Biotech food.  Tomatoes with pig genes.  Strawberrys with fish genes.  Corn that manufactures it's own pesticide.  

Those are a few examples of GMOs.  How do you feel about eating them?  It's a [b]sure[/b] bet that you have been eating them.  [i]For more than 5 years now.[/i]

Sorry, I thought it said Ogasms.
Oops

I saw Frontline last night too. Interesting show. We've all been eating this robo-food for some time now. I think it'll take many years for the real long term studies to be done.

In the mean time, welcome to planet guinnie pig (sp?).

We are all geneticlly modified organisms.

Norm

Genetically modified means exactly that. MODIFIED!  Modified  (usually) to enhance the product in some way. Don’t get me started, dickheads with no expertise in this particular area have cost me a lot of money lately.

Everything evolves over time, if you speed up the process and point it in a direction that provides benefits to everyone then that is not a bad thing.  

At the risk of not being paranoid or hysterical, it sounds yummy to me.

Unless 20 years from now, one of these many genes that are pretty much experimental is determined to promote some sick birth defects that skip a generation.

I'm not saying it's enevitable, but without long term studies(like 25 years) there's really no telling what the hell could result.

In the mean time, I'll just keep eating whatever gets put in front of me....with a smile.



P.S.- Holy shit, I have 1000 posts!

A particular gene usually imparts a pretty specific trait. You don't just go sticking random genes in to see what they do. For instance, the insecticide producing gene that was mentioned (the term insecticide applies only because the substance kills a particular insect. This is a naturally occurring substance) is beneficial in that it enables the producer to grow crops without the use of chemical insecticides. Think about it.

Good points Oslow and congratulations M4 on 1000 post!

Funny, I just was reading something about this. I didn't see the Frontline though.

I'm a beekeper and this stuff is killing our bees and other insects!

I have no problem eating them.  

I wouldn't mind if you explained how animal genes were supposed to make it to plants and vice versa.

I didn't see the BS on the TV so I don't have any point to start a discussion of that. I know some people that could stand a little gene enhancing though.

BT corn or BT cotton doesn't do crap to Bees.

Oslow,
Let me get this straight.  Because you have financial involvement with Biotec, anyone who [i]merely[/i] questions the safety of these foods or their impact on the environment is an idiot?  Or, perhaps you are a leading expert in this field? Not impossible, but please, let us know.
I'm not talking hysterics here, but frankly I don't give a damn about the money you or Monsanto stands to make or lose.  There are a lot of smart assholes who were doing the world a big favor, only to find out that not only did they not know it all, they didn't know the half of it.

Ask anyone in Florida about Love Bugs, insects which were introduced to control mosquitoes.  Not a genetics mishap, but parallels can be drawn.
 
What worries me is most is introducing new genetic combinations into the environment.  You know, like unapproved GM corn in taco shells.  It was not supposed to be there.  But it was.  Like corn that produces BT insecticide, constantly.  This will inevitably result in BT resistant insects.  No chance to allow non-BT resistant insects to dilute the BT resistant bugs genes, because the BT is ever present, as opposed to a periodic spraying.
I am not saying there is no place for GMOs.  I'm saying that a close eye needs to be kept on them, by those who do not stand to profit from them, and that questions which are asked should be answered, not brushed aside.

 
BTW, I've never watched Frontline          

Bt.

Bacillus thuringiensis.

Yes, I am picking nits.  Sorry.

I want some bacteria that eat carbon and powder residue and excrete CLP, so that my guns are clean by the time I get home from the range.

Call me parinoid but ITS PURE EVIL. there's got to be a trade off somewhere.[BD]

I'm a genetics major. I have 0 problems with genetically engineered food. I would eat them anyday. Knowledge will set you free.

Freedom Fighter,
Get to work on this.

It's not impossible. If I remember correctly there are bacteria that do "eat" carbon.  This could be the beginning of a great invention. Just imagine the government contracts!

[green]You didn't get any of that straight. You just made up a bunch of crap and stuck it into the middle of an informal discussion. What's the point?[/green]

If these "dickheads" (Greenpeace, ELF, ect.) are costing you money, then logic would dictate that you have some financial involvement.  Also, the cracks about various gene defeciencies of those in disagreement with your position are not contributing to your stance.   I never came out against GMOs, my lead post on this thread just questioned others opinion about this issue.  I think that the possibilties are endless, the benefits could be immense  But, it would be foolish not to acknowledge that any powerfull technology is a double edge sword.  Also foolish to ignore that when profit is the absolute bottom line, that's exactly what it is.    

David

OK. I didn't assign the term to any particular person or group but I won’t argue about your list.  I suppose the term “dickhead” calls up different images for each individual. If I have to define it I would just say that Dan Rather is a DICKHEAD. Go from there.

Everyone has some financial involvement because many applications of this technology make production of food and fiber more efficient. Read “less expensive”. I don’t have any direct involvement with Biotech. I’m not an expert on genetic engineering. Everything I know about it is based on practical application.  

I did not say those in disagreement with me were deficient genetically. You read that in all by yourself. This “SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING” form of debate is tiresome.

Sorry my communication skills are so lacking. I'm just a country boy.

Oslow,
Perhaps I read a little to much between the
lines in your posts.  Hell, I could use some gene enhancement, to relocate my hair back to my head!
My main point was, if someone has this idea that they say is better than sliced bread, an intrusive, complex, relatively new technology that will bring in [b]billions[/b] to the goodwill messenger, then all of a sudden I'm from Missouri.  Show me.
To err in caution, is to err wisely.

How about the milk cows and the beef steer and pig that they pump full of hormones and steroids to make them bigger and produce more?

It's for the greater good of humanity to experiment with foods that are faster and easier to produce.  Unless it kills us all we will benefit in the future. I agree that we need to make sure it does the animal kingdom no harm.  Our bodies can adjust over time if we make such changes slowly.

The DNA in these foods is totally broken down in the GI tract and is of no danger to any creature that ingests these foods. An exception would be a bio-engineered virus that would be resistant to gastric acid and gut enzymes. That, of course, might be done without anyones consent or knowledgeand their is little we could do about it until we discovered the problem, by which time it would probably be too late.
  My main concern with such organisms is the trend towards less variation. If an organism evolves that can destroy our food sources it would subsequently destroy a large amount of our food sources.
   As for toying with bacteria, I think that would be a very bad idea. Though they have no brain they have clearly "outsmarted" us numerous times in recent history.

I'd be concerned about eating them if I knew.  Not so much for what they would do to ME, but to the environment.

Why don't we see something on the label, so we can decide for ourselves.

April, 2001 Scientific American has an article on this, beginning page 51.

"Canadian Farmers, in particular, have described GM canola escaping from farm fields and invading wheat crops like a weed.  This canola also resisted pesticide sprays."

Also reported:  Green lacewing caterpillars more likely to die after eating the corn-borer caterpillars fed on Bt corn vs. the ones that fed on regular corn.

And monarch butterfly larva died after feeding  on milkweed leaves dusted with Bt corn pollen.

Other issues: "Gene flow" into related species which are kept in balance without the modification, but the modification then gives them an edge, disturbing the balance.  "Weedy relatives" of GM plants, too.

The examples above were selected not to summarize the entire article, but to point out
that there are real dangers.  It's just not clear to what extent.

I'd recommend this issue of Scientific American for anyone interested in the topic.  I dropped my subscription years back, but pick up an issue when something interesting is in it.

I see a real conflict when the people who profit from the 'manufacture', sale, and use of these products are the ones telling us they're perfectly fine and cause no problems.  I've had plenty of experience in the corporate world where "oh my god" factual situations were transformed and reduced into belated "minor tweaking may be necessary"  admissions.



[red][size=4] P.R.K.