The Big Picture: Feeding Edge

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 15 NEXT
 

Man, this show gets me thinking! Great work!

I knew he was going to mention carrots; I wasn't sure about cows though.
I would have gone with "white chickens" with their white eggs.

What Bob fails to point out is that the genetic modification their talking about... Involves the addition of animal genes to vegetables.

Kinda like how some guys try to impress the ladies by slipping a few veggies into their jeans.

MovieBob:
Feeding Edge

This week, Bob takes a bite out of "frankenfood."

Watch Video

When it comes right down to it, you're right. I think the problem is that people group everything in the "genetic engineering" field into one of two controversial categories:

1) Eugenics - the idea that we're going to "selectively breed" humans, as enforced by law, in an effort to remove certain diseases (and later, any 'undesirable' trait) from the gene pool. This line of discussion flirts with Godwin's Law, so we'll leave it at that.

2) Genetic tampering - Not just switching extant genes off and on, but introducing new traits... like a potato with lips. Amazing how one made of plastic is a timeless child's toy, while a real one with real lips is suddenly an abomination. This comes back to the old, "Man must not tamper in God's domain!" deal, but also comes back to our fear that someone is going to engineer an accidentally-apocalyptic supercritter (be it a hyper-locust or velociraptor)

So, basically, you can thank Gattaca and Jurassic Park for the fact that no one can say "genetic engineering" without being stuffed behind a tiny half-mustache and a Swastika (See? Godwin's Law!)

And ofcourse the Tragedy is that the only people who will see this...are smart educated escapists who don't believe this shite in the first place.

The whole time I watched this video, I was like "yeah, ok, what's your point. This is obvious." Then, I remembered that most people wouldn't find this obvious... and that made me sad...

Also: defibrillation can't bring people back to life. Frankenstein's thing was more post-mortem nervous stimulation.

Fan of the Show. I don't like chemicals and growth hormones. Things that don't have a long term FDA study. Things the U.S. citizens are testing for the rest of the world. If you look at our medical stats, it might give you reason for concern. Life expectancy in Costa Rica is greater than the United States. Not as many hero doctors, but not as many ailments.... When I hear genetically engineered food, I think of a cow with a third utter and DDT, not common sense selection. I'm not concerned with a 10lb carrot, just as long as its grown in a chemical free environment. mod the seeds all you want. I don't think the show differentiate between the two.

Totally loving the new series, Bob. Keep the good stuff coming.

dastardly:

MovieBob:
Feeding Edge

This week, Bob takes a bite out of "frankenfood."

Watch Video

When it comes right down to it, you're right. I think the problem is that people group everything in the "genetic engineering" field into one of two controversial categories:

1) Eugenics - the idea that we're going to "selectively breed" humans, as enforced by law, in an effort to remove certain diseases (and later, any 'undesirable' trait) from the gene pool. This line of discussion flirts with Godwin's Law, so we'll leave it at that.

2) Genetic tampering - Not just switching extant genes off and on, but introducing new traits... like a potato with lips. Amazing how one made of plastic is a timeless child's toy, while a real one with real lips is suddenly an abomination. This comes back to the old, "Man must not tamper in God's domain!" deal, but also comes back to our fear that someone is going to engineer an accidentally-apocalyptic supercritter (be it a hyper-locust or velociraptor)

So, basically, you can thank Gattaca and Jurassic Park for the fact that no one can say "genetic engineering" without being stuffed behind a tiny half-mustache and a Swastika (See? Godwin's Law!)

I'm for genetic enhancement, but it needs to be strictly controlled. The problem with you post is that the thing people are actually objecting to IS the INSERTION OF GENES, i.e., ARTIFICIAL GENETIC ENGINEERING AND NOT JUST SELECTIVE BREEDING.

Companies are actually doing this, and it is not completely safe because we don't understand the technology enough now to predict all the possible outcomes. The answer isn't to give into fear, but to invest more in research so we CAN understand it, and to have heavy oversight in place until we have done so.

The only real dangers are unpredicted allergies and stuff like prions (which are essentially just messed up proteins that cause mad cow disease). The other danger has to do with corporate greed and copyright law, but that doesn't have to do with the technology as much as the legal system needing to adapt.

Dody16:

Seriously, if there was a problem with it, a lot more people would have died because of it by now, probably including my self.

And a lot of people probably WILL die in the future without GM crops. As the planet's climate shifts, current crops will be unable to survive in deserts and equatorial regions. Genetically modifying crops to include genes coding for drought resistant traits (eg. temperature resistance, longer, wider spreading roots, increased water retention, etc) will save millions of lives in the future.

Go Science!

Marry shelly was a romatisist who wrote that book to show to problems with the men of the scientific revolution. Also A difibluater doesnt bring you back to life, it just keeps your heart going, because once your dead you stay that way

keserak:
Bob is absolutely full of shit.

He is speaking with the air of authority on something he knows less than nothing about. That is, he has so much misinformation that he would actually be better off being completely ignorant.

Let's review the errors.

Selective breeding is NOT the same thing as genetic engineering. Genetic engineering involves using viruses (or other small carriers, such as needles) to modify a species using genetic material from a completely different species. In other words, two species that could NEVER breed in the wild can have materials combined. Viruses can move genetic material around in the wild "naturally," but, in multicellular organisms, this is an incredibly rare event that has only been theorized to have occured. In other words, this is NOT a natural event. In fact, you take genetic traits from plants and fungi and add them to animals. The organisms don't even have to be in the same kingdom.

Bob implied that this was only turning on and off existing traits.

In this, Bob is a liar.*

In comparison to crossbreeding, Bob calls using genetic engineering, "simplifying." By his bullshit logic, invasive surgery is the same thing as taking an herbal supplement.

And oh, let's not hear the "it all exists in nature" canard from some of the posters. Cyanide is naturally occuring -- I invite you to try some. The fact of the matter is, a protein that is excellent in corn won't necessarily be healthy in a trout. Biological systems are exceptionally complex -- they are likely the most complex thing known to man -- and extensive testing would be needed to be certain the chimeric animal is healthy and safe to eat -- testing that Monsanto and the like are dedicated to avoiding.

By the way, the relevant term here is chimera, NOT a hybrid Bob -- and if you don't know what a chimera is, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. Seriously, this is like discussing the Middle East without knowing what Jew, Arab, oil, and the U.S. mean.

But back to that earlier point, it is not the mere existence of a biological agent that makes it "natural," but its relationship with the organism. I can assure you that an octopus contains plenty of chemicals that, if placed in the human bloodstream, would sicken it, and vice-versa. Saying that something is "natural" because it's found in nature is like claiming it's okay to stab you in the head with an icicle. Water is natural, after all, and you're full of it already, right?

It gets worse. The problem with genetic engineering -- which Bob doesn't even understand -- is that it is being used without proper controls and with complete disregard to environmental laws and human saftey. Monsanto, the biggest and most well-known perpetrator, made its fortune by doing the following:

a) Invent a highly toxic weed killer.
b) Genetically modify seeds with material outside the seeds' species to resist the weed killing toxin.
c) Modify the seeds further for other uses.
d) Fail to test the food on animals -- or test the food badly, obscuring animal harm such as increased rate of cancer. (Yep, they'll lie about their own results.)
e) Sell the seed to farmers where the plants will interbreed with wild species, contaminating them.

And the real doozy:

f) If some of Monsanto's seeds get onto your property and you've refused to buy their seed, they will claim your ENTIRE FARM as their own and take the plants you developed via decades of actual cross-breeding, patent the plants, and steal your livelhood.

I'm not kidding. They did this to farmers in Canada and are pulling the same crap in India.

Oh, by the way: if you're in the third world, they'll refuse to let you save your seeds -- you know, what farmers have done for over 20 thousand years. That way you have to buy from them ever year. And they jack the price up. Not that you needed to buy their seed before they started polluting your crops with their seeds.

Needless to say, contamination of some of the oldest crops of mankind could lead to some pretty serious devastation. Monsanto and similar companies are using the entire planet as a laboratory and have no experimental controls. (And again, if you don't know what a scientific control is, you have no business saying anything about genetic engineering. Just to be sure, I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about this: you should. You should look up your terms first, however -- and not spew a bunch of poisonous lies on a popular media site while ridiculing hundreds of millions of people fighting to preserve their lives and jobs.)

It is not genetic engineering to improve crops. It's genetic engineering to exploit the trademark system, a legal system that the framers of the Constitution never expected to be employed as we do today. It is supposed to be illegal to patent living things; Monsanto's bribes changed that.

And, oh, Bob -- that carrot? The one you thought you were so clever about? Yeah, we know it was genetically engineered due to activists telling us. It wasn't mentioned in the supermarket. In fact, Monsanto and its allies work hard to obscure all genetic engineering information and hope to make its disclosure illegal. This is despite the fact that some of their additions can trigger allergic reactions in humans.

So, if you're allergic to peanuts, imagine it being illegal to label something as containing peanut products. That's you're future.

Seriously, Bob, that carrot gag did nothing to ridicule your target and simply made you look like an ass.

Hell, even his non-science discussion is a doughy pantload. Frankenstein's lack of scientific credentials in the novel was basically irrelevant since accredidation didn't mean much in the 19th century -- but, zounds, it was a big deal in the 20th, hence the change to the movie.

You'd think he'd know that, being a movie critic.

*The vehemence of this reply is due to the fact that Bob was contemptuous of people who have a valid, important concern with the state of the FDA. In short, Bob was belittling people who are working their asses off to save lives and livelihoods in the face of ridiculously irresponsible and, frankly, antiscientific mismanagement. And he did so using out-and-out lies, some of which parallel the lies used by the industries breaking the laws and bribing congress as we speak. I call him a liar because of his confidence; he made blanket, untrue declarations with the intent to persuade.

+1 man, nicely said.
I really think, or I want to believe, that Bob knows about the dangers but he just chose to not mention them and used ambiguous facts and gross simplification to further his argument, which is just wrong. This is not a simple subject. He isn't doing genetic research a favour with that.

Pretty much this, really, I hate the American media oh so much... but they're free to say all the garbage they want... no, what I really really hate are the idiots that tag along because "it's on TV", those mindless vermin.

Either way to the pundits and mindless vermin I say this... via Cyborg Richard Nixon (I'm as surprised as you are):

Hello escapist and Movie Bob,

Long time watcher/reader, first time commenter.

While I do find the fear tactics about GMOs annoying and eat them all the time without concern for myself, I think you addressed the argument very poorly. There are actual concerns about GMOs and you didn't address any of them, sticking to the "science = good" argument.

For example, health concerns aside, GMOs do damage the diversity of the ecosystem and the plant species in particular. This means that all of the crops can be wiped out by a single disease. (see Irish potato famine.) Secondly as a crop, GMOs mean that a corporation can claim ownership of a species of food (like trademarking carrots).

MaxFan:
So far I'm supposed to have died from the Bird Flu, the Swine Flu, Frankenfood, and probably dozens of others the media didn't do a good enough job trying to scare people for me to remember.

Actually, the scare over swine flu actually caused the government to react so well that it didn't become an issue. You just assume that because it was fixed it never mattered.

I agree, even though the idea of robot vegetables is far more a appealing than regular fruit.

HankMan:
Genetically engineered?
SO WHAT?


Edit: What was that screen shot of The Princess' Bride at 1:25 about?

Vizzini "IN-conceivable!!"

INIGO MONTOYA "You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means..."

I thought it was a brilliant touch,anyway :P

Great stuff, Bob! Although I hadn't noticed it in the news at all... Irish news is mostly just bitching and moaning about the bail out/economy/fucking X factor/ and whatever else people find to moan about.

This was a breath of fresh air in comparison! :P

Bob's "it's just sped up cross-breeding" argument is only true for GMOs which have new genetic material introduced from a closely-related species. The Frankenfood argument is geared at GMOs that have new genetic material introduced from unrelated species, families or even phyla - nothing whatsoever to do with traditional cross breeding.

The real problem with GMOs is:
1) testing - it would take a few generations of people eating GMOs before we would have enough data to label them safe/unsafe (not going to happen in today's short-term profit driven markets)
2) genetic pollution - unlike traditional pollution which decreases over time (even nuclear waste becomes less radioactive over a looooong time), genetic pollution increases over time with unpredictable outcomes

This is the food chain we're talking about here. In the end, though, global warming and its resulting resource wars are likely to kill us all off before the GMO question gets answered...

keserak:
Bob is absolutely full of shit.

He is speaking with the air of authority on something he knows less than nothing about. That is, he has so much misinformation that he would actually be better off being completely ignorant.

Let's review the errors.

Selective breeding is NOT the same thing as genetic engineering. Genetic engineering involves using viruses (or other small carriers, such as needles) to modify a species using genetic material from a completely different species. In other words, two species that could NEVER breed in the wild can have materials combined. Viruses can move genetic material around in the wild "naturally," but, in multicellular organisms, this is an incredibly rare event that has only been theorized to have occured. In other words, this is NOT a natural event. In fact, you take genetic traits from plants and fungi and add them to animals. The organisms don't even have to be in the same kingdom.

Bob implied that this was only turning on and off existing traits.

In this, Bob is a liar.*

In comparison to crossbreeding, Bob calls using genetic engineering, "simplifying." By his bullshit logic, invasive surgery is the same thing as taking an herbal supplement.

And oh, let's not hear the "it all exists in nature" canard from some of the posters. Cyanide is naturally occuring -- I invite you to try some. The fact of the matter is, a protein that is excellent in corn won't necessarily be healthy in a trout. Biological systems are exceptionally complex -- they are likely the most complex thing known to man -- and extensive testing would be needed to be certain the chimeric animal is healthy and safe to eat -- testing that Monsanto and the like are dedicated to avoiding.

By the way, the relevant term here is chimera, NOT a hybrid Bob -- and if you don't know what a chimera is, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. Seriously, this is like discussing the Middle East without knowing what Jew, Arab, oil, and the U.S. mean.

But back to that earlier point, it is not the mere existence of a biological agent that makes it "natural," but its relationship with the organism. I can assure you that an octopus contains plenty of chemicals that, if placed in the human bloodstream, would sicken it, and vice-versa. Saying that something is "natural" because it's found in nature is like claiming it's okay to stab you in the head with an icicle. Water is natural, after all, and you're full of it already, right?

It gets worse. The problem with genetic engineering -- which Bob doesn't even understand -- is that it is being used without proper controls and with complete disregard to environmental laws and human saftey. Monsanto, the biggest and most well-known perpetrator, made its fortune by doing the following:

a) Invent a highly toxic weed killer.
b) Genetically modify seeds with material outside the seeds' species to resist the weed killing toxin.
c) Modify the seeds further for other uses.
d) Fail to test the food on animals -- or test the food badly, obscuring animal harm such as increased rate of cancer. (Yep, they'll lie about their own results.)
e) Sell the seed to farmers where the plants will interbreed with wild species, contaminating them.

And the real doozy:

f) If some of Monsanto's seeds get onto your property and you've refused to buy their seed, they will claim your ENTIRE FARM as their own and take the plants you developed via decades of actual cross-breeding, patent the plants, and steal your livelhood.

I'm not kidding. They did this to farmers in Canada and are pulling the same crap in India.

Oh, by the way: if you're in the third world, they'll refuse to let you save your seeds -- you know, what farmers have done for over 20 thousand years. That way you have to buy from them ever year. And they jack the price up. Not that you needed to buy their seed before they started polluting your crops with their seeds.

Needless to say, contamination of some of the oldest crops of mankind could lead to some pretty serious devastation. Monsanto and similar companies are using the entire planet as a laboratory and have no experimental controls. (And again, if you don't know what a scientific control is, you have no business saying anything about genetic engineering. Just to be sure, I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about this: you should. You should look up your terms first, however -- and not spew a bunch of poisonous lies on a popular media site while ridiculing hundreds of millions of people fighting to preserve their lives and jobs.)

It is not genetic engineering to improve crops. It's genetic engineering to exploit the trademark system, a legal system that the framers of the Constitution never expected to be employed as we do today. It is supposed to be illegal to patent living things; Monsanto's bribes changed that.

And, oh, Bob -- that carrot? The one you thought you were so clever about? Yeah, we know it was genetically engineered due to activists telling us. It wasn't mentioned in the supermarket. In fact, Monsanto and its allies work hard to obscure all genetic engineering information and hope to make its disclosure illegal. This is despite the fact that some of their additions can trigger allergic reactions in humans.

So, if you're allergic to peanuts, imagine it being illegal to label something as containing peanut products. That's you're future.

Seriously, Bob, that carrot gag did nothing to ridicule your target and simply made you look like an ass.

Hell, even his non-science discussion is a doughy pantload. Frankenstein's lack of scientific credentials in the novel was basically irrelevant since accredidation didn't mean much in the 19th century -- but, zounds, it was a big deal in the 20th, hence the change to the movie.

You'd think he'd know that, being a movie critic.

*The vehemence of this reply is due to the fact that Bob was contemptuous of people who have a valid, important concern with the state of the FDA. In short, Bob was belittling people who are working their asses off to save lives and livelihoods in the face of ridiculously irresponsible and, frankly, antiscientific mismanagement. And he did so using out-and-out lies, some of which parallel the lies used by the industries breaking the laws and bribing congress as we speak. I call him a liar because of his confidence; he made blanket, untrue declarations with the intent to persuade.

While I disagree with the tone of your argument, I think it still bears repeating. GMOs are a great idea, but the way they're implemented is morally repugnant.

Bob, do some reading on Monsanto and see if you still hold the same opinions. Perhaps you will. Or perhaps you'll see how the idea and the reality don't always line up.

unacomn:
I've never heard the term Frankenfood before.

The reason some people are scared of genetically engineered food is that, well, sometimes it's done not for better food, but for more food. In theory that's not a bad thing, even in practice that's a good thing.
But in some areas of the world, where, well, let's say there's no FDA-like entity, and morals are, well, they aren't, and people with money give money to people with knowledge so they can make more money, well there may be some mistakes in there somewhere. Mistakes can sometimes be harmful.

Not necessarily JUST more food. Ever hear of Golden Rice? It's rice that produces Vitamin A, which is one of the most dangerous vitamin deficiencies experienced by people in undeveloped countries.

But yes, there is a lot of potential for making dangerous cross-breeds that produce harmful substances.

I mean, think about all those diet books out there. Think about the guy who lost 20 pounds eating nothing but Twinkies and Doritos for a month (he kept his caloric intake under 1800/day, ate vegetables infrequently, and took a vitamin supplement, but still). Do we really understand how all the substances in food, naturally occurring though they may be, interact with our bodies?

Still, even if there is potential for producing harmful hybrids, there is still a lot more danger in cross-breeding than genetic engineering, just because you don't always know what traits are being crossed. Genetic engineering (I think) allows you to reproduce specific traits.

Screwing with genes is certainly risky, but I think it's ultimately worthwhile. We should be careful, just like the guys who performed the first few open-heart surgeries had to be careful, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Selective Breeding is NOT Genetic Engineering as understood by most people.

Few people have issues with breeding, because it's an iterative process where unnatural things get culled. You don't get "monsters" like that.

Genetically modifying crops or animals in a lab CAN produce monsters. Things that are crazy, scary and down right dangerous to eat. How about these CORN which cause organ damage in rats in as few as 90 days? You wanna eat some of that with your carrot, huh BOB?

http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm#headingA11

And a more "human" write up:
http://www.healthyandy.com/2010/11/11/genetically-modified-corn-dangerous/

So please, stuff your condescending attitude and do some damn research instead of acting like a smart ass, when all you do is come off as an ignorant fool spewing nonsense. Very sad.

Obviously being a half-decent reviewer has done nothing for your actual world knowledge. So crack open some research and educate yourself next time before you open your mouth and reveal just how clueless you are on a topic.

zombie711:
Marry shelly was a romatisist who wrote that book to show to problems with the men of the scientific revolution. Also A difibluater doesnt bring you back to life, it just keeps your heart going, because once your dead you stay that way

No, a Defib unit doesn't bring you back to life at all by restarting your heart, let alone keep it going. It in fact kills you, seriously... it stops your heart totally in hopes that your brain will bring you back to life by restarting it. And they only us a Defib unit when you are in fibulation, or eratic and unnatural heart rythym, not when it's completely unmoving. Nothing except maybe a miracle and/or an anomaly can bring it back from that.

Also, it always bugs me when people confuse the original imagining of the Frankenstein monster with the one portrayed in Holywood. They are not even remotely close.

Supp:

MaxFan:
So far I'm supposed to have died from the Bird Flu, the Swine Flu, Frankenfood, and probably dozens of others the media didn't do a good enough job trying to scare people for me to remember.

Actually, the scare over swine flu actually caused the government to react so well that it didn't become an issue. You just assume that because it was fixed it never mattered.

Damn straight. The CDC tends not to fuck around.

image

. . . Unlike the FDA, which is known as a captured agency. That's another phrase you need to know when discussing genetic engineering, Bob. The FDA is regulated by the industry it "regulates." That's why we still have kids dying from E. coli like we're some kind of goddamn third world hellhole that the U.S. just invaded. The problem is genetic engineering is being used in an insanely dangerous fashion -- insane as in actually has the potential to kill a billion-odd people due to contamination of crops. Seriously. It CAN be done safely -- and it can and must be researched -- but the point is Monsanto and its ilk are dedicated to NOT doing it safely. They're thugs and extortionists. Genetic engineering -- for modern agribusiness -- isn't about science, it's about rent collection and theft.

And, btw, we don't need genetic engineering to feed the Earth. Cure disease, hell yes, but not for mere feeding. We've been able to feed the planet since the late sixties. The point of agribusiness is to distort the market with dirty tricks, theft, and massive taxpayer subsidies so that the old players make money while the poor starve. Right now, at this very minute, people are starving in contries that produced crops for thousands of years because the WTO (and the U.S. -- the same thing here) are subsidizing crops that these countries could easily produce more cheaply. No one on Earth starves now without it being someone else's fault.

Oh, look, it looks like genetic engineering just touched on another important topic. Alas, we'll have to wait for Bob and his fans to stop playing with carrots and put on their big boy pants before they can join us.

geierkreisen:
You may think Star Trek, I think Dune.
You may think "for the good of mankind", I think "for the good of the monopolist".

It's not really a scientific problem, it's an economical and social one.
While a farming dynasty can, say, breed the perfect sheep for their benefit, Monsanto and others genetically engineer crop and vegetables to dominate the market.
They even go so far as to "unsex" plants so that they don't produce new seeds which have to be bought for a hefty price every damned year again and sustainability and independence go overboard.

I only fear the day when Monsanto's Sardaukar-crops have eliminated all and every "organic" AKA traditional alternative and some African farmers have to go Fremen on His Imperial Highness' corporate ass.

There will always be demand for "organic" crops.
Also, Africa has very little viable farmland, thats part of the reason its so screwed up over there: most of it is desert, and the other half is savanna that is desert most of the time anyway.

Anyway, good video. Can we have purple oranges? okay fine, I'll settle for a purple carrot, that sounds cool.

geierkreisen:
You may think Star Trek, I think Dune.
You may think "for the good of mankind", I think "for the good of the monopolist".

It's not really a scientific problem, it's an economical and social one.
While a farming dynasty can, say, breed the perfect sheep for their benefit, Monsanto and others genetically engineer crop and vegetables to dominate the market.
They even go so far as to "unsex" plants so that they don't produce new seeds which have to be bought for a hefty price every damned year again and sustainability and independence go overboard.

I only fear the day when Monsanto's Sardaukar-crops have eliminated all and every "organic" AKA traditional alternative and some African farmers have to go Fremen on His Imperial Highness' corporate ass.

There will always be demand for "organic" crops.
Also, Africa has very little viable farmland, thats part of the reason its so screwed up over there: most of it is desert, and the other half is savanna that is desert most of the time anyway.

Anyway, good video. Can we have purple oranges? okay fine, I'll settle for a purple carrot, that sounds cool.

MovieBob:
Feeding Edge

This week, Bob takes a bite out of "frankenfood."

Watch Video

Coincidentally, most companies are switching to the thicker, nicer, Dark Blue for the lab coats. Because they're awesome.

Yay! Movie Bob Carrot!

*On nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom.....
5 min later
....nom nom nom nom nom nom* *Burp* Ah... GOOD!
I love me a good carrot.

What I didnt know about them, is that they were purple. That is interestingly awesome.

The house of Orange still rules the throne btw.

Nice to think that there's people out there who are happy about genetically engineering too. If we can make drops more effective to make food cheaper and more widely available, why wouldn't we? It's our moral duty to feed the poor, right? Then why be angry over the solution?

I'm afraid I found this a patronising and unhelpful video.

Enough people on this thread have already have articulated the difference between selective breeding and more modern transgenic techniques. While the anti-science brigade are often offensive, unthinking and wrong they should not be used as a straw man to justify a lack of concern on novel foods created in this manner.

I believe that genetic engineering (using the more conventional definition which does not include traditional practices of selective breeding or mutagenesis) has the potential to deliver extraordinary benefit to mankind. I also believe that new transgenic food products require regulation and study to ensure that they do not cause harmful side effects, perhaps not to the same rigour or paranoia as that of pharmaceuticals but certainly beyond that required of traditionally-derived products.

There are additional legal issues both regarding intellectual property and public health liability which others have covered far better in this thread than I could. These too are legitimate causes for concern and do not deserve being dismissed as narrow-minded scaremongering.

Bob's video appears to argue for a total lack of concern on GM food and wrongly equates GM-derived products to products created through completely different processes. Moreover he is pointedly questioning the rationality and intelligence of those who raise concerns which he has in no way disproven or adequately addressed.

I don't much mind being told that I'm wrong, I do mind being told that I'm an unthinking idiot by someone who gives a oversimplified and fallacious argument to dismiss legitimate concern on a matter of public health.

Bob,
In principle, I agree wholeheartedly with you. The nature of humans is to fear the unknown and anything dealing with food is going to ruffle some feathers. My only issue with genetically engineered food isn't so much with the biology as it is with the legal issues arising from it. companies patenting the genes. Monsanto is the stereotypical villain in this story and for good reason. They swing the blunt instrument of lawyers at farms and drive them out of business using laws that they sponsored, and in some cases, even wrote the original bills. Do a little bit of research on the topic and perhaps watch the documentary Food Inc. I think you'll find it quite illuminating.

I have never heard of this topic until now, and now that I know about it I can honestly say I care about as much now as I did before. Not at all.

And I still hate those black and white head things. Love the Gremlins veggie monster though, wonder where he found it...?

Bananas have problems, too. Due to the fact that all the Bananas on the shelf today are montypic, if they get wiped out by disease (as is actually happening, just as it has happened before), we will no longer have those sweet golden fruits in the market.

See here: http://www.naturalnews.com/023339_banana_bananas_disease.html

Thank you bob for adding to my plethora of useless knowledge. Carrots used to be purple. Awesome.

In return I offer this piece of info: Kangaroos lick their forearms to keep cool, because they don't have sweat glands.

Very interesting and educational Bob! I loved the comparison between defibrillators and Frankenstein.

I had no idea carrots used to be purple!!!

Great video but... are you gonna talk about leaks and the last week?

John the Gamer:
Yay! We (dutch) made carrots! Also: BEWARE! Be nice to us or we'll make all foods orange!

you'll never get away with it! never!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 15 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here