Why Aren¹t G.M.O. Foods Labeled?

Savant I'm not. Savant isn't required.

How do I know that size and yield are genetic traits? Because of the numerous times we've already selected for yield.

The Wikipedia article cites apparent instances for GMO improving yield.

I'm guessing that you are unconditionally opposed to any use of GMO. Is that why you won't concede that GMO _might_ induce a beneficial trait?

Seems like slippery ice to me. Either it can induce change or it can't. I think you're mostly opposed to GMO because you worry that it will induce change. Too much change.

To also hold that it can't induce any beneficial change doesn't seem rational.

Reply to
despen
Loading thread data ...

I will concede it might induce a beneficial trait (but so far unproven). I will also concede that it may be harmful for humans to eat (See Arpad Pusztai, and StarLink corn).

Why doesn't it bother you that we are all the guinea pigs here?

Yes, too much change to the environment, and to those who consume GMO products.

A free/fair market can't exist without sellers and buyers having the same information.

You responded to #5. How about #1. #2, #3, #4, and #6?

The problems with GMOs are multiple.

1) An antibiotic is attached to the genes that are to be inserted. This allows for identification of GMO cells in a petrie dish. It also allows bacteria to develop a resistance to that antibiotic, making it worthless in the treatment of a bacterial disease.

2) The cauliflower mosaic virus is attached to the genes that are to be inserted. The cauliflower mosaic virus is the activator that turns on the inserted gene. More than 98% of the human genome does not encode protein sequences. Some of these genes are for suppressed evolutionary traits such as gills, some could be dormant diseases. These genes are also susceptible to being activated by the cauliflower mosaic virus.

3) The spliceosome (a complex of specialized RNA and protein subunits) from the host cell may not recognize a protein from the injected genes and attach it to other proteins, thereby creating an allergen. This appears to be the case with GMO potatoes created by Arpad Pusztai at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland. He was tying to modify the lecithin in the potatoes, which he did, but the potatoes gave lab rats lesions in their digestive systems, which lead to death.

4) GMO Bt corn (StarLink) kills monarch butterflies. Round Up Ready crops allow more glyphosate to be used to suppress weeds, but it also severely damages the soil biota, triggers over 40 plant diseases, and endangers human and animal health.

5) GMOs don't produce larger crops. (Ignore this for the sake of argument)

6) Then there is the matter of a recent recent CBS/NYT poll that found 87 percent of consumers want GMOs them labeled.

Further reading: Against GMOs "Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating" by Jeffrey M. Smith

and

For GMOs "Mendel in the Kitchen: A Scientist's View of Genetically Modified Food" by Nina V. Fedoroff and Nancy Marie Brown

(both are available at better libraries near you)

Why don't you address the rest of the problems, hmmm?

- Billy

Reply to
Billy

=B9re not listed.

=C2=B3different.=C2=B2

=B9 is so wary that

ies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, thos= e who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending mone= y alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scient= ists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any tr= ue sense.=C2=A0 Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross = of iron.

Still not sure what a GMO is but thank you for the information

Reply to
Big Country

Thanks for the INfo

Reply to
Big Country

You can breed salmon genes into a tomato with selective breeding? Take longer indeed, salmon and tomatoes sprang from eukaryotic cells, which evolved 1.6­2.1 billion years ago, and developed along completely different lines (Plant Kingdom, Animal Kingdom).

Just remember, there have been NO feeding trials. We are the guinea pigs. No one knows if a particular GMO is good. We do know that Arpad Pusztai's GM potatoes killed lab rats.

Reply to
Billy

...

They transfer individual genes. I don't see why not.

Maybe you could get a tomato to produce fish oil?

Yep, but that's why GMO is so cool, we won't have to wait for a billion years to get our fish oil tomatoes.

:)

Reply to
despen

Aside from everything else there is the issue of pattens. Sure you can get your omega 3 rich tomato but it will cost you. Control of the food supply will be a police duty.

Now back to Bladerunner or was it some Heston movie.

Reply to
Bill who putters

Soylent Green? And book control the duty of the fire dept.

Reply to
Billy

Still not sure what a GMO is but thank you for the information

GMO= genetically modified organism

Reply to
Steve Peek

Just continue the point I was trying to make, when plant breeders select one plant because it has a desirable trait, for example, it grows faster, what they are really doing is genetically modifying the plant. The offspring will contain the desirable gene.

This has been going on for thousands of years with plants and animals.

GMO speeds up the process because scientists use recombinant DNA technology which actually extracts genes from one species and inserts those genes into another species.

So "normal" breeding relies on randomly occurring change and GMO speeds up the process by picking specific changes.

The way the public reacts to this is that they see a Frankenstein in the making. Fortunately, scientists recognize the danger and take steps to minimize the problem. The same danger is present with "normal" breeding. It's just a matter of degree.

Reply to
despen

The problems with GMOs are multiple.

There is no relationship to normal breeding. No matter how many times that lie is told, it won't make it the truth.

Breeding for size is simply preferentially cultivating the larger organism. On the other hand, giving people composite eyes from a fly, or giving tomatoes protein from fish is beyond normal.

Despen has not responded to the first four points below.

1) An antibiotic is attached to the genes that are to be inserted. This allows for identification of GMO cells in a petrie dish. It also allows bacteria to develop a resistance to that antibiotic, making it worthless in the treatment of a bacterial disease. 2) The cauliflower mosaic virus is attached to the genes that are to be inserted. The cauliflower mosaic virus is the activator that turns on the inserted gene. More than 98% of the human genome does not encode protein sequences (junk DNA). Some of these genes are for suppressed evolutionary traits such as gills, some could be dormant diseases. These genes are also susceptible to being activated by the cauliflower mosaic virus. 3) The spliceosome (a complex of specialized RNA and protein subunits) from the host cell may not recognize a protein from the injected genes and attach it to other proteins, thereby creating an unique proteins which may be allergens.

This appears to be the case with GMO potatoes created by Arpad Pusztai at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland. He was tying to modify the lecithin in the potatoes, which he did, but the potatoes gave lab rats lesions in their digestive systems, which lead to death (which, IIRC, had nothing to do with the lecithin).

[In 1995 the Arpad Puzstai began research on genetically modified potatoes containing the GNA lectin gene from the snowdrop plant.[2] His group fed rats on raw and cooked genetically modified potatoes, using Desiree Red potatoes as controls. In 1998 Arpad Puzstai said in an interview on a World in Action programme that his group had observed damage to the intestines and immune systems of rats fed the genetically modified potatoes. He also said

"If I had the choice I would certainly not eat it",

and that "I find it's very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs".[4]]

4) GMO Bt corn (StarLink) kills monarch butterflies. Round Up Ready crops allow more glyphosate to be used to suppress weeds, but it also severely damages the soil biota, triggers over 40 plant diseases, and endangers human and animal health. 5) GMOs don't produce larger crops. 6) Then there is the matter of a recent recent CBS/NYT poll that found 87 percent of consumers want GMOs them labeled so that they can make an informed choice about what they eat. Arpad Pusztai, a recombinant geneticist agrees with them (see #3 above).

Other than that, there isn't anything wrong with "Genetically Modified Organisms" (GMOs) that we know of, yet.

Reply to
Billy

The whole idea of saving the best for the next generation of seeds resides on a delicate thread . Seed viability can be lost in a few years if GMO's interlope. Control of viable seeds is removed from the end users and placed in the hands of a few corporations. I wonder how many GMO seeds are deposited the Norwegian Seed Bank? I'd guess none and wonder why.

formatting link

Reply to
Bill who putters

I think you need to re-read the thread where I agreed that these are all legitimate issues.

I don't want to look now but I think you commented that you were happy I agreed.

Any alteration in genes is dangerous. In many cases they lead to the previous occupier of the ecological niche being removed. Ie, they go extinct.

It's a matter of opinion as to whether that's a good thing.

Reply to
despen

Good guess:

formatting link
2/3 of the way down.

Since they only have about a third of all current crops I guess they think they don't need them. Of course the GMO companies have their own seed banks.

Reply to
despen

In article , Billy wrote:

Singing in the rain Just singing in the rain. I'm happy again. Yada Yada. Who wants a label besides me?

...........................................................

formatting link
Report 21/02/11 Emergency! Pathogen New to Science Found in Roundup Ready GM Crops? USDA senior scientist sends ³emergency² warning to US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on a new plant pathogen in Roundup Ready GM soybean and corn that may be responsible for high rates of infertility and spontaneous abortions in livestock Dr. Mae-Wan Ho Please distribute widely and forward to your elected representatives

An open letter appeared on the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance founded and run by Judith McGeary to save family farms in the US [1, 2].  The letter, written by Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University, to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, warns of a pathogen ³new to science² discovered by ³a team of senior plant and animal scientists². Huber says it should be treated as an ³emergency¹¹, as it could result in ³a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies.² The letter appeared to have been written before Vilsack announced his decision to authorize unrestricted commercial planting of GM alfalfa on

1 February, in the hope of convincing the Secretary of Agriculture to impose a moratorium instead on deregulation of Roundup Ready (RR) crops.   The new pathogen appears associated with serious pervasive diseases in plants - sudden death syndrome in soybean and Goss' wilt in corn ­ but its suspected effects on livestock is alarming.  Huber refers to ³recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.² This could be the worst nightmare of genetic engineering that some scientists including me have been warning for years [3] (see Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare, ISIS publication): the unintended creation of new pathogens through assisted horizontal gene transfer and recombination. Huber writes in closing: ³I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.² The complete letter is reproduced below. Dear Secretary Vilsack: A team of senior plant and animal scientists have recently brought to my attention the discovery of an electron microscopic pathogen that appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings. Based on a review of the data, it is widespread, very serious, and is in much higher concentrations in Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans and corn-suggesting a link with the RR gene or more likely the presence of Roundup. This organism appears NEW to science!  This is highly sensitive information that could result in a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies. On the other hand, this new organism may already be responsible for significant harm (see below). My colleagues and I are therefore moving our investigation forward with speed and discretion, and seek assistance from the USDA and other entities to identify the pathogen's source, prevalence, implications, and remedies. We are informing the USDA of our findings at this early stage, specifically due to your pending decision regarding approval of RR alfalfa. Naturally, if either the RR gene or Roundup itself is a promoter or co-factor of this pathogen, then such approval could be a calamity. Based on the current evidence, the only reasonable action at this time would be to delay deregulation at least until sufficient data has exonerated the RR system, if it does. For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman's terms, it should be treated as an emergency. A diverse set of researchers working on this problem have contributed various pieces of the puzzle, which together presents the following disturbing scenario:

Unique Physical Properties This previously unknown organism is only visible under an electron microscope (36,000X), with an approximate size range equal to a medium size virus. It is able to reproduce and appears to be a micro-fungal-like organism. If so, it would be the first such micro-fungus ever identified. There is strong evidence that this infectious agent promotes diseases of both plants and mammals, which is very rare.

Pathogen Location and Concentration It is found in high concentrations in Roundup Ready soybean meal and corn, distillers meal, fermentation feed products, pig stomach contents, and pig and cattle placentas.

Linked with Outbreaks of Plant Disease The organism is prolific in plants infected with two pervasive diseases that are driving down yields and farmer income-sudden death syndrome (SDS) in soy, and Goss' wilt in corn. The pathogen is also found in the fungal causative agent of SDS (Fusarium solani fsp glycines). Implicated in Animal Reproductive Failure Laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of this organism in a wide variety of livestock that have experienced spontaneous abortions and infertility. Preliminary results from ongoing research have also been able to reproduce abortions in a clinical setting. The pathogen may explain the escalating frequency of infertility and spontaneous abortions over the past few years in US cattle, dairy, swine, and horse operations. These include recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.  For example, 450 of 1,000 pregnant heifers fed wheatlege experienced spontaneous abortions. Over the same period, another 1,000 heifers from the same herd that were raised on hay had no abortions. High concentrations of the pathogen were confirmed on the wheatlege, which likely had been under weed management using glyphosate.

Recommendations In summary, because of the high titer of this new animal pathogen in Roundup Ready crops, and its association with plant and animal diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions, we request USDA's participation in a multi-agency investigation, and an immediate moratorium on the deregulation of RR crops until the causal/predisposing relationship with glyphosate and/or RR plants can be ruled out as a threat to crop and animal production and human health. It is urgent to examine whether the side-effects of glyphosate use may have facilitated the growth of this pathogen, or allowed it to cause greater harm to weakened plant and animal hosts. It is well-documented that glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases; it dismantles plant defenses by chelating vital nutrients; and it reduces the bioavailability of nutrients in feed, which in turn can cause animal disorders. To properly evaluate these factors, we request access to the relevant USDA data. I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.

Sincerely,

COL (Ret.) Don M. Huber Emeritus Professor, Purdue University APS Coordinator, USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS) References

  1. ³Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause Animal Miscarriages², Jill Richardson, La Vida Locavore, 18 February 2011
    formatting link
    ³Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause Animal Miscarriages², 18 February 2011,
    formatting link
    Ho MW. Genetic Engineering Dream of Nightmare? The Brave New World of Bad Science and Big Business, Third World Network, Gateway Books, MacMillan, Continuum, Penang, Malaysia, Bath, UK, Dublin, Ireland, New York, USA, 1998, 1999, 2007 (reprint with extended Introduction).
    formatting link
Reply to
Bill who putters

+1

Gary Woods AKA K2AHC- PGP key on request, or at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic Zone 5/4 in upstate New York, 1420' elevation. NY WO G

Reply to
Gary Woods

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.