Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

[veganblue]

Veganblue, not a lot in this World is 'natural' now, is it, but by 'near to natural' food, I mean food that has been 'tampered' with by humans as little as possible - i.e fresh fruit and vegetables.

Using the old techniques of genetic modification by artificial selection, we are blessed with the delights of modern agriculture - wild fruit plants do not necesarily naturally produce the great fleshy things we call fruits if it were not for the gradual selection over generations for traits that we deem beneficial. The plants that produced inferior fruit were not allowed to breed to the next generation and now we have apples, tomatoes, great big carrots, pumpkins, soft leafy plants with big foliage - all due to our active selection for these characteristics. There isn't a great deal of natural agricultural crops including wheat which is vastly modified from the original plant. It goes on today where plant breeding scientists cross breed varieties to get "better" characteristic. Sometimes getting that genetic material into the plant genome is difficult or impossible using sexual reproduction. Considering the genetic material that makes up all living things is essentially the same, barrier to cross breeding is that two dissimiliar organism will not produce a next generation with any chance of survival. *If* one of the parents had the genes that were desired then it is far more likely that the offspring would survive. All that is required is placing the genes into the parent....and then you have GM.

You can appreciate the sequence of events that has led to what we have now. Each incremental step is so subtle that the warning bells barely shudder.

Going 'back to nature' is a resonant theme it seems. I am all for doing it actively now - not when we are forced to because there is no other choice.

[ConsciousCuisine]

I've seen this term elsewhere on the board. What exactly is a co-op? Maybe we just call it something else in Michigan.

-JK


Our "Co-Op" is a Cooperatively Owned Natural Food Store with Deli/Natural Home/Body/Book/Fairi Trade and Organic Clothing and Goods sections...it is mostly Organic...

[eve]

veganblue - 'modifying' fruits etc is not the same as GE where genes from another species is inserted, as in the well-known example of fish genes inserted into tomatoes so that they keep cool. Do you want to eat fish with your tomatoes? Bacteria is inserted into some other fruits and veges. The whole point of messing around with GM, is for multinational companies to make more money.

When was the last time you ate a delicious apple? Or a tomato that doesn't have a thick skin for easy packaging? Just as I boycott products from the slaughter industry, so I prefer to boycott Monsanto products. And don't forget where the 'exterminator' gets its name, now that farmers in poor countries can no longer save the seeds of the food crops they grow.

[JasperKat]

Our "Co-Op" is a Cooperatively Owned Natural Food Store with Deli/Natural Home/Body/Book/Fairi Trade and Organic Clothing and Goods sections...it is mostly Organic...

I guess I'm confused about who is cooperating in the ownership :)
Do the vendors all own a piece?
-JK

[ConsciousCuisine]

I guess I'm confused about who is cooperating in the ownership :)
Do the vendors all own a piece?
-JK


It is technically "owned" by the Employees and Members. They are a"non-profit" kind of place, *not* a corporation...

From A Press Release:


"Ocean Beach People's Food Co-op
(San Diego, California)

Ocean Beach People's Co-op is a member-owned full-service vegetarian retail market that has been serving the community since 1974. Originally a worker's collective, the cooperative has grown to include 3000 feet of retail space, 7000 members, and over 60 employees. The Co-op offers an extensive selection of organic produce, organic and natural grocery items, organic dairy products, bulk items, perishable items, fresh deli items, books, vitamins, herbs, cruelty-free bodycare, and aromatherapy products. We specialize in products that are organic, wholesome, minimally processed, cruelty-free, and environmentally safe. Stop on by and see all that we've got to offer. "

[mysh]

Proof that anarchism does work... ;)

[ConsciousCuisine]

Proof that anarchism does work... ;)

Sure, I have seen that Anarchy in small communities can work...

But when we are talking about the "machine" it's either strategize or be ground up and spat out... either way, you'ver bound to be disgruntled with how it works out, but it's a bit less bothersome if you do *something* to move it in the right direction...

[veganblue]

veganblue - 'modifying' fruits etc is not the same as GE where genes from another species is inserted, as in the well-known example of fish genes inserted into tomatoes so that they keep cool. Do you want to eat fish with your tomatoes? Bacteria is inserted into some other fruits and veges. The whole point of messing around with GM, is for multinational companies to make more money.

When was the last time you ate a delicious apple? Or a tomato that doesn't have a thick skin for easy packaging? Just as I boycott products from the slaughter industry, so I prefer to boycott Monsanto products. And don't forget where the 'exterminator' gets its name, now that farmers in poor countries can no longer save the seeds of the food crops they grow.

Fish and tomatoes already share genes without the interferrence of man. If evolutionary theory is to be believed; we all arose from a common ancestor - possibly a bacterium - but despite this you will find sequences for proteins found in tomatoes that you will also find in fish. The difference with GE being that we can get a plant to produce the molecules that a fish already does - if it is made by a plant - is it actually fish? What about the other proteins that the plant and the fish make - are they fish or plant? Since autotrophes (produce own food from inorganic matter) would have developed before heterotrophes (must consume autotrophes or other heterotrophes) it could be suggested that the fish has been producing plant molecules all along as well as dveloping some of its own combinations.

It is within the realm of possibility that a plant will start producing the gene from the fish by the accident of mutation - if this is beneficial it will pass into the gene pool of that plant. Something so specific could take millions of years to develop and still be unlikely but the mechanisms are there. Genes are not static things.

Genetic modification is not an 'evil' in itself, but the motivation for actually modifying something is the real problem - and to what end the modifying is supposed to serve. More nutritional food? or longer shelf life at the cost of taste and value?

When I can I buy organic tomatoes - for the taste. I also try and grow as much as I can as the flavours are much better from a plant that is grown in healthy complex soils not the leached one with gross NPK fertiliser and pesticides to keep them healthy. I also love organic apples and enjoy a selection of heritage plants and ones I have sown from last years crops. This is because home grown tastes better - but if in the lab I could devise an apple with a paper thin skin with a full sweet smell and crisp juicy flesh better than a fuji, sundowner or royal gala - would you eat it knowing it was GE? I would guess not but am curious to know what you are afraid of.

The bayers and monsanto's of the world should be feared since they have thier own self-interest at heart as the number one priority; and apart from the employment they provide and the great taxes; seem to have no intrinsic use of their own. They do not serve the community or the interest of the world - in fact, to do so is usually merely a PR stunt or mere side-effect.

We agree that GE is being used by unscrupulous people and they must be made accountable - preferrably stoped - but is GE in itself bad?

If you are aware of monsanto products for us to avoid, I would like to know of them to avoid them too. Monsanto was the company spraying America with DDT - why it is still in business is probably purely a political reason...

[eve]

It was also the company that brought agent orange into being in Viet Nam. veganblue, you say you're curious to know what I'm afraid of. I'm not afraid of anything, but I am rather wary of you.

[tails4wagging]

GMO is a timebomb wanting to happen. The knock on affect of this interference with nature is that, the GMO is windblown and is destroying the essential foodstuffs for insects which in turn affects the birds etc.,. Also look at the beautiful monarch butterfly, there was a great concern in recent years that suggested the caterpillar of this lovely creature does not survive on GMO/cross contamination, so the risk for its extinction is very worrying, and that is only one species we know of.
Of course, there is also Genetically modified mice for vivisection, surely, to God, no one approves of that!!

[PinkFluffyCloud]

I agree, Tails, it's sickening!!

[veganblue]

It was also the company that brought agent orange into being in Viet Nam. veganblue, you say you're curious to know what I'm afraid of. I'm not afraid of anything, but I am rather wary of you.

I like to understand all sides of a discussion; therefore I ask questions. Sometimes this means I ask difficult questions to get a balanced view and it can also help others to analyse why they hold their opinions. Statements like it is wrong because it is bad is a tautology and not useful to establish any truth in a scenario - I am looking at more than personal opinion but why people hold personal opinions.
Exploring a topic such as this will require sensitivity since it brings up strong feelings, especially in such a group as this. You would be able to help this by stating why you hold your opinions and assist me in forming a more balanced view of the topic.

[PinkFluffyCloud]

I see what you want, Veganblue, so here are my concerns: :)
GM foods lead to uncontrolled Pollination and Cross-Pollination, disrupt the 'natural' cycles and contaminate the lineage of different species.
GM foods introduce new plant DNA and rogue genes into the food chain.
GM foods are not properly tested, just compared with 'similar' products.
Tests on Rats showed a thickening of the stomach lining after just 10 days on GM potatoes (not that I necessarily beleive that animal testing is relevant!!!!) - and human volunteer testing showed that GM soya was indigestible, and that Maize caused allergic reactions in 50% of the tested consumers. :(

On a personal level, I am one for the 'Gaia' theory, so I just can't bear the thought of this Frankenfood! :o

[veganblue]

I see what you want, Veganblue, so here are my concerns: :)
GM foods lead to uncontrolled Pollination and Cross-Pollination, disrupt the 'natural' cycles and contaminate the lineage of different species.
GM foods introduce new plant DNA and rogue genes into the food chain.
GM foods are not properly tested, just compared with 'similar' products.
Tests on Rats showed a thickening of the stomach lining after just 10 days on GM potatoes (not that I necessarily beleive that animal testing is relevant!!!!) - and human volunteer testing showed that GM soya was indigestible, and that Maize caused allergic reactions in 50% of the tested consumers. :(

Thanks PinkFluffyCloud :) I get the feeling that some may get the impression that I am pro-GMO's which I certainly am not so far - just trying to tease out the elements within the debate so thankyou for your input.

There is a great deal to fear from GMO's; not just themselves but the ways they are being used including the emergence of roundup resistant weeds - it was only a matter of time. The roundup resistant weeds have not taken genetic material from the GM crop; they have been selected for by only plants that can survive glysophate being able to co-exist in the same field as the GM crop. What may eventually happen is that people will have to be employed to manually remove the weeds hence creating employment and returning to the ways things were done pre the industrial age. Maybe I am being too optimistic; but someone has to be positive about the way forward.

I think that GM is extremely shortsighted in the way it is being used and inexcuseable in the way that they are using animals. There is a current situation where goats are being modified to produce spider silk proteins in their milk - so that the thread can be harvested; a situation that is abhorrent in the projected abuses of the animals that can be expected if the dairy industry is a model for prediction.

The most remarkable development is the creation of viruses that induce sterility in target species. Considering the unstable nature of DNA in huge populations; the liklihood that the virus will stay specific to that species is not a threat that is worth tinkering with.

In New Zealand, where possums are an introduced pest species that are dramatically changing the New Zealand landscape of both fauna and flora; a virus is being considered. The possibility of it crossing the Tasman is a very real threat to not only that possum but ultimately all marsupials.

GM research is an expensive and imprecise science of which there is usually no fix if things go wrong. The motivation is almost entirely financial and leads to greater control of agriculture for the investing corporation as compared to altruistically benefiting everyone. Until it can be shown to be benign, I will be opposed to it's introduction.

Apologies to any confused individuals that miscontrued my intent.

[eve]

You say: "Apologies to any confused individuals that miscontrued my intent" So what was your intent? Somehow, no matter what the subject, you seem to take it upon yourself to instruct the rest of us.

You also say: "Statements like it is wrong because it is bad is a tautology and not useful to establish any truth in a scenario - I am looking at more than personal opinion but why people hold personal opinions". What's that supposed to mean? Who is using tautologies?

I think that pinkfluffycloud neatly clarified the dangers of GM, yet still you had to write another long posting. Talk about being prolix.

[veganblue]

The GM debate is a very complex one. Teasing out the long term ramifications and getting short term action on the topic requires more than an unqualified opinion that GM is bad. This kind of opposition will not sway legistlators, scientists or big business. Two of the most effective tools I know of are the weight of public opinion and reasoned scientific debate. To this end analysing a subject and being aware of all the alternatives is important.

To understand is my intent. I am not seeking to instruct, but to stimulate discussion so that I may learn and anyone else can also.

I am, however, interested in your intent eve, and why my, and the postings of others, causes you such great ire - so much so that you feel the need to make ascerbic comment and interrupt. If you are not interested in either this topic or any others that I post to, please feel free to read other postings and hopefully make constructive comments elsewhere.

Thankyou for your postings regarding current AR activities here in Australia. It is good to be kept up to date on what is going on around the country.

[eve]

To understand is my intent. I am not seeking to instruct, but to stimulate discussion so that I may learn and anyone else can also. I am, however, interested in your intent eve, and why my, and the postings of others, causes you such great ire - so much so that you feel the need to make ascerbic comment and interrupt. If you are not interested in either this topic or any others that I post to, please feel free to read other postings and hopefully make constructive comments elsewhere.

But I AM interested in this topic, and have posted heaps of articles on many websites on the topic, and keep in touch with ETC to have the most up-to-date info. What I am NOT interested in, are comments deliberately made to 'stimulate discussion', rather than the posting of sincere views.

You accuse me of making acerbic comments to you and others. You're the only one who has whinged. I feel free to make comments, just as you commented on tautologies. I won't thank you for your permission for me to feel free to read other postings and to make constructive comments - do I need your permission?

What you say does not cause me great ire, your comments would have to have more substance for that. In fact, since ire means anger and wrath, well for your info, those are feelings that I finished with many years ago. I've been vegan since before you were born, and rather than give me any other advice or permissions, may I ask if you have taught your grandma to suck eggs yet?

[ConsciousCuisine]

[QUOTE=eve]What I am NOT interested in, are comments deliberately made to 'stimulate discussion', rather than the posting of sincere views. QUOTE]


Wow. You must really dislike Gertvegan's incessant (and much appreciated, by ME anyway) posting of links and quotes with no personal commentary.

[eve]

What? Why would you think I really dislike Gertvegans postings? Please don't put words in my mouth. I LOVE Gertvegan's comments and links, and have often thanked her for them. The fact that they come without personal commentary is also appreciated. :)

[ConsciousCuisine]

What? Why would you think I really dislike Gertvegans postings? Please don't put words in my mouth. I LOVE Gertvegan's comments and links, and have often thanked her for them. The fact that they come without personal commentary is also appreciated. :)




I put NO words in your mouth, Eve. I would *never* do that (I do not assume anything :) ).

I expressed an opinion based on following the logic you put forth.



[QUOTE=eve]What I am NOT interested in, are comments deliberately made to 'stimulate discussion', rather than the posting of sincere view[QUOTE=eve]

Gertvegan often posts links and quotes, which do not have his personal commentary attathed; no opinion.

They are thought provoking.

Therefore, they do not express a "personal, sincere view", but are a representation of someone else's views.

Therefore, following your expressed logic, following that you are "NOT interested in, are comments deliberately made to 'stimulate discussion', rather than the posting of sincere view" it would then make sense that you would NOT enjoy Gertvegan's postings of soley quotes and links.

[eve]

Well, you misunderstand me CC, if gertvegan doesn't attach a personal opinion, well she is not posting comments simply to stimulate discussion. You assumed that I really dislike gertvegans postings, and I'm simply saying that I love her postings. I just took exception to a young man who is instructing me in what I can and can't say. Let's not get bogged down.

[ConsciousCuisine]

Well, you misunderstand me CC, if gertvegan doesn't attach a personal opinion, well she is not posting comments simply to stimulate discussion. You assumed that I really dislike gertvegans postings, and I'm simply saying that I love her postings. I just took exception to a young man who is instructing me in what I can and can't say. Let's not get bogged down.


No asssumption going on here Eve!

I didn't ASSUME you liked Gretvegan's statements, I posted an *opinion* based on following your logic! No "assumptions". If I assuemd anything, I would state it as a fact and have no logic to back it up. It was an OPINION following your expressed reasoning.

Also, since I knew you were online and likely to respond, it was more of a "questioning" statement than anything.


If the real intent of your message was to express that you took exception to "a young man who is instructing me in what I can and can't say", that didn't come across to me directly by way of your *words*, again following the rhythm of what you posted and how it resonated with me.

I was simply saying that that is where your post took me. Not saying you personally feel the way your specific wording carried me to.

If I were to feel as you expressed, you initially indicated that you felt about Veganblue's posts, then *I* also would not enjoy posts like Gertvegan's that seem intended to simply inspire discussion and thought and lack personal comment...

[cedarblue]

just a quickie eve - gerts a guy i think you'll find :)

[Artichoke47]

Also, I find it disrespectful that people make comments about those that are of lesser age than they are; in my opinion, only ignorant people resort to such comments. Age has little to do with intelligence, knowledge, and knowing how to respect others.

[mysh]

Age has little to do with intelligence, knowledge, and knowing how to respect others.

I think my four year old could quite effectively disprove that... Once you're as old as me, you'll understand. ;)