to rent or buy it if you wish to watch it. Many farmers in developing countries have no idea about the science of bioengineering and only know what they are told by the biotech company pushing their product. Another evident evil of these companies: preying on those who are not truly educated. Monsanto, for example, has a legal counsel that puts them on a unequal playing field that no one can touch, as well as a well-orchestrated marketing team. Responsibility for this misinformation lies solely on the head of Monsanto, et al; especially when these innocent farmers sign their rights away on the required contract for such things as cross pollination, health issues etc. when they occur. The uneducated farmer takes the fall.
You may have more vested in the biotech field than I. You may have some association with a biotech company. Or, maybe you are simply an unenlightened shareholder. Maybe there is a lot more at stake for you and you want to believe that all is right with the GMO's you now consume. It is a very ugly realization that we are guinea pigs in an unstudied "study" and that there are NO predictable outcomes. I can understand why many do not want to believe the unknown risks, as it is just too frightening. After all, the government wouldn't really let this happen..
You must have chuckled to yourself when you wrote that you feel even "safer" feeding GMO's to your loved ones. How clever of you to have "one upped" Monsanto's PR script. Monsanto insults the intelligence of its shareholders and misleads them (such as why they are pulling out of rBGH). All is not rosy on the home front. Monsanto's transgenic contamination cannot be recalled from the environment and Monsanto cannot recall "The World According To Monsanto". The truth cannot be recalled. Bioengineered foods on our dinner plates are not a trival and simplistic matter and you do not give the topic the depth it warrants.
What could be more safe than consuming a perfectly ripened beautiful golden red heirloom tomato as "nature" intended it? You say a GM tomato is "safer" to consume because a company has "improved" nature? We can only hope to understand nature.
I'll be honest with you. I have not researched this topic thoroughly. I hadn't even heard of Monsanto until this forum.
I am a Biomedical Engineering student. I have taken Graduate courses in Molecular Biology although I am not going into that area of research. (I am going into exercise physiology, completely unrelated)
You are right that there are unknowns in genetic engineering. We can't predict every consequence of switching out a gene. However, we have come a very long way in understanding cells and whole genomes, and determining safety is possible.
If a tomato has been engineered to contain more vitamins and be resistant to disease and if this tomato successfully grows, there is very little chance for danger. It will not suddenly become radioactive or develop cancer . Those are absolutely ridiculous. The thing with plants is that if it is unhealthy, it will die.
I am not saying that you must eat GE foods. But you should not stop starving people from eating foods that will probably save their lives with no side affects. If the choice is GE rice or maggots and rats, the rice is guaranteed to be safer. Not safe, but safer. Nothing we eat is truly safe because everybody is different with allergies and reactions and different digestive systems. But let's keep in mind that plants don't eat people, people eat plants.
A simple suggestion: tone down your paranoia and keep it to yourself please? As consumers we have the right to eat what we like whether good or bad.
If we were always this scared and nervous about trying new unknown things, we would have accomplished nothing. Cars, planes, rockets, pasteurizing milk, eating meat , using lightbulbs, everything. Should we freak out about having electricity in our homes? No, but I'm sure some people did. We learned to control electricity enough to make it worthwhile, didn't we?
I find it a little bit absurd that we have a way to produce food cheaper to feed starving countries and you're arguing that there MIGHT be something horrible about that food so they shouldn't eat it.
Again and again I find your comments on this subject just lacking any true information at all, just a bunch of bull.
If you would do your research you would learn the problem of world hunger isn't that there isn't enough food , its a distruption problem. Guess what most of these starving countries around the world grew their own food until companies like monsanto fcked all that up.
You know they actually have a gene called the terminator gene. The terminator gene makes sure the seeds from the crop you grow from their seeds won't germinate, means they aren't viable and you have to keep buying their seeds season after season. How exactly does that sound to you? Oh yea Monsanto, the biggest gmo food producer out there, now owns 75% of our worlds seed banks . These are untainted natural seeds and a giant gmo seed company now owns them. Hmmmm sound like reason for concern to you? Cause it sure does concern me. Oh yea a lot of our government officials are part of Monsanto. Secretary of treasuary, secretary of defense, and secretary of argiculture to name a few. Hmmmm sound like a conflict of interest to you? Cause it sure does to me.
Montanso is also going after these farmers who have their gmo plants on their land without knowledge and suing them, because these seeds are paitened. The farmers usually also settle cause they don't have the money to fight a giant company like Montanso. Guess what most of these farmers didn't even know it was in there fields, usually gets blown over from fields futher down by wind or by a seed truck driving by and a few fly off. Seriously how can we let living things be paitened. These raises a bigger issue for concern. Well if montanso owns that gene and an animal eats that plant with that gene, guess what Montanso now owns that animal. So that means if those genes we are eating ever get into our system guess what Montanso actually owns you then. Of course this is in conflict with the Constitution, but eventually we could see Montanso take this to the supreme court , just like they did with the issue of paitening living things and guess what the same supreme court decided to allow it. Now how in your right mind can you try and put a patient on living things.
Like I said before go do some research and become more informed on this subject before rambling on about how great gmos are and how they can save all the starving people. Let me guess you would be the same kind of person to come on here and tell us smoking cannabis should be illegal and will cause all kinds of health problems. Learn to do your own thinking and stop letting the government do it for ya.
know much about the food industry but you clearly don't know much about biotechnology.
Firstly, as this is a forum for intelligent debates, I would like to clear up one thing. When you say "paitened" and "patient" do you mean patented and patent?
Secondly, I am not the kind of person you think I am. I have commented in discussions saying cannabis should be completely legalized. I do not let the government think for me. But thank you for the advice .
Now. Yes the food industry is messed up. However, the food these companies produce is not nearly so bad as you think. I am a Biotechnology graduate student with a bachelor's in human anatomy and physiology and I have actually cloned and expressed genes myself. I know the process and I know the biology. I believe you are mistaken in you beliefs primarily that you think eating a gene may somehow cause you to imbibe and express the gene. This is not true. Eating food means you break it down and absorb the nutrients for energy but in no way does your genetic code change from the food you eat. In other words, Monsanto would have no claim over you. The genetic code that they patented would be broken down by the animals that ate their plants. This is not in conflict with the constitution .
In response to your other response to me, I would have to read the research article myself to believe anything about gmo 's causing physical harm by ingestion. Also, people can research themselves which foods have been altered or they can shop in the organic aisle at the grocery store. They don't need the information handed to them on a silver platter (or sticky label) to pick what to eat. Forcing them to be labeled is just another way of increasing costs for businesses and making it easier for people to stop thinking.
I have the right and intelligence to discuss this matter just as much as you do. You are lacking in the science aspect and I am lacking in the logistics aspect. Perhaps we can share information and both gain from it.
As for the terminator gene (which I am sure has a scientific name that neither of us knows) I absolutely believe in its likely existence because it would be logical for the company to be a business and try to make money . To me, that sounds like they are being a business, which I have no problem with. The part that members of government are affiliated with Monsanto does not surprise me but also reduces my faith in the US government even more. It definitely sounds like a conflict of interest.
To address the comments I expect to receive from this post, the reason I have no problem with Monsanto being and acting like a business is because businesses give people jobs . Bigger businesses give people more jobs. The more money they make, the more they can spend in salaries. This whole anti-business idea is ruining our economy and the fact that most people don't understand the simple concept of the more money a company makes the more it has to dish out is frankly, shocking. It makes me want to club baby seals.
I am for promoting free choice in what we eat and drink ( food , medicine etc) and therefore for promoting mandatory labelling of GMO food/drink and medicine:
My opinion on gentech foods? I am really not sure. But as long as I am not sure, and uninformed by companies producing and selling GMO foods and medicine by lack of labelling, I am solely eating organic foods.
You have your free choices and can choose to buy whatever food you like.
You are promoting forceful spending on food labels for companies simply because you don't want to have to research it yourself. You preach free choice and then fight for taking it away. Think about all the affects that would occur by creating laws forcing companies to make food labels. The information you want is already available to you; why do you wish increased spending and increased cost?
Hi sunshine,
There are neglectable costs involved with mandatory labelling GMO foods.
Simply because labelling other ingredients is already mandatory (at least it is in Europe), and companies are already changing their labels every other term in order to charm their consumers to keep with their product (simple and obvious marketing technique that any selfrespecting company uses). So that would be a nice opportunity to type these two words into their list of ingredients already on the label: contains GMO's. No extra costs involved for companies.
It is simply a civil right to be able to choose what or what not to put into your body. It is a civil and fundamental (UN protected) human right. The choice can only be made if the choice is informed.
Or do you and biotech companies think the people are too dumb to decide?
If any burden is involved it should lie with producers of GMO foods since they are the ones gaining from them (which I think is great because I am all for Free trade and lots of jobs ).
Please read article 3 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (can be found on UN website).
True, packaging costs are relatively small. Perhaps they could afford it with just a cent price increase for their products. *shrug
As a libertarian, I am against creating useless laws. This law would be useless because I actually consider people smart enough to research what they are eating if they care. Like you. I think they are smart enough not only to decide what to eat but smart enough to find out for themselves.
The burden should be on the consumer because the consumer is responsible for their own body and what goes in it. The burden of thought and research is more a benefit than a burden anyway..
I have read the entire declaration and not only does article 3 have nothing to do with this debate, but the UN is wayyyy too socialist anyway. I do not accept all of those rights as rights but as I know there is nothing I can do about it.. I will debate if asked.
As for your strawberry being a fish.. taking one gene from one organism and placing it into another does not change the species of that organism. Also, many of your genes align with a strawberry's. So no, your strawberry is not a fish.
Ah, you and the gentech companies feel that the people and I are so very very smart that we should be sent on a puzzle tour and quizz exercise , where the objective is to find information that nobody wishes to give. That is so considerate and very caring (or consciencious and dignified). Thank you for appreciating our intellectual capacity and challenging it to it's core.
As to the UN Declaration. I agree that it is a little utopian, starting with article one which reads:
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. I dont see dignity and conscience everywhere I look. And the way people are acting towards on another.. well..
Did you know that companies have the fundamental same rights as people whereas they are not endowed with conscience, dignity, etc.. Funny hey?
Strawberries the same as fish?
I think that a great many people would disagree. For instance some vegetarians (who dont like meat DNA in their veggies) or a few muslims and jews (who don't like pig and bug genes in their foods), various christians (who like to eat real fish on fridays) would disagree. And then there is me and some people with me, who would simply prefer to not have fishgenes in their strawberry's. I won't bother you with why. It is not relevant to my promotional activities of securing free choice in what we eat for everyone.
The simple fact that we are made up from the same components doesnt make us the same. That's like saying Donald Duck is the same as Playboy Magzine. Or Mine Kamff the same as The Bible.. They are very very very diffrent.
I am not stating an opinion that fish genes in a strawberry is still just a strawberry with enhanced properties. People may have whatever opinions they want but it is just plain false to say that strawberries with fish genes are fish. I say this because I am in biotech and I know. Trust me, if I don't know something, I admit it. Obviously having a similar genome does not make us the same. I was pointing out that it makes as much sense to say that as to say that your strawberry is a fish. None.
As for appreciating human intelligence, I believe everyone has the capability to be responsible consumers and research what they wish to. You believe they do not..
People acting in a spirit of brotherhood? Why? That instinct evolved to ensure species survival and it seems pretty clear that humans will survive. It's a dog eat dog world and it always will be. (just being realistic)
It is nice of you to say that people may have whatever opinions they like. But you are being untruthfull as you also dont really find that they should be informed.
As to strawberrry's not changing into something else when adding fishgenes, I wholly disagree. Or at least I believe -with my little knowledge of biotech- that this presumption is false and unscientific.
I think my next example can function as a clarifying thoughtexperiment: When we just add a few "enhancing" pictures of beautiful naked women to a Donald Duck comic the comic is still appearing to be a Donald Duck comic but will actually have changed into something very diffrent. To say it is enhancing is a wholly subjective opinion and nothing to do with scientific proof. Some would love the change and some would hate it. Whichever way you decide, love or hate, it can only be decided if you are informed. Selling "enhanced" Donald Duck comics without informing people is obviously unethical. Or would you disagree?
This discussion is really finally becoming interesting now that you are becoming truthfull (dog eat dog world and let's do away with brotherhood). As you are, I will be truthfull also. I'll explain why I don't eat gentech. But first let me tell you that I am not intellectually vain. Or at least, I try not to be. It's mixing emotions with intelligence and it makes for bad judgement. This is not about winning an argument for me. It is about doing what is right and you giving up in saying it is a dog eat dog world out there isn't. No offence intended.
As I already said. This is about spreading knowledge for me. Maybe you have heard of the phrase "knowledge is power". Who hasn't? But, most people don't realise this, it is only true if you keep others unknowledgeable.
Another thoughtexperiment to clarify this: You like being smart and working in gentech probably. It makes you feel knowledgeable. But does it give you power or wisdom? Is it serving you? Serving someone else? And how is this someone else making use of this knowledge? Do you agree with the way it is used? Do you think about that at all? What is steering these decisions? Serving humanity or return on investment? If they coincide that's just great, but if they clash, which wins? Return on investment 100% of the time is my humble guess. Was there any wisdom in these decisions of just fear of losing marketshare or desire to gain more? How do you feel about these decisions? Do you care? Or are you just thinking about your paycheck which you get after lending your knowledgeableness to the cause. And what do you spend it on? Gentechfoods? Who has the power? You?
See the thing is, putting all the knowledge and power in the hands of companies that do not have the human ability op wisdom, compassion, care, etc is simply dangerous. Just look above for the expert opinions to get an idea of which dangers can arrise. Spreading the knowledge serves the balance of power. Consumers will force openness and honesty into the equasion. It is a neccesary evil.
I say evil, because consumers have the tendency to react on instinct and most will say thanks but no thanks to fishgenes in strawberry's. Which might not do justice to the case of gentech in every given situation. That makes it harder to present people with the right information and it will be hard to do it honestly and openly certainly without losing marketshare. It will be very difficult and therefore more costly then putting two words on a label. (I am being really honest here)
But as there are many many very smart and intelligent and good people working in gentech as there are marketingpeople, I am sure you will find out a way to do it. It is just the right thing to do.
I had to switch to another computer and pseudonym in order to post this. Entries from the one I was using were somehow no longer postable.
It's not that I don't think they should be informed, I just think people should be able to inform themselves. Now I realize that's very idealistic and certainly can't be used in all situations in the real world. You have indeed convinced me that labels should be used although I hate creating red tape laws.
Strawberries are still strawberries as long as the can produce seeds that grow into more strawberries. That is the scientific definition of a species. They will be changed in a small way just as members of a species have normal variation but the name will be the same. Labeling them as tampered with is totally acceptable but calling them a fish is not.
I am in total agreement that knowledge is to be shared and learned from. I am a 22 yr old biomed engineering student working toward my master's. For my career I am not pursuing the gentech route. I am swaying toward biomed instrumentation but haven't decided. I do like being smart and sometimes I get carried away and just need someone to humble me (thanks lol). As for the reason I am still in school, gaining knowledge, is to better myself to be able to better my community, and of course my personal situation. I care so deeply about the world that I want to accomplish things that benefit everyone. Most likely I will end up being a college anatomy or neurology or kinesiology teacher or in some company somewhere doing research on something. My dream is to do something bigger than that but I am afraid of being in the spotlight because people have an aversion to intellectuals and CEO's. Even if I became an expert in something people would hate me for it.
You're are ultimately right. Knowledge should be shared and power should be in the consumer. It is indeed a necessary evil.
Hi again,
Happy to hear you are opting for spreading the information.
Have to slap your wrist though. You didn't read up on Pearsons when posting your poor and unscientific definition of a species. Be glad I am not one of your professors testing you. I'd give you hell and flunk you. Check page 316 and further.
Evolution as you know installs isolating mechanisms in species to keep them from reproducing with other species; crossing those species borders would lead to unfit or sterile offspring. Gentech has changed all that. Maybe redefining the definition of what a species is (after gentech) will make for a nice paper.
I wish you good luck on your studies and hope that fear of what others might think of you will not stop you from doing what makes you happy. People don't have an aversion to intellectuals or CEO's. They have an aversion to their own inadequacy's and weakness. It is up to you how to react to that. It took me 40 years to understand that pleasing others was ultimately not going to please me. Since I have learned to fix my focus on pleasing me, I am also more pleasurable to others. How is that for a surprise.
I really did not want to respond to your comment, however I will just in case your dumbing down of GMO's might persuade a reader to dismiss the seriousness of this issue. You write casually as if a genetically modified organism is somehow equal to "soap"?
Referring to the government website you posted, did you not read the part:
"Controversies
Safety
Potential human health impacts, including allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance markers, unknown effects
Potential environmental impacts, including: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity
Access and Intellectual Property
Domination of world food production by a few companies
Increasing dependence on industrialized nations by developing countries
Biopiracy, or foreign exploitation of natural resources
Ethics
Violation of natural organisms' intrinsic values
Tampering with nature by mixing genes among species
Objections to consuming animal genes in plants and vice versa
Stress for animal
Labeling
Not mandatory in some countries (e.g., United States)
Mixing GM crops with non-GM products confounds labeling attempts
Society
New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries "
You say you have researched these issues? None of the above concern you? I am curious how you have come to the conclusion that you "feel safer" in feeding this to your "loved ones". Do you somehow think the controversy is based on misunderstanding of recombinant GMO's? Let me directly quote from an individual learned in this topic, Richard Strohman,PHD. Professor Emeritus, Dept of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley:
"When you insert a single gene into a plant or an animal, the technology will work. You will be able to move that gene from organism A to organism B. You will be able to know that the transfer was successful. You will be able to know that the gene is being expressed, and even that the function of the gene is being expressed. So you'll get the desired characteristic. But you will also get other effects that you couldn't have predicted from your original assumptions. You will have also produced changes in the cell or the organism as a whole that are unpredictable. And that's what the science is having to deal with.
"The reason why Monsanto can claim scientific soundness is that they are only answering the technical question, 'Can I move this gene and this characteristic from A to B?' They are not asking the questions that the current understanding of cell biology demands. You can ask the technical question and get the answer you are looking for. You can take a gene from A and put it into B. We know that. But that's the only question we can answer with certainty. We now realize that there are a whole host of other questions.
"Genes exist in networks, interactive networks which have a logic of their own. The technology point of view does not deal with these networks. It simply addresses genes in isolation. But genes do not exist in isolation. And the fact that the industry folks don't deal with these networks is what makes their science incomplete and dangerous. If you send these new genetic structures out into the world, into hundreds of thousands of acres, you're going into the world with a premature application of a scientific principle.
"We're in a crisis position where we know the weakness of the genetic concept, but we don't know how to incorporate it into a new, more complete understanding. Monsanto knows this. DuPont knows this. Novartis knows this. They all know what I know. But they don't want to look at it because it's too complicated and it's going to cost too much to figure out. The number of questions, the number of possibilities for what happens to a cell, to the whole organism when you insert a foreign gene, are almost incalculable. And the time it would take to assess the infinite possibilities that arise is beyond the capabilities of computers. But that's what you get when you're dealing with living systems."
Biochemist, Dr John Fagan, returned his government grant to research genetic science and refused to do any more work in the field when he realized the dangers of current GE scientific practice. He referred to as being about as accurate as throwing a statue through the 2nd floor of an art museum and expecting it to land on a specific pedestal. He now works with a company that does testing for genetic content in food etc. Until thorough testing is done on the long term effects of tinkering with genetic code, GE products should be not allowed into the food chain. It's another case of dubious science being forced through for commercial gain with no proper scientific or moral safeguards.
There is no such thing.
Perhaps the scientific practice in this field needs some development but the products should absolutely be allowed into the food chain. Honestly, in the grand scheme of things, how many people will die from GE corn? How many die everyday from starvation? Which is a lesser evil, trying to feed them or preventing them from getting food? Breeding plants is possibly more imprecise than genetically engineering them. Both have the same principles of recombining genes.
Besides, if we disallowed anything dangerous, we would be left with nothing.
Dear Sunshiner 24: Actually what you say is a repetition of the biotech industry standard PR points on genetically engineered food products and highly inaccurate. There is no real food shortage in the world. There is a food distribution problem between those who have and those who have not. A lot of that could be sorted out with a compassion approach and sensible politics (I know, it's a scary thought, but not impossible and we do hope). Secondly check out the statistics on the numbers of Indian farmers who have committed suicide because their livelihoods have been taken away by the forced imposition of GM terminator seeds by their government in conjunction with companies such as Monsanto; seeds which they cannot afford nor are they successful replacements for their traditional growing practices. The truth is the the biotech promise of increased crop production through GM seeds has failed to happen. What has happened is they have produced pesticide resistant crops which just happen to require a lot of products such as Roundup which just happen to be made by the same companies that make the GM seeds. Furthermore, the weeds can then become pesticide resistant and so even more pesticides are required, creating an increasing pollution of the crops with chemicals which we already know are not good for us. As to your point about GM engineering being the same as regular breeding of plants, that's also not true. Let's be honest, there is no sex involved here. It is not bringing together different plants to create a healthier hybrid. It is ramming together genetic code from different species: animals , insects, bacteria and plants. The resulting mishmash has the ability to penetrate the normal defense barriers in the human digestive and immune system and cause structural alteration to the human DNA, with consequences that are extremely scary and possibly irreversible.
Sunshine 24, I don't know if you are real in your views or a schill for the biotech industry. But as a human being (potentially with children to care for) I urge you to do some further research into this subject. This is serious stuff and not to be taken lightly. Check out the following web page:
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/AboutGMFoods/index.cfm . There's lots more information like this out there.