Fresh opinions on GE crops

[Maria92]

Just want to know everyone's stance on genetically engineered crops. I support it, and think that it could do a lot of good, but that's just me. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

[Kuhnada29]

No I don't think foods natural from the earth should be fucked with. Just like I don't think tap water should be fluoridated, but we have to deal with it anyway. Foods that come naturally from the earth are the healthiest.

[Maria92]

May I then inquire on your stance on selective breeding?

[Kiza]

I voted undecided, because I haven't really been informed about the whole thing that much. I'm sure there'll be arguments for and against showing up in here, so I figure I'll see everyone else's opinions on it first before making a conclusion about genetically engineered crops.

[khh]

I see the value of genetically altered crops, and therefore I voted yes. However, there are many pitfalls. It's hard to predict what effect altering some of the genes will have, and so one can cause damage both to crops and natural life. Also, there is probably a risk of cross-breeding between a genetically altered plant and a wild one, which could have unforeseen consequences. So all in all I'm for the concept, but only if it's strictly controlled and researched. Now, many people don't seem to know it, but we have genetically altered vegetables in our houses already. There are for instance genetically altered versions of corn that are popular, especially in America I think.

[Techno]

With the proper knowledge, application, and continuous research, definitely. Why wouldn't you want to genetically-engineer your food to grow much quicker, in greater amounts, and with resistance against adverse environmental effects? As long as it is still edible and less harmful than regular food, I'm all for it.

[Bonsay]

As a technology it's just another thing that can help us in the future, just like with anything else. The only problem is that in this system it's exploited for profit gain of privately owned companies. It isn't regulated, it can and is fucking things up. See Monsanto for example. So I vote yes, if it's regulated.

[Photolysis]

Just like I don't think tap water should be fluoridated, but we have to deal with it anyway. So you don't support the chlorination of water either? Or you don't support selective breeding of crops? The use of pesticides? Modern fertilizers? Those are unnatural too and "fuck with" natural stuff.

[Xei]

No I don't think foods natural from the earth should be fucked with. Just like I don't think tap water should be fluoridated, but we have to deal with it anyway. Foods that come naturally from the earth are the healthiest. Out of interest, what the hell do you eat..? Because you just excluded pretty much anything made using cereals, fruit, or livestock.

[Alric]

The dangers to it is that the US government has taken the stance that no matter what is done to genetically modified food, it doesn't need to be tested for safety. Which basically means they are pumping them up to produce as much as possible with no regard for safety. It is unnatural to make food like that, but not in the hippy bullshit way of, everything needs to be natural, but in the you are going to get cancer and die sort of way. Of course, you might just increase your chance of getting cancer by 70% and it may take years and years for it to happen, but why take that risk? They had the same problem with the bovine growth hormone, used to make cows produce more milk. Now everyone is banning that stuff from their stores. You can hardly even find people who use it anymore in the US, because no one wants to sell it. Its that dangerous. They had GM bans in other countries. Why are we eating stuff, that entire countries ban from being allowed inside? What are we, mexico now? We eat the scraps of what other countries don't want? They can all produce their own food safely but we need to push the envelope and eat untested and likely unsafe foods? All of Europe banned alot of this stuff, so why are we eating it? It is not tested, a lot of it is showing signs of not being safe for human consumption, they really don't know what they are doing. It crazy, why would anyone want to eat that stuff? So simply put, I am all for it if it is well tested and safe. I am not for a lot of the current stuff, that is totally untested and the government actually promotes rapant abuse of the system, alllowing unsafe foods into the market. On a side note, water shouldn't be fluoridated. Flouride is a waste byproduct from manufacturing, and they needed a way to dispose of all the waste so they decided to dump it into the water. Flouride is a toxic chemical. Ever notice the warning on toothpaste with flouride? If you swallow more than a pea size drop of toothpaste you are supposed to call poison control.

[Odd_Nonposter]

Coming from a farming background, I'm probably one of the few that knows what they are talking about from firsthand experience. The most widely complained about GM crops are glyphosate resistant soy and corn and Bt corn. In order to control weeds, there have been two methods available to be implemented on a large scale: tillage and chemicals. Manually removing them would be far too much labor to be implemented on our scale. With tillage, however, there is a great increase in soil erosion, compaction, and loss of organic matter in the soil, which means the soil becomes less fertile and requires more inorganic fertilizers to be added. Doing so changes how the soil drains and retains water, which means that irrigation is required in drier times and that crops drown in downpours. Irrigating crops from rivers or aquifers, however, increases the salinity in the soil, which may make the soil permanently sterile. (This is how Mesopotamia went from a rich agricultural area to the desert of Iraq we know today.) No-till farming mitigates these issues. Instead of running heavy equipment across the soil to reduce it to a fine powder, a slit is simply cut into the soil, the seed inserted, and the slit closed. This does nothing to control weeds. Older herbicides were sprayed onto the field before planting to control weeds as they emerge from the soil. Weeds can, however, grow after the crop is planted. What farmers needed to do to control these was to spray a chemical on the growing crop that killed the weeds, but not the crop itself. Since such a chemical did not exist, Monsanto genetically modified the crop itself to be resistant to an herbicide that it already had. And thus Roundup Ready soybeans and corn were born. Bt corn, unlike traditional corn, creates a toxic protein that causes a relative few number of insects' larvae to develop ulcers in their digestive tracts which subsequently become infected by bacteria and cause the larvae to die. The Bt toxin is derived from a natural soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, and had been used in sprayable form as a natural pesticide. The main pests that the protein works on are corn borer, rootworm, and cutworm. Very few other insects are affected by the toxin, and the receptor that the toxin triggers is not found in non-insects. These pests used to be controlled by regularly rotating corn and soybeans on the same ground, however, the pests got smart and started laying their eggs in soybean crops. They could still be controlled in this way if more crop types were added into the crop rotation, but economic circumstances leave most alternatives unprofitable. It would be great if the US government let us grow hemp, and we're working on changing that. It'd also help us with erosion, compaction, organic matter... On the water fluoridation issue, some water sources have natural fluoride in them, so much so that it needs to be removed. We discovered that fluoridation reduced tooth decay by studying populations that had high levels of natural fluoride in their water. It's all irrelevant to me; I have a well.

[Maria92]

Okay, this is just how scientists create GE crops: 1. Isolate the desired gene 2. Locate a complete piece of RNA (one or a few genes in usable form) containing the desired gene and isolate it. 3. Replicate the gene through harmless PCR (polymerase chain reactions) 4. Turn the RNA into DNA using the enzyme reverse transcriptase 5. Introduce bacteria to the DNA fragments (they will naturally absorb them) 6. Allow the bacteria to infect a small population of plant cells 7. Grow the plant cells into new plants through micropropagation 8. Weed out the failures 9. Run many, many, many tests on the remaining plants. Isolate the best ones. 10. Obtain governmental approval. Distribute to the masses. In all reality, it isn't much different from natural selection. It's just a lot faster, a lot more efficient, and allows people to incorporate "intelligence" into plants.

[ChrissyMaria]

Just want to know everyone's stance on genetically engineered crops. I support it, and think that it could do a lot of good, but that's just me. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Terrible idea. Nuff said.

[Sisyphus50]

Terrible idea. Nuff said. Care to elaborate?

[Maria92]

Terrible idea. Nuff said. Care to elaborate? I too am curious as to the reasoning behind your views...

[ChrissyMaria]

In my opinion, genetically modifying anything should be highly illegal and in my mind is HIGHLY immoral and an abomination of nature and earth. No animal, human, aquatic or plant life should be genetically altered or engineered and I hope anyone who does this research realizes the damage they can permanently cause to earth and the ecosystem. If we mess with genetics and dna much longer were going to end up with such problems which could be irreversible. Ask yourself this question, haven't we fucked up earth enough, when will it stop? We must stop being so selfish as to creating gmo crops to suit OUR lives, what about the lives of all nature, put at risk by gmo seeds being lost in the wild, growing amongst natural crops. You could potentially engineer malevolent things in the crops, such as a disease or a plague, this technology can open doors to new bio-weapons and could threaten the very existence of the food we eat! THINK PEOPLE! THINK (think with your dip-stick, jimmy) Plus, would you trust your body, your only vehicle in this world, with un-tested un-safe modified food? Haven't people learned by now that only strictly natural things are healthy, anything humans alter or create is unhealthy, unsafe and downright disgusting. Humans couldn't create a healthy alternative to nature if they tried, nature is incredible and should not be taken for granted, and should NOT BE ALTERED IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM! If corn were to grow in harsh climates, NATURE and evolution would decide corns fate, it shouldn't be our decision or control to produce and alter what millions of years of evolution has created, something that nature made, we can never match the greatness of pure raw unaltered NATURE! I urge you to never eat gmo food, When i buy my corn i make sure its from a non gmo source. literally everything I eat has to be 100% organic certified with no alterations or harmful pesticides and junk. Plus, who needs soil and farmland when you can just grow natural organic food hydroponically in a greenhouse, totally circumventing climate issues or soil or plant diseases, there IS NO NEED FOR GMO CROPS, PERIOD. Hydro and Aeroponics is the future of crops, not some retarded gmo human altered nightmare. lesson of todays post: Don't let humans try to re-create what billions of years of evolution made, how dare us, how fucking dare us. We should be a fucking shamed of ourselves, altering something so divine, so natural, so powerful and healthy and wonderful. Humans sure know how to crash a party, in the wrong way.

[Photolysis]

You could potentially engineer malevolent things in the crops, such as a disease or a plague, this technology can open doors to new bio-weapons and could threaten the very existence of the food we eat! Appeal to emotion (fear). Not a good argument. Genetic engineering can also help cure many genetic diseases, particularly as we advance in the field. Not to mention GM micro-organisms allow us to synthesise certain drugs extremely cheaply, which is highly beneficial for people who suffer from conditions. For example the production of human insulin for diabetics. What about the advantages of using GM bacteria to deal with crude oil spillages? Or even terraforming in future? Or what about using GM organisms for the production of biofuels? Almost any technology can be abused. Our understanding of nuclear physics (for example) can create a WMD, or (with further research) it could be used to create an almost unlimited power source. Thankfully others were not as short-sighted as you. Plus, would you trust your body, your only vehicle in this world, with un-tested un-safe modified food? Strawman (it is tested and no rational person would claim it should not be), and lack of evidence to support this conclusion. What negative effects have been documented due to any GM crop? should NOT BE ALTERED IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM! Alright, we'll ditch our high-yield crops created by thousands of years of selective breeding. Are you one of the ones volunteering to starve to death? Selective breeding achieves the same kinds of thing as genetic engineering. It's a different method. AND CAPS FTW! THINK PEOPLE! THINK The irony. altering something so divine Well, luckily the idea of divinity is fictional. Phew, glad we got that out the way. I was worried it would be a serious problem for a second! so natural, so powerful and healthy and wonderful. Selection bias anyone? If nature's so good, then presumably you'll be happy to give up modern medicine, for starters? how dare us, how fucking dare us. Get over yourself

[Maria92]

Also keep in mind that humans are 50% genetically identical to bananas. All the genes ever conceived in nature tend to be found in a great number of organisms. Sometimes, scientists need not incorporate DNA from other organisms. It can be as simple as flicking a specific gene on or off; a single mutation that could easily occur in nature, but the process streamlined for modern purposes. Haven't people learned by now that only strictly natural things are healthy, anything humans alter or create is unhealthy, unsafe and downright disgusting. Humans couldn't create a healthy alternative to nature if they tried, nature is incredible and should not be taken for granted, and should NOT BE ALTERED IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM! If corn were to grow in harsh climates, NATURE and evolution would decide corns fate, it shouldn't be our decision or control to produce and alter what millions of years of evolution has created, something that nature made, we can never match the greatness of pure raw unaltered NATURE! Oh, so I take it you never eat potatoes, or any other crop...ever? The first potatoes, as designed by nature, were tiny nubs. The first almonds were so rich in cyanide that they were impossible to eat. It was only when humans entered the scene that things found in nature became edible. Plus, who needs soil and farmland when you can just grow natural organic food hydroponically in a greenhouse, totally circumventing climate issues or soil or plant diseases, there IS NO NEED FOR GMO CROPS, PERIOD. You've...obviously never tried to garden indoors, have you? First of all, this technology is not currently practical on a commercial level, as the cost is far too great. Also, from experience, I know that plants tend to be prone to all sorts of pests and diseases when grown inside, especially in a greenhouse. Besides that, whatever happened to not messing with nature? What part of nature said to grow plants inside, anyway? Of course, all these problems could be avoided...through the cunning use of genetic engineering...

[ChrissyMaria]

first off photo, I don't appreciate being made a mockery of, don't try to poke fun at someone who meant every word they posted. I stand behind my beliefs because thats what makes me unique, I believe gmo crops are the worst idea since guns and bombs. Also, I am not against selective crop breeding because it does not involve altering of the genetic structure of a natural incredibly evolved plant. I am however against any dna manipulation because the main reason im against it is because I DO NOT trust that they will be made safe, no matter what any doctor scientist or anyone says. For me to even consider eating 1 iota of that garbage it would have to undergo such an extensive testing process that it would be impossible to pass inspection in my own standards. Plus, how long have humans ate gmo crops for, do we know the long term effects? Chances are the answer to that is NO. Once people eat gmo crops for a few hundred years without any adverse effects, then my rotting corpse might consider eating a piece, but for now im sticking with what this earth has created for everyone to appreciate the raw unaltered pure nature, it feels great to eat all natural, I never get sick...so modern medicine is useless to me unless I break a bone or develop some crazy problem in the body that is untreatable with natural things. I actually don't even think 'modern' medicine is very modern, in 20 years the medical industry will shudder at the thought of our archaic system in 2009, in 2029 they will laugh at our so called modern symptom masking system. Todays philosiphy is treat the symptoms, NOT the freaking cause, its madness. It was only when humans entered the scene that things found in nature became edible. Um, WHAT? That's the biggest farce I've ever heard. So how did cavemen or neolithic farmers live, they ate each other? Also, hydroponics is much more cost effective, i have no clue where you guys get so your so called facts but you are misinformed highly. There is currently a rooftop skyscraper grow operation which is hydroponic in NYC, this operation uses strictly hydroponics and they ship and deliver to anywhere in the country and they charge less than any other source because of the less expense with hydroponics. This was actually shown on the discovery and history channel just a few weeks ago, so please don't tell me this bologna how hydroponics is not cost effective or good for commercial operations. Growing outdoor involves a lot more water, which isn't free or environmentally friendly to use such a large amount, with hydroponics they only have to worry about nutrient vitamin mixtures with the small amounts of water they use. Also, aeroponics will be even more advanced, it uses even less water, saving water and money, and it produces bigger tastier and healthier crops, along with hydroponics. Also, they have no soil to purchase, or constantly fertilize and maintain. Please guys, do some research before diving into these terrible gmo crops and claiming outdoor ancient growing is superior with modified freak crops, instead of an indoor natural organic hydroponic cost effective environmentally safe plants.

[Alric]

One of the biggest problems people have with that type of stuff, is that they are not tested. In some cases, they are not tested at all. The biggest claim the companies make, is that genetically modified food is at its core still the same type of food as before and thus does not need to be tested at all. This is ridiculous though. Why should anyone be pro genetically modified food, when their stance is, they will never test it. Doesn't that throw up a lot of warning signals?

[ChrissyMaria]

One of the biggest problems people have with that type of stuff, is that they are not tested. In some cases, they are not tested at all. The biggest claim the companies make, is that genetically modified food is at its core still the same type of food as before and thus does not need to be tested at all. This is ridiculous though. Why should anyone be pro genetically modified food, when their stance is, they will never test it. Doesn't that throw up a lot of warning signals? for half the users in this thread apparently no signals appear to them. The signal would hit them after getting gmo cancer.

[Maria92]

Also, I am not against selective crop breeding because it does not involve altering of the genetic structure of a natural incredibly evolved plant. I am however against any dna manipulation because the main reason im against it is because I DO NOT trust that they will be made safe, no matter what any doctor scientist or anyone says. You...really have no idea what scientists are doing, do you? In case you missed my last post, I'll explain it again. Scientists do NOT have free reign within the genome, nor can they easily create custom genes. In order to genetically modify an organism, the gene must first exist in nature. Also, considering that HUMANS and BANANAS are 50% genetically IDENTICAL, would it not be safe to make a claim that nature shares a great deal of genetic information already? Also note that genetic engineering is essentially selective breeding, part two. It's taking existing genes (as in selective breeding) and combining them with other organisms (as is the case in selective breeding). Really, the two are a lot more similar than you seem to think they are. For me to even consider eating 1 iota of that garbage it would have to undergo such an extensive testing process that it would be impossible to pass inspection in my own standards. Plus, how long have humans ate gmo crops for, do we know the long term effects? Chances are the answer to that is NO. I must admit, you're making this dreadfully easy for me. Okay, first off, when scientists genetically modify an organism, they are simply taking a select few genes and splicing them into the existing genome of an established crop plant. Genes, as I hope you know, code for the production of proteins within the body. Genes themselves are powerless, and must be turned into something that the body can actually use. Therefore, any sort of recombinant DNA on its own is not toxic, and contains NO mutagenic properties (meaning no cancer). As for the crop itself, nothing will be produced within the plant that is not specifically placed there by scientists. Once people eat gmo crops for a few hundred years without any adverse effects, then my rotting corpse might consider eating a piece, but for now im sticking with what this earth has created for everyone to appreciate the raw unaltered pure nature, it feels great to eat all natural, I never get sick...so modern medicine is useless to me unless I break a bone or develop some crazy problem in the body that is untreatable with natural things. I actually don't even think 'modern' medicine is very modern, in 20 years the medical industry will shudder at the thought of our archaic system in 2009, in 2029 they will laugh at our so called modern symptom masking system. Todays philosiphy is treat the symptoms, NOT the freaking cause, its madness. And what happens when you contract pneumonia or some deadly illness that requires pharmaceuticals or a hospital? How about cancer? As for the modernness of medicine, I'm inclined to disagree. At this moment, medicine is on the cutting edge, and new cures and treatments are being discovered left and right. True, in 20 years scientists will be shaking their heads at us, but for now, we've got the best medicinal technology to date. We can only expand so fast, and reaching the destination requires a journey, mate. Can't expect miracles overnight. Um, WHAT? That's the biggest farce I've ever heard. So how did cavemen or neolithic farmers live, they ate each other? I will concede that some crops were edible, but I meant more specifically that so much of what we have today was of so poor quality or so scrawny that they were hardly worth the effort until the ideas of farming and cross-breeding were introduced. Also, hydroponics is much more cost effective, i have no clue where you guys get so your so called facts but you are misinformed highly. There is currently a rooftop skyscraper grow operation which is hydroponic in NYC, this operation uses strictly hydroponics and they ship and deliver to anywhere in the country and they charge less than any other source because of the less expense with hydroponics. This was actually shown on the discovery and history channel just a few weeks ago, so please don't tell me this bologna how hydroponics is not cost effective or good for commercial operations. Growing outdoor involves a lot more water, which isn't free or environmentally friendly to use such a large amount, with hydroponics they only have to worry about nutrient vitamin mixtures with the small amounts of water they use. I agree that hydroponics in itself is cost-effective, but the infrastructure could be considered slightly less so. You need greenhouses, and indoor lighting, and filtration systems, and water pumps...the list goes on. At the present moment, conventional farming is simply more economic to farmers, so the incentive for change is not there. Please guys, do some research before diving into these terrible gmo crops and claiming outdoor ancient growing is superior with modified freak crops, instead of an indoor natural organic hydroponic cost effective environmentally safe plants. In a perfect world...look, not everyone on the planet can currently afford vast hydroponics systems, etc. Besides that, GE crops have great potential to help the world. Ever heard of Golden Rice? It's still an early development, but it has great potential to do some wonderful things in the world. Why stop there, though? Why not develop vast arrays of fast-growing, vitamin-rich plants? GE has the potential to end world hunger, but it must first be supported. One of the biggest problems people have with that type of stuff, is that they are not tested. In some cases, they are not tested at all. The biggest claim the companies make, is that genetically modified food is at its core still the same type of food as before and thus does not need to be tested at all. This is ridiculous though. Why should anyone be pro genetically modified food, when their stance is, they will never test it. Doesn't that throw up a lot of warning signals? Um...no. Genetic engineering works like this: Take a plant cell. Leave the DNA intact. Introduce a small number of new genes (not all that dissimilar from the ones already within the plant) and culture the cell. It will grow into a new plant exhibiting the new traits, if all goes well. Many of these cells are done at a shot, and only the very strong actually make it anywhere. So yes, the crop is essentially the same. And seeing as how we're not putting heavy metals into tomatoes, I would consider them to be safe.

[SnakeCharmer]

Also, I am not against selective crop breeding because it does not involve altering of the genetic structure of a natural incredibly evolved plant. Sure it does, altering the genetic structure of naturally occuring species is the point selective breeding. Please guys, do some research before diving into these terrible gmo crops and claiming outdoor ancient growing is superior with modified freak crops, instead of an indoor natural organic hydroponic cost effective environmentally safe plants. Growing crops indoors? Yes, that sounds 100% natural to me. for half the users in this thread apparently no signals appear to them. The signal would hit them after getting gmo cancer. Then you should get all kinds of diseased from eating crops obtained by selective breeding. Most of those crops are polyploids, as are most of the cancer cells.

[Kuhnada29]

Out of interest, what the hell do you eat..? Because you just excluded pretty much anything made using cereals, fruit, or livestock. that's what I'm saying...while I do eat that, i would prefer natural foods more than anything because it's fresh and straight from the earth. But I live in the states so I don't really have a choice BUT to eat it. Natural foods are most likely WAY healthier for you anyway.

[Alric]

See that is the kind of thinking people have a problem with. You claim it is "essentially" the same, and thus needs no testing. As if, being close enough makes it safe. The fact that you end up with obviously defected plants that need to be weeded out during the process, shows there is the possibility of things going wrong. See now if you said you could change the plant and get exactly what you want, then maybe I would agree with you. However you change it and, 'if it goes well' it has new traits. They are not exact or precise, yet they want us to believe that there is no possible way of side effects? If you admit there is a chance of side effects, then it needs to be tested, which they don't seem it needs to be. Also, we already know some of the stuff, they have created has caused health issues. Things have gone badly before. So why should we trust them now?