GMO-Science Takes a Blow as Studies Are Retracted

[PierzStyx]

double post. :\

 

[angelatc]

The...irony (?) in this post is astounding. .

Blah blah blah.



https://www.google.com/search?q=organic+food+deaths&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS554US554&oq=organic+food+deaths&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l3.3521j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8


It is incredible how many people are so absolutely determined to cling to their beliefs that they don't even bother to Google the accuracy of their statements before they post.

OK, what you said was, "The only time I've seen E.coli as an issue is in non-organic food such as prepackaged spinach," and perhaps that is technically true. And by true, I mean that maybe that's the only time you've seen it.

But that doesn't make my statement wrong, in that organic food is deadlier and filthier than organic food. So go eat it, enjoy it, pay more for it, feel superior about it. But leave my food the hell alone.

 

[Petar]

For clarity, this makes it sound very brutal, rudimentary, and brings forth images of a 50/50 splice...when that's not the case.

It's more like "hey, this fish has a very tiny slice of its genes that makes it produce this property/chemical that is a natural deterrent to X/Y/Z (ie: parasites, insects, or something), so let's splice it into corn so the corn does the same thing"

For example, the puppies that glow? I doubt you'd consider them a "Jellyfish-Canine Hybrid", when the only gene they have is the one that makes the skin produce bioluminescence.


Genes are like segments of code---so if you can sequence genes in a particular way, you can make that organism behave in a particular way..it's just that, right now, due to technological and knowledge limitations we're at the "copy-pasta" stage for genes instead of writing completely original and new genes (AFAIK; I haven't kept up with this particular types genetic engineering in the past couple of years).

But yeah, I don't think a 50/50 splice is going to happen any time soon....dont' worry, you can rest easy at night, for now, werewolves don't exist...yet =p

It doesn't have to be 50/50 to produce what are effectively alien proteins that human beings are simply not meant to ingest.

Is it your position that it is alien scientists that are doing the splicing together of earth native organisms in an off world laboratory?

Clearly.

Blah blah blah.



https://www.google.com/search?q=organic+food+deaths&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS554US554&oq=organic+food+deaths&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l3.3521j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8


It is incredible how many people are so absolutely determined to cling to their beliefs that they don't even bother to Google the accuracy of their statements before they post.

OK, what you said was, "The only time I've seen E.coli as an issue is in non-organic food such as prepackaged spinach," and perhaps that is technically true. And by true, I mean that maybe that's the only time you've seen it.

But that doesn't make my statement wrong, in that organic food is deadlier and filthier than organic food. So go eat it, enjoy it, pay more for it, feel superior about it. But leave my food the hell alone.

So why don't you address the fact that you are a proponent of allowing everyone's food supply to be poisoned with synthetic organisms that may as well come from Mars?

Don't you think it is kind of cowardly to simply ignore the basic reality?

Do you think it's possible that maybe you are just sort of a bully instead of someone with any kind of legitimate point?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Monsanto shouldn't br writing legislation-period. That is the issue. Any time you allow a corporation to have control of what is supposed to be "policing" it then it will abuse that power to attack its detractors and promote itself at the public's expense. And if you can't see that Monsanto is doing just that then you're either blind or an idiot.

Absolutely. We call the merge of corporation and state Fascism. We call it this because that is what it is. And it's not just a phenomenon seen with agribusiness and biotech. Which I'm sure that many know.

Do you know what we call people who support this model? Well, I'll tell you. We call them Fascists. We call them this because that is what they are. Period. Now, sure, we see them parade around as if to present themselves as some sort of libertarian model for others to follow but, as I've said before, "libertarianism" often serves as the stalking horse for fascism. True story. Look that up, by the way. Stalking Horse. Wiki defines it rather well.

As far as this report goes, it's peanuts. There are soooo many things happening right now regarding this issue. Things that haven't even graced these pages. And won't for some time.

 

[donnay]

Blame factory farming, not organic food

Craig Holdrege1

1.The Nature Institute, 20 May Hill Road, Ghent, New York 12075, USA. e-mail: [email protected]


Introduction

To the editor:

Clearly, editorials provide a journal the opportunity to express opinions. But your October editorial “Why silence is not an option” (Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1177, 2006) goes too far by misrepresenting some basic facts.

The editorial laments that biotech crops get bad press whereas organic crops, when something goes awry, seem to come away unscathed. Your example is the recent contamination of fresh spinach with the food pathogen Escherichia coli O157:H7, which led to numerous human illnesses and, up to now, four deaths. You insinuate that organic spinach was the carrier of the pathogen. That is not the case. The manufacturing codes from the contaminated bags of spinach have, to date, all been from conventionally and not organically grown spinach. The conventionally grown spinach was packaged at the same warehouse as Earthbound Farm's organic spinach1.

You go on to decry that no one has pointed out that “the combinations of 'organic' and 'spinach' [are] simply a time-bomb waiting to go off.” You provide absolutely no evidence for this radical claim. I would expect more substance and less hyperbole from a scientific journal. The problem of E. coli O157:H7 contamination is complex. The largest known reservoir of these pathogens is the colon of cattle. When cattle are fed large portions of grain—as is the case in feedlots and large factory farms—both the number of E. coli and their acid resistance rise significantly2, 3, 4. This increases the likelihood that pathogenic E. coli—including O157:H7—will survive and reproduce. Perhaps 30–50% of grain-fed cattle harbor E. coli O157:H7. Because the strain is acid resistant, if it contaminates uncooked food it survives the acid environment of human stomachs, which normally kills most bacteria, and then can cause serious illness.

Manure and runoff from factory farms and feedlots can easily pollute streams and groundwater—water used to irrigate those huge vegetable farms in California that produce most of the produce for the United States, including fresh spinach. The US Food and Drug Administration sees contamination of irrigation water supplies as a primary means of spreading E. coli O157:H7 and warned California growers about this danger in a letter in November 2005 (ref. 5). Factory farming and concentration of the food supply is the issue here, not organic food. Your editorial got it wrong.

In fact, researchers studying E. coli O157:H7 found that when cattle feed was shifted from grain to forage (hay or silage), both the pathogen population in the cattle and the bacterial acid resistance dropped drastically2, 3, 4. Although it may be hard to swallow, you're probably much safer eating a hamburger made from grass-fed beef slaughtered in a local slaughter house and topped with a piece of lettuce from your neighbor's organic farm that used the grass-fed cow's composted manure as a fertilizer than you are eating products of all-American industrial agriculture.

I would agree with your editorial's conclusion that “there is a basic truth that bears repetition: and that is that basic truths bear repetition.” The basic truth I missed in your editorial is that the recent food contamination has to do with systemic problems in conventional industrial food production and processing. Don't blame organic farming.


Continued...

 

[dannno]

Blame factory farming, not organic food

Craig Holdrege1

1.The Nature Institute, 20 May Hill Road, Ghent, New York 12075, USA. e-mail: [email protected]


Introduction

To the editor:

Clearly, editorials provide a journal the opportunity to express opinions. But your October editorial “Why silence is not an option” (Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1177, 2006) goes too far by misrepresenting some basic facts.

The editorial laments that biotech crops get bad press whereas organic crops, when something goes awry, seem to come away unscathed. Your example is the recent contamination of fresh spinach with the food pathogen Escherichia coli O157:H7, which led to numerous human illnesses and, up to now, four deaths. You insinuate that organic spinach was the carrier of the pathogen. That is not the case. The manufacturing codes from the contaminated bags of spinach have, to date, all been from conventionally and not organically grown spinach. The conventionally grown spinach was packaged at the same warehouse as Earthbound Farm's organic spinach1.

You go on to decry that no one has pointed out that “the combinations of 'organic' and 'spinach' [are] simply a time-bomb waiting to go off.” You provide absolutely no evidence for this radical claim. I would expect more substance and less hyperbole from a scientific journal. The problem of E. coli O157:H7 contamination is complex. The largest known reservoir of these pathogens is the colon of cattle. When cattle are fed large portions of grain—as is the case in feedlots and large factory farms—both the number of E. coli and their acid resistance rise significantly2, 3, 4. This increases the likelihood that pathogenic E. coli—including O157:H7—will survive and reproduce. Perhaps 30–50% of grain-fed cattle harbor E. coli O157:H7. Because the strain is acid resistant, if it contaminates uncooked food it survives the acid environment of human stomachs, which normally kills most bacteria, and then can cause serious illness.

Manure and runoff from factory farms and feedlots can easily pollute streams and groundwater—water used to irrigate those huge vegetable farms in California that produce most of the produce for the United States, including fresh spinach. The US Food and Drug Administration sees contamination of irrigation water supplies as a primary means of spreading E. coli O157:H7 and warned California growers about this danger in a letter in November 2005 (ref. 5). Factory farming and concentration of the food supply is the issue here, not organic food. Your editorial got it wrong.

In fact, researchers studying E. coli O157:H7 found that when cattle feed was shifted from grain to forage (hay or silage), both the pathogen population in the cattle and the bacterial acid resistance dropped drastically2, 3, 4. Although it may be hard to swallow, you're probably much safer eating a hamburger made from grass-fed beef slaughtered in a local slaughter house and topped with a piece of lettuce from your neighbor's organic farm that used the grass-fed cow's composted manure as a fertilizer than you are eating products of all-American industrial agriculture.

I would agree with your editorial's conclusion that “there is a basic truth that bears repetition: and that is that basic truths bear repetition.” The basic truth I missed in your editorial is that the recent food contamination has to do with systemic problems in conventional industrial food production and processing. Don't blame organic farming.


Continued...

Ya that makes sense, that's how I've always understood it.

 

[James Madison]

Unless your position really is that there is nothing "totally alien to Earth" about splicing fish and corn together in a laboratory...

You're not splicing fish and corn together in a laboratory. God...dammit...

All life on Earth uses DNA to store genetic information for transcription and replication. DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is a specific compound. This is no such thing as 'fish dna' or 'corn dna'; there is only 'DNA'. Same formula, same structure, same deoxyribose backbone, same phosphate groups, same nitrogenous bases, same...EVERYTHING. The only difference is how those four bases are arranged in sequence, which is hardly unique to a single species. You might have...

Fish DNA: AAATTCGCGATTA
Corn DNA: AAATTCGCCATTA

NOT

Fish DNA:AAATTCGCFISHATTA
Corn DNA:AAATTCGCCORNATTA

Science is tough, especially if don't do your homework.

 

[James Madison]

It doesn't have to be 50/50 to produce what are effectively alien proteins that human beings are simply not meant to ingest.

Proteins are denatured by saliva and stomach acid. If what you're saying is true, then if I eat something made of BT Corn and place, say, a few skin scrapings on a leaf, and then if butterfly larva eat that leaf, they should die. But they don't. Just like instead of feeding the caterpillars, if I eat the leaf myself, I don't turn green because I'm producing chlorophyl. It's just not how proteins work.

I also have to laugh at fat-ass Americans complaining about not having enough choices when it comes to food and wanting to ban GMOs, when little kids in Ethiopia are starving to death because their organic crops can't grow, but the GMO crops can, yet they don't want those according to you because they aren't natural.

 

[Petar]

You're not splicing fish and corn together in a laboratory. God...dammit...

All life on Earth uses DNA to store genetic information for transcription and replication. DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is a specific compound. This is no such thing as 'fish dna' or 'corn dna'; there is only 'DNA'. Same formula, same structure, same deoxyribose backbone, same phosphate groups, same nitrogenous bases, same...EVERYTHING. The only difference is how those four bases are arranged in sequence, which is hardly unique to a single species. You might have...

Fish DNA: AAATTCGCGATTA
Corn DNA: AAATTCGCCATTA

NOT

Fish DNA:AAATTCGCFISHATTA
Corn DNA:AAATTCGCCORNATTA

Science is tough, especially if don't do your homework.

What I was referring to:

What I wasn't referring to:

You would have to be pretty dumb to wanna eat food that may as well come from Mars.

 

[dannno]

when little kids in Ethiopia are starving to death because their organic crops can't grow, but the GMO crops can, yet they don't want those according to you because they aren't natural.

Hahahahahahahah.. where did you read that??

You need to take some sustainable agriculture classes. There are plenty of natural ways to conserve water, fight pests and weeds that don't require GMO crops with added chemicals that are actually more expensive.. Didn't you read the article posted recently about how a lot of US farmers are switching to non-GMO crops because the GMO crops produce less yield and are more expensive?

 

[James Madison]

What I was referring to:

Yeah...

If I gave you two sequences and you had to choose which was GMO which was organic, would you be able to?

 

[James Madison]

Hahahahahahahah.. where did you read that??

You need to take some sustainable agriculture classes. There are plenty of natural ways to conserve water, fight pests and weeds that don't require GMO crops with added chemicals that are actually more expensive.. Didn't you read the article posted recently about how a lot of US farmers are switching to non-GMO crops because the GMO crops produce less yield and are more expensive?

Ok, then. So how do impoverished third worlders plan to conserve water, fight pests, and kill weeds?

 

[Petar]

Yeah...

If I gave you two sequences and you had to choose which was GMO which was organic, would you be able to?

And that is supposed to prove that splicing fish genes with corn is something that should be considered natural and part of this Earth?

 

[Petar]

I mean I've watched a lot of fucked up porn in my day but I have yet to see a piece of corn banging a fish...

 

[dannno]

Ok, then. So how do impoverished third worlders plan to conserve water, fight pests, and kill weeds?

Permaculture is a branch of ecological design, ecological engineering, and environmental design that develops sustainable architecture and self-maintained agricultural systems modeled from natural ecosystems.

"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labor; and of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single product system."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture

Go on youtube and search permaculture, or for example 'permaculture desert' and you can see how you can grow agriculture in a place where there is extremely limited water supply.

 

[James Madison]

And that is supposed to prove that splicing fish genes with corn is something that should be considered natural and part of this Earth?

Fish and corn are natural. Humans are natural. If a virus infected a corn cell and then infected a fish cell, transferring DNA from one cell to the other in the process, would that be natural?

 

[James Madison]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture

Go on youtube and search permaculture, or for example 'permaculture desert' and you can see how you can grow agriculture in a place where there is extremely limited water supply.

Yes, wikipedia and youtube videos. Excellent and persuasive argument.

What you're proposing is unrealistic because it requires major invests of both time and capital, a luxury that most of the world's poor simply do not have. Again, you can do it on a small scale in a wealthy, first-world nation, but anything else becomes very difficult as you get poorer and larger in scale. And by the way, all of this anti-GMO fear-mongering is basically the definition of a "First World Problem".

 

[Petar]

Fish and corn are natural. Humans are natural. If a virus infected a corn cell and then infected a fish cell, transferring DNA from one cell to the other in the process, would that be natural?

Yeah.

Seems like it would be an anomaly though.

Tell me again why we are supposed to be focused on producing anomalies on an industrial scale???

 

[James Madison]

Yeah.

Seems like it would be an anomaly though.

Tell me again why we are supposed to be focused on producing anomalies on an industrial scale.

Because there's a market for it. And if it can do some good, what's the problem?

 

[Petar]

Because there's a market for it. And if it can do some good, what's the problem?

Principally because those genetic anomalies are eventually going to create corresponding health anomalies for the people who are consuming those synthetic organisms.