Do you know what genetic modification is?

givprayz
givprayz Posts: 328
edited September 27 in Food and Nutrition
I am a little sick of seeing genetic modification tied in with antibiotics, pesticides, artificial colors and trans fats. Humans have been genetically modifying plants and animals since the first hunter-gatherers settled down to raise crops! It is the reason we have been able to grow the population of this planet to the levels we have today.

Granted, in the past, the genetic modifications were hit-or-miss, hard won, and long-in-development, but they were still what brought native corn from a pod not much bigger than a head of wheat to the big juicy cobs we ate as children. Now we are able to find the exact genetic code that allows a certain species to have a certain positive trait, to lift that code out and place it into an otherwise superior species, and create an even better, hardier, more nutritious, or better transported product.

If we stop genetic modifications, we will need to use more pesticides, more fertilizer, more antibiotics. If we insert genetic code that prevents pest infestation, we raise vegetables that haven't been coated with DDT or other known carcinogens. If we use genes that keep cattle healthy, we stop injecting them with antibiotics that are in large part the cause of our "super-bugs". And if we genetically create fruit that can travel long distances remaining fresh, then we can feed a world that has outgrown it's current resources.

Organic farming is lovely, and I do it myself as much as possible, but this world CANNOT feed itself on organics alone! If we tried, famine would grip every nation, and the population of the world would likely drop to about 30% of it's current level in under 3 years. The only way we can hope to decrease the use of dangerous chemicals in any significant manner is to develop crops and herds that have natural resistance to pests. The only way we can develop those species is to use our ever-growing knowledge of genetics to create them.

The fear-mongering related to GOM is outrageous. No studies have ever found genetically modified food to be dangerous to humans. To the contrary, over 80% of corn is genetically modified and we have been eating it for years. Somewhere around 45% of wheat is genetically modified, and American wheat feeds the world.

Please understand an issue before jumping on board with it. If you agree pesticides are bad, and antibiotics in meat are not healthy, then you should support genetic modification. Great if you can afford organics, but what about the 90% of the world that can't? If you want healthy food (and environments) for all people, not just the wealthy, then support genetic modification as our only hope for a clean food supply for all people.

Thank you for reading my little rant, and please learn more about the viability of organics and of genetic modification.

Replies

  • Avalonis
    Avalonis Posts: 1,540 Member
    Well said, I've been saying much the same for years.
  • EDesq
    EDesq Posts: 1,527 Member
    I am a little sick of seeing genetic modification tied in with antibiotics, pesticides, artificial colors and trans fats. Humans have been genetically modifying plants and animals since the first hunter-gatherers settled down to raise crops! It is the reason we have been able to grow the population of this planet to the levels we have today.

    Granted, in the past, the genetic modifications were hit-or-miss, hard won, and long-in-development, but they were still what brought native corn from a pod not much bigger than a head of wheat to the big juicy cobs we ate as children. Now we are able to find the exact genetic code that allows a certain species to have a certain positive trait, to lift that code out and place it into an otherwise superior species, and create an even better, hardier, more nutritious, or better transported product.

    If we stop genetic modifications, we will need to use more pesticides, more fertilizer, more antibiotics. If we insert genetic code that prevents pest infestation, we raise vegetables that haven't been coated with DDT or other known carcinogens. If we use genes that keep cattle healthy, we stop injecting them with antibiotics that are in large part the cause of our "super-bugs". And if we genetically create fruit that can travel long distances remaining fresh, then we can feed a world that has outgrown it's current resources.

    Organic farming is lovely, and I do it myself as much as possible, but this world CANNOT feed itself on organics alone! If we tried, famine would grip every nation, and the population of the world would likely drop to about 30% of it's current level in under 3 years. The only way we can hope to decrease the use of dangerous chemicals in any significant manner is to develop crops and herds that have natural resistance to pests. The only way we can develop those species is to use our ever-growing knowledge of genetics to create them.

    The fear-mongering related to GOM is outrageous. No studies have ever found genetically modified food to be dangerous to humans. To the contrary, over 80% of corn is genetically modified and we have been eating it for years. Somewhere around 45% of wheat is genetically modified, and American wheat feeds the world.

    Please understand an issue before jumping on board with it. If you agree pesticides are bad, and antibiotics in meat are not healthy, then you should support genetic modification. Great if you can afford organics, but what about the 90% of the world that can't? If you want healthy food (and environments) for all people, not just the wealthy, then support genetic modification as our only hope for a clean food supply for all people.

    Thank you for reading my little rant, and please learn more about the viability of organics and of genetic modification.

    Agree...and who wants to pick seeds out of grapes and water-mellon anyway! LOL!

    It's a lot of "status" seekers who criticize others for NOT eating "organic." There is NO true "organic" unless they use purified water to water their crops and plant in sterilized soil and kept from the air People breathe and use seeds from Pre-Farming Days. You know, those "organic lovers/genetic mods" really enjoy MICRO-Greens and grain feed beef and pork...All of which have been genetically mod/breed for "Our" consumption!
  • javamonster
    javamonster Posts: 272 Member
    I love rants that are intelligent! :happy: There is so much misinformation and ignorance out there.

    When I was in school I worked one summer at the university (U of Guelph, Ontario Ag College) for the department of Crop Science - for a prof who did risk assessment. One of my co-workers said in one class they had gone to the local grocery store and bought produce to check it for GMOs. This was eleven years ago, and they were testing everyday things like broccoli and tomatoes - all of which had been genetically modified. On the one hand, okay, so maybe we think we should have that information, but on the other, we *have* been eating the stuff for years now, and there is no evidence to support it is causing us harm. Processed foods are far more harmful to us than genetically modifed ones.
  • rlysrh
    rlysrh Posts: 244
    Well said! I think most people must not even think about what GM means, because everyone seems against it for no particular reason. GM food often means BETTER food rather than worse food, its not an evil chemical or anything like that, it just gives us bigger, better, stronger crops.
  • chris0912
    chris0912 Posts: 242 Member
    the population of the world would likely drop to about 30% of it's current level in under 3 years

    would this be a bad thing? i don't want to come off sounding callous (it's certainly not intended that way); i'm a very empathetic person. of course, starvation is horrible. but a lot (note that i did not say all) of the environmental problems we're facing are due to overpopulation and longer life-spans of human beings. it's a double-edged sword. produce more food to feed everyone and damage the earth further or protect the earth from further damage and allow survival of the fittest to take its course.

    i'm in the process of reading the vertical farm by dr. ****son despommier which is all about getting rid of the big corporate farms (that have killed the soil and are in the process of killing the oceans through run-off) and bringing greenhouse farming into the cities, so everyone has access to healthier (pesticide-free) local produce. one of his biggest arguments in favor of vertical farming is land usage. the current population (6.8 billion) uses cropland the size of s. america. throw in food animals and we are using 80% of dry land for food production. by 2050, the population is expected to be 9.5 billion and will be in need of additional new arable cropland the size of brazil, which does not exist.
  • IsMollyReallyHungry
    IsMollyReallyHungry Posts: 15,385 Member
    Alrighty then.......:-) You learn something new everyday! Interesting rant indeed.:wink:
  • cupotee
    cupotee Posts: 181 Member
    First of all, let me say that I absolutely agree with you. Without genetic modification, diabetics would still be shooting themselves up with coarse insulin extracted from blended cow pancreas, instead of pure insulin produced by HG-transformed bacteria.

    I think the argument of people who actually understand GMOs, as well as some scientists, is the risk of spreading these organisms into the wild. What if GM corn dominates domestic vegetation or damages the soil irreversibly? We don't know. There's also the whole argument about widespread use of antibacteria in cattle promoting microbe resistance (but, that's what universities have an army of grad students slaving away in their labs for right?).

    But like you said, unless 30% of the population willingly commits suicide, we have mouths to feed. And this looks to be the only way to do it.
  • Lucy1Green
    Lucy1Green Posts: 9 Member
    I
  • Lucy1Green
    Lucy1Green Posts: 9 Member
    x
  • a_stronger_steph
    a_stronger_steph Posts: 434 Member
    This is refreshing!
  • primaverapvr
    primaverapvr Posts: 14 Member
    I'm sorry but you're wrong. You're confusing gross pollination, which is what gave us the the agriculture boost your talking about, with genetically modified foods. GMO's is when scientists alter the DNA of the seed/animal, this type of human interference wasn't possible even 20 years ago. This isn't the same as breeding a cross between two strawberries to make a bigger more stable strawberry, which can take years to perfect. or crossing a plum with an apricot to make a pluot. GMOs are when introduce something completely outside the nature of that organism's DNA, like resistance to a specific company's fertilizer so it kills the everything but that plant, this is what people are nervous about. I'm not saying that GMOs are necessarily wrong but i think we don't know enough about them to release then in to the wild because we don't know how they effect the natural organisms out there, they haven't been around long enough for us the really know what the long term effects are.

    I'm all for rant.....when you actually know what you're talking about.
  • girlinahat
    girlinahat Posts: 2,956 Member
    I'm sorry but you're wrong. You're confusing gross pollination, which is what gave us the the agriculture boost your talking about, with genetically modified foods. GMO's is when scientists alter the DNA of the seed/animal, this type of human interference wasn't possible even 20 years ago. This isn't the same as breeding a cross between two strawberries to make a bigger more stable strawberry, which can take years to perfect. or crossing a plum with an apricot to make a pluot. GMOs are when introduce something completely outside the nature of that organism's DNA, like resistance to a specific company's fertilizer so it kills the everything but that plant, this is what people are nervous about. I'm not saying that GMOs are necessarily wrong but i think we don't know enough about them to release then in to the wild because we don't know how they effect the natural organisms out there, they haven't been around long enough for us the really know what the long term effects are.

    This is my issue with GM - that it is speeding up a process without necessarily considering the multiple effects the changes in process could have. When plants mutate over time to survive, (or get cross pollinated by farmers to get the best yield), the surrounding environment changes as well - insects change to be able to keep up with the changes in the plantlife, and so on up the food chain - it's survival of the fittext (for the purpose). One of the issues with GM foods is that the changes are made with a specific end which doesn't take into account the more holistic and total environment around it.

    The second issue with GM is darker. The only reason for a company to spend billions on developing better stronger plants to feed the world is monetary. The only way to make plants economically beneficial is to retain control of the production of the plant. And that means creating sterile plants. This has two effects - firstly, the farmers have to buy seeds from the company producing the GM crop, rather than setting aside some of their seed store they produce themselves. GM seeds are considerably more expensive than normal seeds. NO company creating GM crops is in it to save the world.

    Secondly, lack of diversification. ALL the plants from the GM crop will be the same, and unable to mutate to stave off other challenges around it. Change one thing, and unless you change every other thing around it, it will eventually be subsumed by the environment around it. Not before causing untold damage however.

    Sadly farming is more about politics that about relationships with the land.
  • givprayz
    givprayz Posts: 328
    I'm sorry but you're wrong. You're confusing gross pollination, which is what gave us the the agriculture boost your talking about, with genetically modified foods. GMO's is when scientists alter the DNA of the seed/animal, this type of human interference wasn't possible even 20 years ago. This isn't the same as breeding a cross between two strawberries to make a bigger more stable strawberry, which can take years to perfect. or crossing a plum with an apricot to make a pluot. GMOs are when introduce something completely outside the nature of that organism's DNA, like resistance to a specific company's fertilizer so it kills the everything but that plant, this is what people are nervous about. I'm not saying that GMOs are necessarily wrong but i think we don't know enough about them to release then in to the wild because we don't know how they effect the natural organisms out there, they haven't been around long enough for us the really know what the long term effects are.

    I'm all for rant.....when you actually know what you're talking about.




    I absolutely know what I am talking about. Look into it. Most corn and half of wheat is already GMO. We have had GMO on our tables for over 15 years, and you are a fool if you believe it takes years to create these products. College laboratories are creating new strains every year.

    And to the next poster, yes there is monetary gain to be had by creating these modifications. There is monetary gain to be had in everything people do! That's why they do it. But it would be beyond stupid to create a modification that caused greater harm than good. Sure there is a chance something could become a problem, but I can't see it being any worse than the introduction of zebra mussels to Lake Erie, killer Bees to the southern US, cudzu vine, Emerald Ash Borers, or any number of other "natural" invasive species. It is still a better idea to tweak the DNA to get pest resistance than it is to spread chemicals.

    I am all for mod's that will end the use of antibiotics in our foods. I am much more afraid of the super-bugs than of killer corn.
This discussion has been closed.