General Discussion

mike_c

(37,072 posts)

143. of course I don't want to deprive you of anything....

Mon Nov 5, 2012, 08:32 PM

Nov 2012

I simply don't respect your reasons for fearing genetic engineering. I find them anti-intellectual and anti-scientific. Also, I'll readily admit that I'm making some assumptions about those reasons, but you've not said anything in this thread to dispel my assumptions either. If you have data-based, biological arguments against genetic engineering rather than emotional, fear-based reasons, then I'm happy to listen to them and consider them, even to the point of reevaluating my own stance on GMOs.

What is it about moving genes around that you find so fearful? Genes are just information. All eukaryotes have the same biochemical mechanisms for gene regulation, protein transcription, and translation-- plugging this gene or that gene into their genome is no more fearsome than popping a CD into your computer-- it makes new information about proteins they couldn't make before available to them. Medicine is routinely produced that way. Do you object to such things as GMO insulin, or GMO vaccines? How is GMO food qualitatively different?

What is it about giving an organism access to information gained during the evolutionary history of another organism-- whose different evolutionary history makes that information possible-- that you find so fearful? I find it wonderful and inspiring.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

170 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If you are in California, please vote YES on 37. -Updated [View all] Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 OP

Thank you Yes!!!!!!! Tumbulu Nov 2012 #1

Prop 37 and Corporate Lies in the Post Truth Era proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #73

This should be its own thread. eom roody Nov 2012 #74

So sadly true! Tumbulu Nov 2012 #77

Recommended. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #79

Best and saddest expert analysis I have encountered on GMOs ever - discovered yesterday. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #158

Done !!! - K & R !!! WillyT Nov 2012 #2

Yes I will Cali_Democrat Nov 2012 #3

Yes on 37! Webster Green Nov 2012 #4

I've been working hard on this issue Le Taz Hot Nov 2012 #5

Thank you for working on it!!!! I have been doing some phone calling Tumbulu Nov 2012 #61

I heard some of the ads are very vicious and misleading blazeKing Nov 2012 #6

They are, I've been seeing them here and for people who don't follow these sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #120

Done. n/t TDale313 Nov 2012 #7

K&R abelenkpe Nov 2012 #8

YES on Prop 37! pinboy3niner Nov 2012 #9

I'll be voting no on 37.... mike_c Nov 2012 #10

I have a scientist acquaintance whom I respect a great deal who advocates voting no for these Brickbat Nov 2012 #11

His/her paycheck probably comes from roody Nov 2012 #19

that is a vile supposition.... mike_c Nov 2012 #30

Big ag has its tentacles in government roody Nov 2012 #32

Correct - it is a fact hardly new info nt Tumbulu Nov 2012 #53

The Secretary of Agriculture works roody Nov 2012 #57

It doesn't, actually. Nice try! Brickbat Nov 2012 #71

Here's one reason why the tipping point has been exceeded. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #80

Wanting a product labeled properly is fear and ignorance? blazeKing Nov 2012 #12

I strongly suspect a lot of people would turn down a product with a label that said: jeff47 Nov 2012 #14

The public doesn't care about Hydrogen in food, they care about Genetic manipulation of their food blazeKing Nov 2012 #22

this from someone who asks "did we not learn our lesson from Jurassic Park?" mike_c Nov 2012 #26

It is about people being honest Tumbulu Nov 2012 #35

Then you should be honest jeff47 Nov 2012 #89

Links? proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #94

I will alert if you keep that up Tumbulu Nov 2012 #98

There may be ways to do this safely Tumbulu Nov 2012 #33

Anti-GMO fanatics like to burn the test fields. Odin2005 Nov 2012 #85

In the US over 80% of the corn, canola, soy and cotton are gmo Tumbulu Nov 2012 #97

You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about jeff47 Nov 2012 #88

Yes science tests things, So please show me the tests Tumbulu Nov 2012 #99

Again, waving your hands and saying "boo" isn't science. jeff47 Nov 2012 #126

So your cited article shows that the toxin is lasting in the soil for 180 days vs 24 hrs Tumbulu Nov 2012 #129

oh for pete's sake.... mike_c Nov 2012 #137

We have no data on the effect Tumbulu Nov 2012 #153

Next point Bt toxin tests for mutations Tumbulu Nov 2012 #156

The label is not a warning. roody Nov 2012 #23

it appears to be one that you accept.... mike_c Nov 2012 #139

That is what they called it in an roody Nov 2012 #141

of course I don't want to deprive you of anything.... mike_c Nov 2012 #143

Can your side state its case for roody Nov 2012 #142

my case is simple.... mike_c Nov 2012 #144

I suggest you start a campaign to roody Nov 2012 #149

why would I have any interest in doing that...? mike_c Nov 2012 #150

If GE food is so great, the food roody Nov 2012 #24

you know, the thing that really makes me ashamed for humans... mike_c Nov 2012 #31

I already buy organic to avoid GMOs. roody Nov 2012 #34

I seriously doubt that you have ever tasted food "the way nature made it...." mike_c Nov 2012 #146

Can you state your anti-labeling case, roody Nov 2012 #147

I believe I answered that question in #144.... mike_c Nov 2012 #148

Most people appear to want the cheapest food Tumbulu Nov 2012 #37

Maybe they have something to hide. roody Nov 2012 #50

BINGO! (nt) Tumbulu Nov 2012 #51

Because people are lying about them. jeff47 Nov 2012 #90

Let's start with infant formula, ok? proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #92

Read what I just found. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #110

Based on what mechanism? jeff47 Nov 2012 #124

I saved you the time of reading to the end of the thread so you can read this full article. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #130

Related material here:�No studies to date have experimentally examined the causal relationship btwn" proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #132

Big Agra sells us big gulps and roody Nov 2012 #95

How, specifically, would you market them? jeff47 Nov 2012 #125

Consult a marketer. Monsanto can roody Nov 2012 #127

Or "Warning: contains dihydrogen monoxide". Odin2005 Nov 2012 #84

I don't think people find it endearing to be called stupid. Tumbulu Nov 2012 #100

The average person IS stupid. Odin2005 Nov 2012 #104

Well the British people and people from Europe that I knew asked me how Americans could be misled Tumbulu Nov 2012 #106

I repeat the fact that Prop 37 roody Nov 2012 #112

Except the proposal isn't really to add it to the indgredients list... ellisonz Nov 2012 #115

I have never seen a label in roody Nov 2012 #119

Really? ellisonz Nov 2012 #121

These companies label some foods roody Nov 2012 #122

What's the practical difference? ellisonz Nov 2012 #123

The issue is our right to know and roody Nov 2012 #128

Good points. nt Tumbulu Nov 2012 #16

I agree. demosincebirth Nov 2012 #13

Labeling is the only way to heal this rift among scientists Tumbulu Nov 2012 #15

Sorry, I really don't understand your point. Can you please explain? cui bono Nov 2012 #17

I like corn the way nature made roody Nov 2012 #20

You've never eaten corn the way nature made it. LeftyMom Nov 2012 #36

Sorry, inserting the toxin from B.T. is hardy anything any breeder Tumbulu Nov 2012 #40

Do you know how dangerous Bt is? LeftyMom Nov 2012 #66

What your child drank was a preparation of B.t. Tumbulu Nov 2012 #68

Selective breeding is not like genetic roody Nov 2012 #46

GMO corn pollinates entirely "in a natural way...." mike_c Nov 2012 #151

I am a plant breeder and if you do not know the difference Tumbulu Nov 2012 #159

if by nature, you mean Man...then yes...man has engineered corn for thousands of years... yawnmaster Nov 2012 #42

If you mean by 'engineered' selective breeding, roody Nov 2012 #48

Seeing the 2 as qualitatively different is irrational thinking. Odin2005 Nov 2012 #86

I am a breeder and there are plenty of reasons to allow the normal Tumbulu Nov 2012 #101

Because the very process of genetic modification itself creates unintended ancillary consequences. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #155

Absolutely correct which is why an entirely new system Tumbulu Nov 2012 #157

ALL technologies and scientific discoveries have unforseen consequences. Odin2005 Nov 2012 #160

Same old lie, forget it Tumbulu Nov 2012 #49

Why not read the proposition and roody Nov 2012 #21

humans have been genetically engineering food since liberal_at_heart Nov 2012 #44

Selective breeding and genetic engineering roody Nov 2012 #55

Plant breeding and genetic engineering are not anything alike Tumbulu Nov 2012 #56

Monsanto will consider you their friend roody Nov 2012 #52

Terrific summary here. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #75

Thank you so much for posting this! Tumbulu Nov 2012 #76

As an aside, for health reasons the future of food is not the biotech pseudo-food variant. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #93

LMAO!!! Odin2005 Nov 2012 #105

Harvard, man, both of 'em. Do not mock their training, expertise, research, or integrity. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #107

This, too (and upon reflection not my call to say which is worse re:post #75). proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #81

I'm with you. slutticus Nov 2012 #136

Kick! Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #18

I'll be in front of a grocery store roody Nov 2012 #25

Exactly. The only reason for lying is because they have something to hide. nt Live and Learn Nov 2012 #29

I can't believe it's even going to be close. DaniDubois Nov 2012 #27

Beef is not yet genetically engineered, roody Nov 2012 #38

I cannot believe it either Tumbulu Nov 2012 #59

Done!! catchnrelease Nov 2012 #28

I'm not decided. I'm in favor of labeling, but I'm not convinced this prop is well written. LeftyMom Nov 2012 #39

It is between The Union of Concerned Scientists and Monsanto Tumbulu Nov 2012 #45

Monsanto have been a pestilence world-wide, suing farmers out of existence, Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #54

Why do you anti-GMO fanatics conflate Monsanto's shady business practices... Odin2005 Nov 2012 #87

...because they have a virtual monopoly on "the technology itself." proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #91

And the scientists within the industry need to Tumbulu Nov 2012 #102

Have you read the prop? roody Nov 2012 #58

No. I like eating food engineered to have bug poison in it. nt Comrade_McKenzie Nov 2012 #41

why not just put the chemical compounds found in the food? well...because labeling can become... yawnmaster Nov 2012 #43

If you like eating the Bt toxin Tumbulu Nov 2012 #47

A genetically modified organism roody Nov 2012 #60

It is hardly normal plant or animal breeding Tumbulu Nov 2012 #62

K&R I would if I could. Don't live there any more. n/t Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #63

Did this.. AsahinaKimi Nov 2012 #64

Thank you!!!!! Tumbulu Nov 2012 #65

Thank you! Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #67

I'm certainly voting yes, but I have a question: Duer 157099 Nov 2012 #69

The animals in the OP picture were fed IIRC, check the articles, 100% GMOs. Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #70

I'm voting yes. OnionPatch Nov 2012 #72

Thank you- my feelings exactly Tumbulu Nov 2012 #78

That mice study has been refuted. Odin2005 Nov 2012 #82

This is not true nt Tumbulu Nov 2012 #103

yes it is.... mike_c Nov 2012 #145

If you want to be up-to-date, you'll peruse the thread below and find your links debunked. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #154

Done and done. nt raouldukelives Nov 2012 #83

If I was in California I would be voting yes on 37 GoneOffShore Nov 2012 #96

More info in LBN... Indi Guy Nov 2012 #108

Already voted and voted, YES! nt Raine Nov 2012 #109

This is just sad, not to mention a blatant conflict of interest. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #111

Scientists from AAAS - Yes: Food Labels Would Let Consumers Make Informed Choices proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #113

Thanks for posting all thee great links Tumbulu Nov 2012 #114

I voted no on 37 Zorro Nov 2012 #116

Check out this definitive article written twelve years ago. The argument for labeling is compelling. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #117

As is the argument for testing Tumbulu Nov 2012 #118

I need evidence of harmful GMO first JLRC Nov 2012 #131

doing what a majority of Californians want gives liberals a bad name? DisgustipatedinCA Nov 2012 #134

Democratic Legislating JLRC Nov 2012 #138

They've spent over $7 million dollars to block this measure in just one state, they've purchased an Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #135

See the article in post #132. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #140

I plan on doing this tomorrow -- Hell Hath No Fury Nov 2012 #133

Whether or not GMOs in my food supply are good or bad is MY DECISION... LancetChick Nov 2012 #152

Did, although I view my vote more as a request than as an actual law. JDPriestly Nov 2012 #161

Just about everything in the grocery store will need to be labeled. Kablooie Nov 2012 #162

YES! mike_c Nov 2012 #163

46.9% voted YES on Prop 37. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #164

I know the issue isn't going away.... mike_c Nov 2012 #165

Thanks for the heads-up. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #168

Statement on Election Results from the California Right to Know Campaign proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #166

Link. proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #167

Samples of three fraudulent mailers sent to California voters provided at link below (will not C+P). proverbialwisdom Nov 2012 #169

great job of adding these to our discussion here Tumbulu Nov 2012 #170