PDA

View Full Version : Are GM foods good for you? Why do we need them?



oriental
05-02-13, 01:24
I have seen videso of a person experiencing high G-forces and his face looked pretty much a boxer face being hit after a punch. I don't know if it is the same guy.

Anyway here is what I composed yesterday:

Genetics is a very dangerous field. Its past isn’t something we should relive. The idea that humans are different led to ideas that some were superior to others. Then there was the concept of superman ‘ubermensch’ as the Nietzsche supported. Then came the sub-humans that included Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled and others whom the Nazis identified as impure like the Slavs. Extermination of these groups was carried out. This scenario could re-occur.

There was a case where a family member had a serious genetic disease. They consented to have this disease genetically identified so a cure could be developed. What happened was a nightmare for the family. The company patented the genetic code of this disease and the family could not use that database for any other company to develop a drug to deal with the disease.

Before judges always asserted that life could not be patented. Well, that hallowed institution of learning Harvard University of Cambridge, Massachusetts modified a mouse and patented the mouse in the US. It is a very interesting case. Now about designer babies, let us look at the issue. Suppose some scientist figured out the process for modifying certain genes and patented the process. A family unknowingly agrees to have a “super” baby. The baby is born. Whose baby is it? The scientist’s who patented the genes or the family’s?

What is a Human Being? Is he/she a genetic code that a geneticist could patent? Could he patent a group of people like Haplogroup Y? Could a corporation by patenting “super” babies thus enslave them? Could “mutants” be created and patented? Could enslaved “super-talented” mutants like “X-Men” surreptitiously overcome the controlling mechanism and take over the world? What if a scientist designed a process to modify a set of genes against a certain disease and patented those genes. Now if you go to a DNA firm and get your DNA mapped. Suppose it is found you have those very same genes that this scientist patented would you belong to this scientist? What if you had a unique DNA map that no else in the world gas and assume it is a new mutation that gives you an advantage you are not aware of. Now a DNA firm maps your DNA and realizing the uniqueness patents it. What do you do? Does the DNA firm owns you?

Professor Church of Harvard University skirted around the issue of resurrecting a Neanderthal. What if he patented the Neanderthal genes, could he form a corporation and create more Neanderthals to be enslaved? He could really bring down the wages of unions.

Is there such a thing as superman? Genes that helped Africans to survive malaria is also the cause of a genetic disease known as sickle cell anemia. Could a set of genes that in one environment enhance the person while in another put that same person at a disadvantage? Could Asperger’s syndrome be such a case where a person with Asperger have exceptional scientific and mathematical skills and yet not be very communicable - an idiot savant.

Monsanto is the leading company to have engaged in GM Genetically Modified plants and animals. Many of the other countries crops were affected - like Mexico’s corn. The GM corn was produced in quantities to flood the market and drove many of the variety of natural corn almost out of business. Biodiversity is being squelched. Countries have to buy those food products from Monsanto. The thing is that Monsanto crops could taint or contaminate ajoining fields by winds blowing seeds into neighbouring farmers’ fields. Monsanto had the gumption of suing farmers for stealing their GM crop seeds.

Monsanto lawyers and executives on loan to the US government served with various US Administrations and infiltrated the US FDA (Food & Drugs Administration) that controls the safety and approval of foods. Michael Kantor (Commerce Secretary) in Bill Clinton’s Administration and Donald Rumsfeld (Defense Secretary) in both Bushs Administrations, were the most prominent.

Should ‘gifted’ people be rewarded or looked up to? There is a naive assumption that ‘gifted’ people benefit society. Obviously not all ‘gifted’ are going to benefit society in fact some are very bad. There is an equal chance that some of the ‘gifted’ would do harm to society e.g. the financial crisis. The people involved are not dummies.

nordicwarrior
05-02-13, 02:22
I have seen videso of a person experiencing high G-forces and his face looked pretty much a boxer face being hit after a punch. I don't know if it is the same guy.

Anyway here is what I composed yesterday:

Genetics is a very dangerous field. Its past isn’t something we should relive. The idea that humans are different led to ideas that some were superior to others. Then there was the concept of superman ‘ubermensch’ as the Nietzsche supported. Then came the sub-humans that included Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled and others whom the Nazis identified as impure like the Slavs. Extermination of these groups was carried out. This scenario could re-occur.

There was a case where a family member had a serious genetic disease. They consented to have this disease genetically identified so a cure could be developed. What happened was a nightmare for the family. The company patented the genetic code of this disease and the family could not use that database for any other company to develop a drug to deal with the disease.

Before judges always asserted that life could not be patented. Well, that hallowed institution of learning Harvard University of Cambridge, Massachusetts modified a mouse and patented the mouse in the US. It is a very interesting case. Now about designer babies, let us look at the issue. Suppose some scientist figured out the process for modifying certain genes and patented the process. A family unknowingly agrees to have a “super” baby. The baby is born. Whose baby is it? The scientist’s who patented the genes or the family’s?

What is a Human Being? Is he/she a genetic code that a geneticist could patent? Could he patent a group of people like Haplogroup Y? Could a corporation by patenting “super” babies thus enslave them? Could “mutants” be created and patented? Could enslaved “super-talented” mutants like “X-Men” surreptitiously overcome the controlling mechanism and take over the world? What if a scientist designed a process to modify a set of genes against a certain disease and patented those genes. Now if you go to a DNA firm and get your DNA mapped. Suppose it is found you have those very same genes that this scientist patented would you belong to this scientist? What if you had a unique DNA map that no else in the world gas and assume it is a new mutation that gives you an advantage you are not aware of. Now a DNA firm maps your DNA and realizing the uniqueness patents it. What do you do? Does the DNA firm owns you?

Professor Church of Harvard University skirted around the issue of resurrecting a Neanderthal. What if he patented the Neanderthal genes, could he form a corporation and create more Neanderthals to be enslaved? He could really bring down the wages of unions.

Is there such a thing as superman? Genes that helped Africans to survive malaria is also the cause of a genetic disease known as sickle cell anemia. Could a set of genes that in one environment enhance the person while in another put that same person at a disadvantage? Could Asperger’s syndrome be such a case where a person with Asperger have exceptional scientific and mathematical skills and yet not be very communicable - an idiot savant.

Monsanto is the leading company to have engaged in GM Genetically Modified plants and animals. Many of the other countries crops were affected - like Mexico’s corn. The GM corn was produced in quantities to flood the market and drove many of the variety of natural corn almost out of business. Biodiversity is being squelched. Countries have to buy those food products from Monsanto. The thing is that Monsanto crops could taint or contaminate ajoining fields by winds blowing seeds into neighbouring farmers’ fields. Monsanto had the gumption of suing farmers for stealing their GM crop seeds.

Monsanto lawyers and executives on loan to the US government served with various US Administrations and infiltrated the US FDA (Food & Drugs Administration) that controls the safety and approval of foods. Michael Kantor (Commerce Secretary) in Bill Clinton’s Administration and Donald Rumsfeld (Defense Secretary) in both Bushs Administrations, were the most prominent.

Should ‘gifted’ people be rewarded or looked up to? There is a naive assumption that ‘gifted’ people benefit society. Obviously not all ‘gifted’ are going to benefit society in fact some are very bad. There is an equal chance that some of the ‘gifted’ would do harm to society e.g. the financial crisis. The people involved are not dummies.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Read about how the poor farmers in India have struggled since the introduction of GMO crops. It is sad, and disgusting. Disgusting that power-hungry spiritual drones could do this to their fellow man. Monsanto produced Agent Orange and now they are growing our food? Who's responsible for allowing this? Many of us know what is going on... we are quietly observing, taking notes, watching.

This new crop of elites (actually it's a very old crop) think that by melding with machines and forming a "transhumanistic" society, they will be granted immortality and infinite power. They think this will enable them to escape from planet Earth and make it to the stars. Guess what? There are other intelligent beings out there already and I'm sure they are grading our collective behavior.

In my humble opinion--it's how you treat your fellow man that matters more than "mating" with a computer. If they (the more intelligent entities) want us off this rock, they have the ability already to make that happen. I'm not sure we deserve it at this point.

LeBrok
05-02-13, 02:40
What is a Human Being?
Excellent idea for a thread in philosophy, beside "when does human life start and when it should be protected by full rights."





Is he/she a genetic code that a geneticist could patent? Could he patent a group of people like Haplogroup Y? Could a corporation by patenting “super” babies thus enslave them? Could “mutants” be created and patented? Could enslaved “super-talented” mutants like “X-Men” surreptitiously overcome the controlling mechanism and take over the world? What if a scientist designed a process to modify a set of genes against a certain disease and patented those genes. Now if you go to a DNA firm and get your DNA mapped. Suppose it is found you have those very same genes that this scientist patented would you belong to this scientist? What if you had a unique DNA map that no else in the world gas and assume it is a new mutation that gives you an advantage you are not aware of. Now a DNA firm maps your DNA and realizing the uniqueness patents it. What do you do? Does the DNA firm owns you?
Nobody can answer these questions yet precisely, and more in light of what would bring biggest benefit to humanity.
Well, at least we know that future won't be boring.



Professor Church of Harvard University skirted around the issue of resurrecting a Neanderthal. What if he patented the Neanderthal genes, could he form a corporation and create more Neanderthals to be enslaved? He could really bring down the wages of unions.
I wouldn't worry about unlikely army of Neanderthals take our jobs away. We have better inventions called robots, already employed in millions in factories around this planet. They will take our labor intensive and manual jobs away in near future. They will really bring union wages down, and already are.
I'm just waiting for you to start a new thread how merciless capitalists plotting around to create more robots to finally kill the working class.



Monsanto is the leading company to have engaged in GM Genetically Modified plants and animals. Many of the other countries crops were affected - like Mexico’s corn. The GM corn was produced in quantities to flood the market and drove many of the variety of natural corn almost out of business. Biodiversity is being squelched. Countries have to buy those food products from Monsanto. The thing is that Monsanto crops could taint or contaminate ajoining fields by winds blowing seeds into neighbouring farmers’ fields. Monsanto had the gumption of suing farmers for stealing their GM crop seeds.
I don't know individual cases, and I'm sure there will be mistakes made with GM food production. DNA is a complicated thing and environment always introduces unknown factors.
What you forgot to mentioned is that cross-pollination was common also before GM foods, from (unnatural) human grown varieties. I don't see you protesting against them.


http://www.plosbiology.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0000008.g001&representation=PNG_I
The left one is the original one, the right one is domesticated one, it's not GM. Well, one might notice that this is Genetically Modified by millennia of intensive mutation and selection by farmers. But somehow for you it is a natural kind, and yet they've cross-pollinated with wild varieties too.

Actually activists like you are turning the GM companies to inventing non-breeding seeds, to prevent "contamination" of environment by pollen of GM foods.

Unlike terminator, apomixis is “germinator” technology—avoiding fertilization altogether by producing seeds without pollination. In effect, seeds can be natural clones of the mother, instead of a genetic exchange between mother and father. Therefore, hybrid quality can be maintained as farmers use seed year after year.Although apomixis occurs naturally in about 400 plant species, Jefferson believes that it can be successfully developed as a useful trait in other crop plants. To ensure its widespread availability, Jefferson and collaborators pledged not to create restrictive patent rights that could block the development of apomixis.
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0000008
And off course, new accusation from activists are already in the air, that big corps will make even more money now, by selling fresh batch of seeds to farmers every spring.

Geez, no break.

Yetos
05-02-13, 03:21
I wonder who controls the GMO companies, and who pays them and why?

No matter above my personal problem is more simple,

in 1 hand, the rights of the sciencist, his possible 'date' with immortality, and the free spirit of science above dogmas
in 2nd hand the rights of the 'clone' in his life

and if I had 3 hands, the psychology of Humans, how they will face it and react, in case they know.


PS
I wonder if GMO will mutate even rats, cause in future many people will eat such food, (if not today)

PS2,
since we are talking about Hybridic and Mutated food,
the most funny was done by a relative of mine,
she was never buing new seeds for tomatoes, but she used the old way of seed gathering,
in same area and small radious also 4-5 other grew tomatoes, but all buy their seeds each year,
the result, after 4 years gathering and mixing tomatoes seeds, a tomato looking like nettles, with small potattoe like bulb roots,
guys it was very funny when she was telling the story, that she plant tomatoes and grew pottatoe nettles,
the above story is real, after that she was forced to buy new seed every year.
we never know when and how the chaotic posibilty happens.
that is why I believe that a quite big time carantine is needed and many tests to avoid the above.

oriental
27-02-13, 03:38
There has been tests of GMO foods at Monsanto which showed adverse effects on cows. The hormone(s) to fatten cows or to have cows produce more milk had the cows' udders producing puss in the milk and lesions developed on the udders. This is was secretly made public by a Monsanto Lab worker who worked on those tests.

Well the horse meat scandal shows how the food industry needs monitoring. In South Africa the meats balls had donkey meat in them. I was told when I was at university that hamburgers and sausages where the meat is chopped up you can never tell what they chopped up. All the waste meat is chopped up. In the thirties in the Chicago meat processing plant even had dead rats chopped up. Beware of chopped meat except where you chop them as you know what you are eating.

nordicwarrior
27-02-13, 04:27
That's quite a story about the tomatos Yetos. I can imagine a future where big farma (as opposed to big pharma) aka Monsanto and the other agri giants pay politicians to make it illegal for the common man to grow a garden because his natural food crops might pollinate/"contaminate" the expensive, genetically engineered products.

We live in strange times.

MrKappa
20-03-13, 23:35
I am no expert on it, however GMO, makes compatibility at the production level more cost effective, or potentially commercially viable.

I know someone mentioned that cows were getting sick, however, was it the GMO? Or the pesticide which was engineered specifically for use with the GMO food? Right?

So I understand there is that economic aspect where pesticides are specifically designed to work on crops specifically modified to work with the pesticides.

Who does it benefit?

I'd say farmers are some of the most undervalued and underpaid, heavily subsidized people out there. I'm unsure if it benefits them at all to be perfectly honest.

Does it yeild more crop? I'd suspect weather modification might be a better investment.

I am not an economist, or farmer, ect... only adding a few points...

nordicwarrior
20-03-13, 23:46
I am no expert on it, however GMO, makes compatibility at the production level more cost effective, or potentially commercially viable.

I know someone mentioned that cows were getting sick, however, was it the GMO? Or the pesticide which was engineered specifically for use with the GMO food? Right?

So I understand there is that economic aspect where pesticides are specifically designed to work on crops specifically modified to work with the pesticides.

Who does it benefit?

I'd say farmers are some of the most undervalued and underpaid, heavily subsidized people out there. I'm unsure if it benefits them at all to be perfectly honest.

Does it yeild more crop? I'd suspect weather modification might be a better investment.

I am not an economist, or farmer, ect... only adding a few points...

I'm no fan of weather modification either. If you have the chance Mr. Kappa, please read about the farmers in India that have first hand experience with growing GMO crops. Their accounts are terrifying, and some Indian farmers have committed suicide over the situation.

Here in the U.S. where big farma (I think I made this term up-- pretty good huh?) has "enabled" Congress to allow GMO food for some time now-- I've noticed a new trend. I'm seeing big pot bellies on people with skinny arms and skinny legs, almost like the images from children starving in Africa a few decades ago (for those older readers). I feel this indicates a nutrient poor diet that fills people up physically, but starves them biologically. The next time you're in the States, look around and see if you notice more bloated, distended stomachs and thin limbs.

This is a different look than the standard obese model, but granted neither are really attractive.

oriental
21-03-13, 02:03
It could be due to mono-culture where this one crop depletes the soil of nutrients. Fertilizers only add in a few elements like Nitrogen, Phosphorus and two other elements.

Cambrius (The Red)
24-03-13, 21:27
I'm skeptical about the benefits.

LeBrok
29-03-13, 07:26
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqPUEfJULUo
Penn and Teller on GM Foods
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqPUEfJULUo

Cambrius (The Red)
01-04-13, 16:07
The more I look at this the less enthusiastic I become about genetically manipulated foods.

oriental
17-04-13, 23:28
Supreme Court debates whether “snipping” human genes merits a patent

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/supreme-court-debates-whether-snipping-human-genes-merits-a-patent/

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/04/15-3

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-04/16/gene-patenting

http://www.theprovince.com/health/human+genes+patented+Supreme+Court+tackles+billion +dollar/8244415/story.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22157410

We covered all of this already.