Image Courtesy: lakeshore.baby
Over the past few days, Skrewtips has received many comments from people sharing their views on genetically modified fruits and vegetables. Some people are absolutely and vehemently against the production/consumption of GMO’s and others seem to wholeheartedly support them. But at the end of the day, most people have no idea what “Genetically Modified” means, having no impact on their buying habits at all.
Please read some of the comments and offer your input into this very important issue.
Why is genetically modified evil? Many things are genetically modified for the better. Plants are sprayed with a hormone specific to its species to create seedless fruit. Do you run from seedless grapes? Most other types of genetic modification involves taking a gene from an animal that is something like mosquito resistant, and putting it into the plant, thus eliminating the need for pesticide. Look things up before you open your ignorant mouth. You can eat inorganic fruit all you want, the pesticide won’t kill you.
– Joe
———————–
Genetically modified crops are the most rigorously scrutinized foods in America, regulated by the EPA, USDA, and the FDA. Genetic modification merely allows crops to produce higher yields while thriving in conditions it would be unable to naturally. It’s not like scientists are fiddling with the “be more poisonous” gene.
It’s wonderful that America has such an overabundance of food that you can afford to RUN!!!! from GM foods, but they are a matter of life or death in countries where that is not the case.
Also, unless you’re eating nothing but wild berries picked off a hidden bush in a secret forest on an alternate-dimension Earth, everything you eat has been modified over time through human selection and modification.
– Frohergeist
———————–
Genetically modified is not bad and a cursory knowledge of genetic history will show that most cultivated produce has been genetically modified pretty much since plant-grafting was developed centuries ago.
Many people tend to associate genetically modified with steroid and chemical enhancement which couldn’t be further from the truth.
– Netbug
———————–
The difference between a GM food and a conventional (or organic) food is the gene make-up, which as the end result produces a protein – which in almost all cases (for the purposes of GM food) acts as an enzyme, changing one chemical into another. Now, the word “chemical” does have some harsh connotations in the English language, but since we’ve put semantics aside, I’ll continue to use it and point out that all of the genes added to GM food have to come from natural products (i.e. scientists do not create genes for a specific purpose out of nothing, it must come from a specific animal).
I’m sure you’re already aware of that and I’m sorry to go over it again, but it’s a nice reminder that GM food is not purely science-fiction – this food is still natural and is just the product in the next step of artificial selection – the same kind of selection that led to the organic foods you love so much. This next step, however, lets developers have more control over the outcome so people don’t have to sacrifice flavor for fruit that last in storage longer, for example.
Genetic modification mainly tries to do the following: increase yields, increase storage length and reduce bruising, and reduce pesticide use. And as long as there’s no plastic in your apple, all of the genes in it came from living things nature created.
– Jesse
———————–
I love the way some people say scientist with a sort of hisssss to it like a snake. For some reason, we evil scientists have gotten a bad rap just for trying to make the world a better place. While you’re out there buying hemp underwear and rubbing rock salt under your pits for deodorant, some people in the world haven’t eaten in days. I doubt very seriously, with all of the ignorant tripe you’ve chosen to waste your time and money worrying about, that you’ve ever had to go a second without food. If the difference is between your body slowly and agonizingly devouring itself for nutrients, or a bumper crop of GM food, I think I’d sink my teeth into an ear of corn with a little mosquito DNA in it – wouldn’t you?
Also, I personally am a clinical scientist. When I’m not worshiping the devil, or drowning baby seals, I save people’s lives. If you don’t like what us evil scientists are doing, next time you get an infection, bacteria, or virus, try to avoid hospitals. Maybe you could try an incantation or meditation. Maybe they make organic coffins these days, I’ve heard stupider things.
– Jeremy
I am opposed to GMs. Ever f’ing hear of Monsanto?? Look at the politics it has created/destroyed. They think they can sue farmers because of wind pollination, essentially screwing the farmers out of their entire farms!
Round-Up Ready? You’re eating freaking round-up!
Terminator Gene: Prevents farmers from saving last year’s seeds, thus spending unnecessary money for more seeds from guess who? Monsanto.
Please, tell me how the things they do can benefit the greater good. How much good can a GM crop be if it can’t be sustainably produced?
– Mike
———————–
My prob with GMs is the way they just passed through without any of our say, without testing etc. Because my son wound up having a deeply damaged immune system due to environmental toxins, I know that messing with mother nature has a down side.
why do we need GMs anyway? It seems that the more we mess with nature, the more we need to, and the food supply has gone up, while the nutritional value has gone down.
– Gina
———————–
I agree. Humans have already messed up this planet enough. Do we really need to tamper even more with our food supply?
There’s this saying… if all the ants in this world were to become extinct, the world would die. But if humans were to become extinct, the world would flourish.
– May
———————–
I don’t think people should be genetically altering anyting. You start messing with nature and before you know it, you will end up having children that have 5 arms 3 heads.
– yeah yeah
———————–
On GMOs I see two major problems that go beyond the health issue (which, for the present, is based on the personal views of an individual, since little evidence exists).
The first, for me, is patent rights. Biotech companies are trotting across the globe and taking wild and natural genomes of plants and claiming rights to them. Yes, this sounds fair since they “found” the gene that does STUFF. But entire plants are getting patented. Then international trade agreements require those villages to stop planting those crops. Next, its our genes; if you have an anti-BADTHING gene, a company can own it and sell it.
Second, and which scares me the most, is the destruction of biodiversity. What protects all living things from being annihilated from disease is its inherent genetic differences from thing to thing. If GMOs are promoted to help curb world hunger, crops worldwide will slowly come from a single strain of DNA, since GMOs are generally sterile so you have to buy more seed. Then a new disease comes along and wipes out an entire nation’s supply of that crop. Yes, this is very cynical, but it’s a very strong belief by many people – enough so to start a seed bank in Norway.
– Bart
———————–
While I’m not completely opposed to GM products, I do remain extremely skeptical. We are only beginning to realize the real power in genetics. Without proper, unbiased, extremely thorough testing, we won’t know what the GM foods might do.
I bring up ‘unbiased’ because the USDA, for one, is there for the benefit of companies, not consumers. That’s why the organic labeling was changed from requiring the product to be 100% organic to 95%. Many companies petitioned for the change to make it easier and cheaper to sell organic labeled products.
– Christopher
David Askaripour, a prominent blogger based in New York, writes on the subject of natural healing among other things. His work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, Television Talk Shows, books and local news channels.
Mwana Mwega says
Once the public gets more information about genetically modified foods, I am sure they will be able to make informed decisions about whether they are good or not. We are in a situation where the public has been fed with propaganda about genetically modified foods. We have a situation where anti-biotechnology activists are deliberately misleading the public about GM foods for their own selfish ends. They do so to protect their bottom lines. Many studies have been published about genetically modified organisms and none has found them to be harmful to human beings and the environment. This, perhaps explains why more and more farmers are choosing to plant genetically modified crops. I don’t think it helps at all to demonize multinational biotech companies such as Monsanto(http://www.monsanto.com/biotech-gmo/), Dupont and BASF. People should pay more attention to the science underlying genetically modified foods. So far, nobody has challenged this science. People are merely engaging in side-shows instead of directing their efforts to discussing how technology can enhance food production. I’d advise everybody to visit James Njoroge’s blog, GMO Africa, which does a good job of enhancing public understanding of agricultural biotechnology.
Jeff says
We’re all gonna have long pointy teeth and stager about mumbling “Braaaaaaaaaains!!!” due to GMO’s.
Not….
It sums up like this:
Increased Yields = Good.
Drought/Disease resistant crops = Good
Patenting Plants = Bad. (Skrew Monsanto et. al!)
Reducing Biodiversity = Bad.
Or, if you could have the GMO without the BS maximizing of profit by forcing the buying of seeds each year, etc. the GMO’s aren’t that bad.
JC says
I keep waiting for the opponents of GMOs to say something that will explain to me why they are so up in arms about it. I honestly would like to hear legitimate counterarguments to better understand the subject, but right now all I’m hearing is that many people a) are inherently against all things corporate and b) uncomfortable with foods that are genetically modified for nebulous, unspecified reasons.
I think that letting people KNOW what foods are GMOs is important (for principle’s sake), but this is a policy problem, not a problem with GMOs.
Regarding Monsanto and other large agribusiness firms, yes, it’s problematic that they can patent organisms that they have designed. But patents expire, and in time the GMOs will be available to everyone, royalty-free. Besides the fact that these patents are almost impossible to enforce, without any financial incentive for research and development, no one would do it. There’s nothing inherently wrong with “corporations” making money; the fact is that this money goes to pay the people who are doing the research. Should plant geneticists work for free? Who among the people opposing patenting GMOs will pay to feed and clothe their families? Developing technology, and the scientists’ salaries and lab equipment necessary to do so, costs money – period.
As far as the comments by “Mike” asserting that all GMOs have the “terminator” gene – NO GMOs have this gene. Monsanto has the technology, but their shareholders have opposed its commercial release on ethical grounds. All GMOs currently in existence can reproduce as normal.
Biodiversity is a concern as well, somewhat, but our current crop populations are already incredibly genetically homogeneous, and at least with genetic engineering we can attempt to “fix” the genetic makeup of our crops to make them more resistant to disease. Perfect it is not, but it’s a step up.
Again, arguments against GMOs that are not blindly anti-corporatist or Neo-Luddite are welcome and encouraged. I want to know more about this subject.
arjuna108 says
Unfortunately, it is about much more than GMO. We can see this in almost every field, most notably politics at this point. It is about Americans learning to think again. It is about America rediscovering facts and logic and letting go of the need for all issues to be placed into novel/sit-com form. The list above really serves as a stark example. The “GMOs are OK” crowd talks about evidence and reason, while the “GMOs are bad” crowd talks about a drama where there are demons and saviors and subplots that turn a rather mundane non-issue into the grand conspiracy to make us all sick.
Mike tells us Monsanto is the demon! Rise up against him, sayeth the lord! He tells us corporate misconduct is evidence of a dangerous product. They sue farmers over wind pollination? Can’t find what he’s reffering to though I found plenty on Monsanto lawsuits. They use pesticides, he tells us! Is this news to anyone here?? And they have the evil Terminator gene! Picture your Arnold Schwarzenegger soy beans intoning, “I won’t be back! Hasta la vista, baby!” (Actually they have several different technologies known as terminators, but interestingly, they have agreed not to use any of them until further research is done. Sorry to ruin your evil empire story.) And what is the logical conclusion from these facts? Mike tells us it is that GMO farming is not sustainable. Huh? A great example of logic. The sun is round. Balls are round. Therefore, the moon is made of cheese.
Gina conveniently ignores all of the positive things that have come from humans “fooling with mother nature”, pretends that only bad has come from it and concludes that it should never be done. Some people die in cars. death bad. Therefore, all cars bad and should never be used, even to transport your dying child to an ER. Maybe Gina can tell us if she applies this to all human activity that can have negative and sometimes serious negative consequences. Let’s make a list of all the human activities that never have unintended or dangerous consequences…
There, that was easy. Anything you don’t see on that list needs to stop NOW! But why think about that when we can merely create demons and angels in our heads and entertain ourselves with a dramatic narrative that ignores reality? Did someone say Iraq? Yes, even death and destruction on a major scale doesn’t shake Americans from there obsession with not thinking about reality.
May tells us we have tampered with the earth enough so we should just stop. Not discriminate between activity that causes harm and that which creates health and joy. Again, all that thinking will hurt our heads. Just stop is the obvious answer.
Then yeahyeah delights us all with the Rick Santorum argument. Remember, yes to gay marriage will lead to man on dog sex running rampant. Yes, Rick was a fine example of how to shut off your higher brain and stick to that reptile brain and all that it fears. After all that is what brought us this far! So yeahyeah explains the obviously logical conclusion that ALL genetic manipulation will lead to human monsters. So, again, just stop it. Don’t think. Google “Santorum” to see exactly what this kind of thinking resembles.
Then Bart tells of the evil companies that patent natural plants and force villagers to stop growing them. Forget that you can’t patent a natural item. Forget that the current law precludes this and has a pretty stringent process for documenting that you actually invented a new plant before you can patent it. If they patented a plant and then called attention to the fact with a lawsuit that someone else has been growing it for hundreds of years, guess what? No more patent! Like politics today, facts only interfere with a good story. So what if you have to make sh*t up to create your demons. If W can do it so can I! But how many thought about Bart’s obviously false assertion. How many thought it sounded fishy enough to google “plant patents”? If you did you had easy access to the entire text of the plant patent laws and a summary of what is needed to prove you invented this novel plant and that you have been successful at reproducing it asexually. (If Bart is right then waste no time in patenting all the house plants in your neighborhood! You can go door to door demanding use fees and suing your neighbors who don’t comply.) Probably, if you liked Bart’s point of view you just swallowed hard and agreed.
Bart correctly identifies his second assertion as more cynicism than fact and for that brief stroke of honesty, I thank him.
Finally Chris points out that the USDA is there more for the corporations than the consumers. That is certainly true now, but has not always been the case. Mussolini said that fascism is best defined as the marriage of corporations and the state. We have certainly taken a dive into fascism. But the solution to our political ills will not come from demonizing some food and creating false narratives about it. Nor will it come from singleing out the USDA when all of our agencies have descended into fascism as well. It will come from the people taking back the power that is rightly theirs and that begins in the voting booth. Ah, but there is the rub!
The politicians and the press (and the grassroots press on the internet) know that, rather than think about complex issues, we’d prefer a simple, black & white narrative, preferably one with villians and heroes. One where the lone American hero can wail against the evils of some company, some race, some food. One that gives enough power to the imagination that it wipes away the awareness of reality. One that saves me from having to think about the very gray and complex nature of reality. Those who do try to look at the facts, will always be branded as those who just don’t understand the conspiracy drama. We would much rather be told to run than told to think deeply for ourselves about complex issues.
There was a time when the Santorum argument would have been laughed at and ignored. In today’s America people proudly proclaim that if we do this or that it puts us on a slippery slope! In my informal research I have asked many who make this statement if they know that “slippery slope” describes a logical fallacy, one of the traps to be avoided in intelligent conversation. So far, every person I have asked was unaware that they were broadcasting the fallacious nature of their argument. Here we see that someone actually chose this obvious logical fallacy to represent the Anti-GMO side. It was instructive only in demonstrating the similarity of the anti-GMO idealogues with the current political idealogues. Logical fallacy is viewed not as fallacious but as “another point of view” to be considered to show balance and fairness. 2 + 2 = 5 is just another point of view and should be taught equally with other math.
So there is a bigger picture and that is, “IT IS OK TO THINK!” Facts are your friends. Dramas, artificially imposed on reality, not so good. As the recent history of America should teach us.
Reality will no doubt be what reality turns out to be after all the shouting is over. Many GMO foods will be amazingly useful to improve the human condition and some will be found to be too risky to use.
Gina says
Hi student of Engineering!
You have our point exactly. Please don’t just blindly trust anyone. do your own research, and listen to your body’s response to you choices. Everyone is unique. And what works for me may not work for you — for many reasons. an open mind to learning is the bes gift you can give yourself.
thanks for your insight.
Gina
David B. Fisher says
The ‘evil’ Monsanto argument aside;
Monsanto’s sick legal tactics;
Animal brain fears aside;
Healthy skepticism aside;
Biodiversity issue aside;
and all the other boogie-man arguments I cannot dredge-up @ the moment;
What, specifically – in detail, how is it that GMO’s are ‘poison?
Everytime evolution selects one trait over another, that’s Genetic Modification.
Put up or s…, gosh I’m just too polite to say it…
David
Theresa McBryan says
Monsanto hasn’t convinced me that eating Round-up Ready food stuffs will protect me from Round-up. It is a systemic poison, which means it is throughout the whole plant, not just on the outside where it can be washed off. Does it build up in the body like mercury and dioxins? There is some suspicion that these modified plants are also killing insects. There are way too many unanswered questions, or only being answered by the people who have a vested interest in making money on the process.
It’s a cheap and easy way to keep fields clean, but there are more labor intensive and less chemically intrusive methods to do that. At this point it is an unnecessary risk in plants for human or animal consumption.
Kittie says
Well, I don’t know enough about GM foods to desire eating them when I can just as easily eat organic foods. Not to mention there is one argument that seems to be neglected…the vegan argument. If they are using any kind of living creatures genes (mosquito or fly) to modify the foods then that means the fruits and vegetables from GM crops are not vegan. Unless you’re a vegan that eats honey and doesn’t count insects as ‘animals’…but they are alive, so they count to me.
I don’t know if it matters to anyone, or if anyone else has thought about it. All arguments aside, because I don’t know if it’s bad or good for me, but I do know what my morals and standards are. I believe that if people are going to use the whole ‘feeding the hungry’ as an excuse they should stop and take the time to realize they are huge hypocrites. Like that scientist who left a comment. No one called you a baby killer or whatever you are implying and no one said you were evil for creating genetically modified foods. No one singled you out. You singled yourself out and acted like an immature drama queen when there was no need.
All that is happening as a result of this topic is a bunch of rudeness and useless arguments.
The bottom line is everyone is greedy, the corporations…you…me…all of us. Especially those of us in America.
How about instead of worrying about growing GM crops to feed the hungry masses…which isn’t happening anyway you liars…why don’t you cut back on meat consumption so you can feed humans what you feed animals.
Why do we need more and more fast food restaurants when there are people starving in other countries? Why do we need to artificially inseminate cows for veal and milk when we could be using our resources to feed others? We could be using crops that feed the masses of animals that get slaughtered for McDonald’s to feed those starving people who haven’t eaten for days that so many people here keep mentioning.
I’m not saying go vegan or vegetarian…I’m saying think about your words, and think about your actions.
You’re hiding behind a huge lie when you claim that Genetically Modified food crops are around to feed the hungry. They don’t help anyone. People are still starving and dying and not getting food. There are still food shortages in other countries because so many people in ‘rich’ countries are eating more than their fair share.
Humans are starving the world over because humans are greedy. We are the ones causing the suffering…especially those who use those poor starving people as an excuse to create GM crops that don’t even go to feed the people they claim to feed.
If you really want to help people, why don’t you help them. Don’t just talk about how you’re helping them by injecting mosquito genes into a tomato…help them by handing over the tomato. Instead of worrying about who is making the most money or who is or isn’t growing what kind of crop or whatever, perhaps we should just stop being driven by pure and simple greed and remember what we claim to think is important.
Diarmid says
I just read this page from start to finish and no one seriously suggested that GM foods were poison.
Frohergeist says
Kittie– one billion people alive today would be dead of starvation were it not for GM foods. Yes, people are still dying of starvation, but that is because of ignorant alarmists who persuade nations against GM foods (as an example, Zambia and other African nations turned away tons of donated GM crop-seed in 2002 as a result of negative propoganda), as well as other factors. Just because people still die in fires doesn’t mean the fire department is ineffective. Also, as must be stated again, there are absolutely no animal genes in GM foods; every gene used in genetic modification of crops comes from a related plant– natural evolution has produced exquisite adaptions to the environment, and all genetic modification does is enhance those existing adaptations.
Cheryl Sheppard says
I don’t think GMO’s are good for the long term. I know it’s good to grow without pest depleting the crop but I think it’s killing our bees and other beneficial insects.
Studies have demonstrated that foreign genes in crop plants don’t always stay put. Pollen from such plants might carry inserted genes from modified soybeans, for instance, into a field of wild soybean plants or an unmodified crop. The unintentionally broadcast genes could come to dominate in future generations of the wild or supposedly normal crop plants and thus reduce genetic diversity in the species.
Personally, I love trees, wildflowers and I like my proteins pure, not modified because my body runs off those proteins, it’s how we process information. I like the world ecosystem.
I know Monsanto doesn’t care how it effects me and mine and they know it’s that there’s big business in GMO’s what with selling and patented seeds. So eat up for tomorrow they will be no naturally growing food they’ll all be sterile and Monsanto will own us all.
My mom always said look before you leap. She never said what you don’t know can’t hurt you.
Only arrogance would try to put a little bandage on world hunger and think it’s great.
Sandy says
It’s the anti-GMO themselves who promote big corporate to grow. While the GM technology has become cheaper with years (hundreds thousands dollars), releasing to the market cost billions of dollars due to the long list of nonsense test that is put by the anti-GM lobby in the government. This high marketing cost has made the small GM companies and university research go “bankcruppt” or just stop doing research and leaving only big capitals like Monansto, Bayer and BASF continue with the industry.
The anti-GM pponent don’t do research themselves, they just act like a God in “halal certification”. They just want to become the stamp approved body who absorb the research money. Lately they even want all GM food to be labeled. How much billions more you think the research funding will be absorbed into this labeling certification?
If the anti-GMO don’t want GMO, they must come up with alternative technology. We cannot go back to the ancient traditional agriculture with low yield and use high amount of pesticide, water, and fertiliser, and cut more forest for agriculture.