Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PufPuf23

(9,852 posts)
7. You perhaps should not post about GMOs because
Thu Aug 18, 2016, 09:14 PM
Aug 2016

you do not apparently understand what they are.

"This, like the breakthroughs in GMO rice in the 1970s, will save ten times as many lives as all the wars being waged combined."

The GM in GMO refers to genetically modified by direct genetic engineering (cutting and splicing) of the genetic material. The first GMO rice varieties were not put into use in the USA until 2000.

The high yield rice varieties of the "Green Revolution" of the 1970s were from plant breading programs (genetic selection of phenotypes) and included cloning and hybridization but did not include genetic engineering as the technology did not exist at the time. High yield rice came into common use circa 1966 and had continued and specific success ever since. Genetic engineering technology was not a used (or available) technology for high yield rice for another 30 years. What is known as the high yield rice of the Green Revolution were not GMOs.

Note I am not offering an opinion regards to GMOs which I support in the general but not always in the specific. I agree with the four paragraphs you copied.

I do offer the opinion that one who does not acknowledge and / or understand the difference in technology between the high yield rice of the 1970s Green Revolution and genetically engineered GMO rice of the 21st century should reconsider whether you are a poster that should make OPs regards GMOs.

Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Another brilliant GMO bre...»Reply #7