NationStates Jolt Archive

Genetically modified Organism or GMOs have been around for a while. They have been used to increase plants resistance to pests and viruses, to increase shelf life, and many other things. Many of us have eaten GMOs and never known about it. They are present in numerous foods today and are not labeled as GMOs. So I was wonder what people's thoughts on GMOs.

MWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!

I can feel the mutations already!!!!

Seriously though, if it increases production without any harm to me, then they can't be half bad. or 1/4 bad. or bad at all.

They are the wave of the future, with far more food with far less effort. And who knows what lies ahead? It may be the basis for future medicine or something.
Anyhow, I also hear that they are modifying animal genes. There are some wacky ideas that would be good if they ever got off the drawing board, like self-sheering sheep, or featherless chickens.

or featherless chickens.
Wouldn't they get cold or something? :D

Considering that we've used GMO to produce medicines at a faster rate than before it cant be all bad.

When I first saw this I thought it said, Genetically Modified Orgazisms, 'Hell yeah! I'm for it!'

Genetically modified Organism or GMOs have been around for a while. They have been used to increase plants resistance to pests and viruses, to increase shelf life, and many other things. Many of us have eaten GMOs and never known about it. They are present in numerous foods today and are not labeled as GMOs. So I was wonder what people's thoughts on GMOs.

Talk about a biased first post...

Seriously, though, I agree that most of the time GMOs are very useful, though people should be careful they don't crossbreed with wild plants.

When I first saw this I thought it said, Genetically Modified Orgazisms, 'Hell yeah! I'm for it!'

That's what I thought too, except I spelled it orgasms.

Talk about a biased first post...

Seriously, though, I agree that most of the time GMOs are very useful, though people should be careful they don't crossbreed with wild plants.

Biased, how so?

Talk about a biased first post...

Seriously, though, I agree that most of the time GMOs are very useful, though people should be careful they don't crossbreed with wild plants.

People can crossbreed with wild plants?

That's news. :p

I'm opposed to GMOs, more for economic reasons than health reasons. Right now, food prices are reasonable because nobody can claim intellectual property rights to an ear of corn or a stalk of wheat. Throw GMOs in the mix and suddenly, you have brand name produce.

What makes it worse is cross-pollination. Not because you don't know what's going to happen, but suddenly because your corn contains genetic material designed by Monsanto, Monsanto is going to turn around and sue you for "crop theft".

There's way too many IP issues to straighten out before GMOs become a reasonable way to go.

This debate really ended about 15 years ago. Nearly all food now has some GMO content. The exception is some minor growers that advertise breeds or cultivers that were raised by grandpa. Plants and animals that don't resist or tolerate anything and have far less production.

Most of the time these changes are within the species that is being modified. In other words, just a faster way of making new varieties without the whims of nature during normal reproduction. However, once the genie is out of the bottle, it became easier to make "mules". Plants that have parts from different species. Most of these are made under consumer demand, such as seedless watermelons and red grapes (green seedless grapes were a natural change, one that wouldn't have survived under "survival of the fittest" if man had not saved it). Others are to add resistance to disease or tolerance to weather problems. This is not all bad. For instance, in order to have sweet corn without ear worms in the past, the farmer needed to spray every three days. Most sweet corn today has tight shucks that resist worms. The same is true of disease, fungus and other problems. If resistance or tolerance can be built into the seed a lot LESS chemicals need to
be used.

As stated by someone above, this is not without risk. If you don't believe in evolution there is no problem, but if you do, you realize that there is a risk of escape. Genes can find there way into the wild or into other domestic plants and animals.

Someone mentioned intelectual property. Yes, it does drive up the cost of seed. Farmers can no longer take wheat or soybeans from last year's crop and sell it for planting. But the ability to do this has been limited in most crops since the invention of hybridization. Farmers have accepted this drawback because the awards are so great.

From a cost of food viewpoint. It has driven down the cost of food because of supply and demand. Supply steadily rises driving down price. Even though seed costs more, the farmer uses less inputs in every other area. Less chemicals, water, fuel, weather loss, labor, etc.

This has gotten long but I've been in agriculture most of my life. I've ran a vegetable farm the last 15 years.

... but it gets creepy when the "scientists" start mixing genes of animals with plants, and inserting DNA from viruses into otherwise normal vegetables...
There is no control, and humanity is going to suffer for it. Soon.

... but it gets creepy when the "scientists" start mixing genes of animals with plants, and inserting DNA from viruses into otherwise normal vegetables...
There is no control, and humanity is going to suffer for it. Soon.
Do you fear The Bunny????
http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.thumbnail.jpg (http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html#gfpbunnyanchor)

I think that it is a good thing.
A better question would be,"If you distrust Genetic Modification, why?" The only diffverence between this and many foods is the method of modification. Many meats are hybridised from different breeds, cross pollenination (sp) occurs in nature why do people oppose GM foods

Natural mutations occur all the time. Some of these natural mutations resulted in higher crop yields. Seeds were collected from these and grown, so these natural mutations were selected for. We have been doing this since the start of agriculture, but we never knew what exactly the mutations were doing...gasp. At least with Genetic modification we know exactly what it is we are doing to the plants.
Nearly all genetic modfications are safe, but I would look at it on a gene by gene basis. They are proposing engineering plants to produce medicines. I tend to support this as well because it has potential of producing cheap drugs for the third world, but depending on what drugs you are manufacturing this could be dangerous. Except for the medicine example I would argue GM plants are actually safer. If they are pest resistant you don't have to cover them in chemicals that we allready know are dangerous. Did you know that certain fungus that may be growing on your unsprayed plants can be dangerous to you as well. Its the differnce between something that we can be fairly certain is safe (genetic modification) versus something we know is dangerous (chemicals).
The biggest fear that people have about genetically modified foods is allergic reaction to the modifications. This is just about the only fear that scientists take seriously. But this is true for non-modified foods as well. The first time you bite into anything you have to worry about allergic reactions. Some plants we eat everyday cause really strong allergies in people. If we created peanuts they would never be approved for human consumption. They would be considered too dangerous, but since they are naturally occuring we are okay with them.

Do you fear The Bunny????
http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html#gfpbunnyanchor (http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html#gfpbunnyanchor)

Very interesting link! Everybody should click on the rabbit. The rabbit (as the article says) has genes from a jellyfish!
Can't wait for the bacon-flavoured eggs... would save a lot of cooking time.

Genetically modified Organism or GMOs have been around for a while. They have been used to increase plants resistance to pests and viruses, to increase shelf life, and many other things. Many of us have eaten GMOs and never known about it. They are present in numerous foods today and are not labeled as GMOs. So I was wonder what people's thoughts on GMOs.

I don't trust GMO food. They tend to knock "useless" genes.

So a farmer can grow his GMO crop better than the non-GMO one, but if the gene to tolerate say higher temperatures is removed - then there's an issue. Your crop of GMO will die much faster when higher temperatures hit and since it's all you use - it's all gone. The non-GMO will still suffer but that "useless" gene will allow enough to survive for future use.

I think that it is a good thing.
A better question would be,"If you distrust Genetic Modification, why?" The only diffverence between this and many foods is the method of modification. Many meats are hybridised from different breeds, cross pollenination (sp) occurs in nature why do people oppose GM foods
There are those that oppose all science. Look at the evolution or not debates on this forum. Look at the stem cell opposition. If God didn't do it or if grandpa didn't have it, it must be bad and against God.

As I said above there are dangers of escape. But there are dangers in walking across the street.

... but it gets creepy when the "scientists" start mixing genes of animals with plants, and inserting DNA from viruses into otherwise normal vegetables...
There is no control, and humanity is going to suffer for it. Soon.

I don't think we need to be too worried about it yet. Most things probably won't have bad effects.

Now, when people start tampering with viruses, that's when you really have to get worried.

... but it gets creepy when the "scientists" start mixing genes of animals with plants, and inserting DNA from viruses into otherwise normal vegetables...
Well, that is basically the core of genetic modification.
What exactly is it that is creepy about it? If it is done correctly, the only thing that is taken from one organism and added to the other is the target trait or traits. It isn't like taking one gene from a potato and inserting it into an apple will create a monstrous potatapple.
There is no control,
On the contrary, if I have heard correctly, the testing is rather strict before one can allow a GMO for consumption and wide use.
and humanity is going to suffer for it. Soon.
I would make quite the opposite claim. I would say that hmanity stands to benefit immensely from genetic modification.
Hopefully one day soon we will be able to safely modify ourselves.

They are the wave of the future, with far more food with far less effort. And who knows what lies ahead? It may be the basis for future medicine or something.
Anyhow, I also hear that they are modifying animal genes. There are some wacky ideas that would be good if they ever got off the drawing board, like self-sheering sheep, or featherless chickens.


featherless chickens already exist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2000003.stm

featherless chickens already exist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2000003.stm
Oh God! They look terrible. Build special shelters for them so that our virgin eyes are immune to these monstrocities.

I don't think we need to be too worried about it yet. Most things probably won't have bad effects.

Now, when people start tampering with viruses, that's when you really have to get worried.

That's what I do. I tamper with viruses

Oh God! They look terrible. Build special shelters for them so that our virgin eyes are immune to these monstrocities.
They’re for eatin not for lookin.

It’s just speeding up the process that would have taken hundreds of years to do through selective breeding. I’m all for genetically modified food. The only people that could be against it for health reasons have been watching to much spider man.

God did a lowsy job, we can do it better.

Here's a story about goats with human genes that produce drugs.




http://www.biotech-info.net/high_tech_farm.html