Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wahoo and the gm grain debate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Wahoo View Post
    GM doesn't produce more food nor is it precise as claimed. It is different because they isolate a gene from a different species and fire it into the DNA of a plant which holds around 30,000 genes. The process is not precise and disrupts different genes in the DNA and the plant can't control the gene at all (some genes are switched on/off to be active while GM is always active). Only around one in a million work and the majority that do grow are seriously mutated. These visual mutations are weeded out then voila... a supposed success.
    If its so unsuccessful, then its no problem if one or two seeds get into an 'organic' farm's wild oats, radish, Dock, capeweed, etc etc etc infested worthless crop?

    There was 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% GM canola in his crop.
    There was 0.001% non Canola in his crop.
    There was 50+% other weeds in his crop.

    common sense and objectivity is so far lost this should never have even gone further than the farm gate.

    Comment


    • Example time where GM may be relevant to this forum:
      1. Some riders prefer riding a Harley and some prefer riding a race bike. How ticked off would you be if your more valuable and preferred bike turned into the other if you parked within 5km of it? If it is worth less or unsaleable, would you be happy to accept the loss? Would you be happy paying a user fee for the unwanted change as well?
      2. What if the Government decided to grant a patent on graffiti? Someone graffiti's your motorbike making it worth less and they get to legally own it but lease it back to you and charge you a user fee. Happy?
      Or would you want compensation for the economic loss caused by the unfair system? If everybody knew the risk before, wouldn't risk management be in place to prevent it happening?
      Life is NOT a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: "Wahoo!! What a ride!"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by filbert View Post
        The reason I'm averse to accepting science as fact is the number of times it's proven not to be.
        What is initially declared safe is proven not to be so by the next generation.

        But by all means leap into planting those GM crops because science, your great grandkids will probably enjoy the compensation money to go with their tumours and brain damage...

        Or you might end up without great grandkids because they can't breed due to genetic damage and organ failures...

        But it'll be fine because science?

        It must be better because science, right?

        Thalidomide was tested and proven safe by science...
        So are you going to reject vaccination because its based on science?
        -

        Comment


        • My house, its contents, motorcycle, roads, race track, fuel, and 99.9999999999999999% of everything I can see in a 10,000 +km radius (Or in our solar system/Galaxy/universe) has been genetically modified in some way, either by mankind, or evolution.

          Life choices are great.

          Did you hear about the Cat that voted green?
          Did a shit and buried itself.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by filbert View Post
            Would probably be a good idea to stop building houses on or mining farmland and selling it off to the Chinese then....
            That is a big problem. Small towns built on prime agricultural land hundreds of years ago are now megacities with agriculture pushed out to marginal land.
            -

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wahoo View Post
              GM doesn't produce more food nor is it precise as claimed. It is different because they isolate a gene from a different species and fire it into the DNA of a plant which holds around 30,000 genes. The process is not precise and disrupts different genes in the DNA and the plant can't control the gene at all (some genes are switched on/off to be active while GM is always active). Only around one in a million work and the majority that do grow are seriously mutated. These visual mutations are weeded out then voila... a supposed success.
              You do realise that random genetic mutation is what drives natural selection?

              Plant and animal breeders have been harnessing this for hundreds, even thousands of years. GM just speeds up the process.
              -

              Comment


              • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                So are you going to reject vaccination because its based on science?
                I reject the flu vaccination every year.
                Do you remember the good old days before the internet?

                when arguments were only entered into by the physically or intellectually able.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                  ... GM just speeds up the process.
                  ... and then pushes it out into an uncontrolled environment as part of an essential food crop with little regard as to how it affects said environment (or even a legal framework to deal with the consequences as this thread illustrates). I fail to see how Round-up resistant strains are of net benefit to either the ecosystem or the food-chain in general.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Skut View Post
                    ... and then pushes it out into an uncontrolled environment as part of an essential food crop with little regard as to how it affects said environment (or even a legal framework to deal with the consequences as this thread illustrates). I fail to see how Round-up resistant strains are of net benefit to either the ecosystem or the food-chain in general.
                    Have you heard of genetic fitness cost? In the absence of selection pressure dominance often declines.
                    -

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by filbert View Post
                      I reject the flu vaccination every year.
                      I have to say I'm a bit skeptical about flu vaccinations, mainly because I'm not convinced that they will have sourced the most recent strains. They are probably vaccinating me against flue strains I'm already immune to. But for $15, why not.
                      -

                      Comment


                      • FSANZ a small science-based organisation.
                        http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/cons...an14%20(2).pdf

                        Its just a parade of responses along the lines of, "The weight of scientific evidence published to date does not support ... adverse consequences for humans"
                        -

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                          You do realise that random genetic mutation is what drives natural selection?
                          Plant and animal breeders have been harnessing this for hundreds, even thousands of years. GM just speeds up the process.
                          No, that is incorrect. GM doesn't speed up the process when producing a GM plant. Biotechnology speeds up the process of producing non-GM plants though. You are deliberately misleading the term genetic modification with modifying genetics rather than the genetic modification as per the genetic engineering that makes it. The majority of GM crops are simply resistant to glyphosate. If you can do that in one year without GM, why after decades can't GM be more successful than that?
                          For a GM crop to reach proof of concept stage, it only needs to stay alive, it doesn't need to prove the claims of salt tolerant, drought tolerant and all the other rubbish that is claimed for it in order to try to lift barriers and gain support.
                          Last edited by Wahoo; 26-03-2015, 05:33 PM.
                          Life is NOT a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: "Wahoo!! What a ride!"

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                            FSANZ a small science-based organisation.
                            http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/cons...an14%20(2).pdf

                            Its just a parade of responses along the lines of, "The weight of scientific evidence published to date does not support ... adverse consequences for humans"
                            TBH I don't hold any major fears that a change in the DNA of a food is going to cause another head to sprout (I do enough harm to my body with known toxins as it is).

                            It simply comes down to two issues for me:

                            1: There are markets, both national and international, that place a value on non-GM produce (much like non-hybrids, organic, pesticide-free etc). Growers should have a right to be able to supply those markets in good faith. Australia is also in an ideal position to cater to these markets as a point of difference.
                            2: Food security. I personally have more faith in the long term viability in a naturally evolved crop (even with human input ie selection etc) than something substantially manipulated at a genetic level over a short term. Especially if it is driven solely by a profit motive (and please don't tell me Monsanto just wants to feed the world...)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                              I have to say I'm a bit skeptical about flu vaccinations, mainly because I'm not convinced that they will have sourced the most recent strains. They are probably vaccinating me against flue strains I'm already immune to. But for $15, why not.
                              Have you read the actual data for a flu vaccination?

                              The claim is that it halves your risk of getting the flu, the actual numbers make a mockery of statistics in advertising...

                              You have a 1 in 100 chance of getting the flu without the vaccine, when you have the vaccine you have a 1 in 10 chance of flu symptoms but drop to a 0.5 in 100 chance of getting the flu again [emoji38]
                              Do you remember the good old days before the internet?

                              when arguments were only entered into by the physically or intellectually able.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by agrid View Post
                                FSANZ a small science-based organisation.
                                http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/cons...an14%20(2).pdf
                                Its just a parade of responses along the lines of, "The weight of scientific evidence published to date does not support ... adverse consequences for humans"
                                FSANZ is more like a public relations exercise for the government to support investors.
                                Judy Carmans response to FSANZ critiquing her study was well worth reading and I can forward anyone a copy if you like.
                                Extracts:
                                "FSANZ therefore requires no evidence from animal feeding studies to determine that GM crops are safe to eat, but requires extensive information from such studies in order to accept data indicating that GM crops are harmful."
                                "FSANZ made numerous statements about the published study that are factually incorrect. Specifically stated that:
                                . Pigs were killed by being stunned in a pen when they were not.
                                . Certain mycotoxins were not measured in the diet when they were..."
                                etc etc.
                                Life is NOT a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: "Wahoo!! What a ride!"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X