If You Had A Twin, But Didn't Realise...
Family Life20 mins ago
What about GM crops?
50 Answers
It seems to me that “GM” has too narrow a definition nowadays. Genetic modification of plants and animals has gone on for centuries, possibly millennia, under the names of cross-fertilisation and cross-breeding, methods of importing genes from one strain to another to improve shelf-life, flavour, appearance, edible muscle, pest-resistance and so on. This was always considered acceptable and sometimes praiseworthy (“Ooh, look at that lovely new rose they’ve produced – it’s called Princess Diana!”)
I fail to understand why GM by these long-winded hit-and-miss methods was OK but the same procedures done more quickly and accurately by isolating and moving just the right genes is considered by some to be sinister, at least dangerous or at very least dubious.
Take the latest example, the trials on introducing blight-resistant genes into Maris Piper potatoes – adding just two genes to the 60,000 the potato already has. What possible danger can that cause to anyone or anything?
This is NOT a challenge, but a genuine search for objections that can be explained and justified.
I fail to understand why GM by these long-winded hit-and-miss methods was OK but the same procedures done more quickly and accurately by isolating and moving just the right genes is considered by some to be sinister, at least dangerous or at very least dubious.
Take the latest example, the trials on introducing blight-resistant genes into Maris Piper potatoes – adding just two genes to the 60,000 the potato already has. What possible danger can that cause to anyone or anything?
This is NOT a challenge, but a genuine search for objections that can be explained and justified.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chakka35. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'd give up on the word splitting, it'll get you nowhere.
I'm happy to accept that (if I felt like it) I could learn more about evolution, but, the fact remains that you've said absolutely nothing to allay my fears that diseases could spread across species.
Whether mutation is random or by design is irrelevan, if that mutation is successful it will propagate, yes?
Again, one does not need to be a scholar or a scientist to comprehend that were money's involved corners can be cut.
I tend to find that when a thread reaches 40 (a bit like women) they start to lose their allure. ;-))
So to sum up tell me that my fears are unfounded and why, basically tell me why animal diseases affecting humans can't happen.
I'm happy to accept that (if I felt like it) I could learn more about evolution, but, the fact remains that you've said absolutely nothing to allay my fears that diseases could spread across species.
Whether mutation is random or by design is irrelevan, if that mutation is successful it will propagate, yes?
Again, one does not need to be a scholar or a scientist to comprehend that were money's involved corners can be cut.
I tend to find that when a thread reaches 40 (a bit like women) they start to lose their allure. ;-))
So to sum up tell me that my fears are unfounded and why, basically tell me why animal diseases affecting humans can't happen.
everton, I don’t agree about threads losing allure after 40 and assume that your reference to women is a joke. Nevertheless I think that you and I are getting nowhere on this one, mainly because you keep repeating points that I have answered. One last try:
1.I don’t know what you mean by “word splitting”. Do you mean “hair splitting”? If so, where have I been guilty of that? Or is it splitting hairs to ask?
2.Mutation is certainly random, not designed. (Designed by what or whom?). But since you seem to think that mutations would be caused, somehow or other, by GM, the fact is not at all irrelevant. It is basic. Mutations are irrelevant in that they have no bearing on what we are discussing.
That you will learn about evolution “if you felt like it” is surely arrogant. What other subjects do you feel happy to pontificate on in pure ignorance?
3.I have never made the preposterous claim that animal diseases can’t affect humans. Anthrax, bird flu, swine fever come to mind. What I have said is that non-human animal tissue would not be transplanted into humans without ensuring they are free from disease.
4.That explains why your fear of trans-species GM is unfounded. What are your fears about GM-crops, the subject with which I started this? You can’t tell me, and you object to anyone else finding out.
**
Staying on that subject, here’s something for you to think about:
In the late 1840s the Irish potato famine, caused by the very potato blight that researchers are now trying to make the Maris Piper immune to, caused the deaths of about a million Irish people and the emigration of two million. If GM had been available then would you have approved of its use to clear that blight so that the people could be fed?
Since you seem opposed to GM research on principle, may one assume not?
1.I don’t know what you mean by “word splitting”. Do you mean “hair splitting”? If so, where have I been guilty of that? Or is it splitting hairs to ask?
2.Mutation is certainly random, not designed. (Designed by what or whom?). But since you seem to think that mutations would be caused, somehow or other, by GM, the fact is not at all irrelevant. It is basic. Mutations are irrelevant in that they have no bearing on what we are discussing.
That you will learn about evolution “if you felt like it” is surely arrogant. What other subjects do you feel happy to pontificate on in pure ignorance?
3.I have never made the preposterous claim that animal diseases can’t affect humans. Anthrax, bird flu, swine fever come to mind. What I have said is that non-human animal tissue would not be transplanted into humans without ensuring they are free from disease.
4.That explains why your fear of trans-species GM is unfounded. What are your fears about GM-crops, the subject with which I started this? You can’t tell me, and you object to anyone else finding out.
**
Staying on that subject, here’s something for you to think about:
In the late 1840s the Irish potato famine, caused by the very potato blight that researchers are now trying to make the Maris Piper immune to, caused the deaths of about a million Irish people and the emigration of two million. If GM had been available then would you have approved of its use to clear that blight so that the people could be fed?
Since you seem opposed to GM research on principle, may one assume not?
If that's what he was talking about, naomi, then it's a bit impertinent of him to say that it will get me nowhere. It's none of his business.
We'll have to disagree, I'm afraid. I think your definition of 'possible' is a little narrow. In the context of this subject 'anything is possible' means 'anything is capable of happening'. I wrack my brain to think of any example where there is something that can't happen after one has said that anything is possible. To say that 'anything is possible but X can't happen' is an oxymoron.
If we continue this shall we do it in the Rest Room?
We'll have to disagree, I'm afraid. I think your definition of 'possible' is a little narrow. In the context of this subject 'anything is possible' means 'anything is capable of happening'. I wrack my brain to think of any example where there is something that can't happen after one has said that anything is possible. To say that 'anything is possible but X can't happen' is an oxymoron.
If we continue this shall we do it in the Rest Room?
I remain unconvinced as to the benefits.
The reality that a disease can/could mutate affect humans is something that makes me wary.
The idea that in the pursuit of profit all institutions will operate to the same rigourous standards is questionable.
I object to testing G.M crops in fields, because we don't know the effects of cross pollenation, we simply still don't know enough full stop.
The reality is that we have plenty of food and plenty of ways to farm them efficiently, we just don't want to share it, we just want to keep prices at a certain level to suit ourselves.
If we deal with the socio-political problems then G.M becomes irrelevant, which brings me to the Irish famine, if the London government had acted in a more sensible manner then the crisis wouldn't have occurred.
Corrupt landlords utilised the famine as part of the wider reaching land clearance program for the conversion to sheep farming, the same conversion that England and Scotland had previously undergone, read Wordsworth and Burns respectively for the affects of these policies.
Irish nationalism with it's American sponsors has placed their experience above all others in this pysche.
Impertinent as I can be, I merely wanted to avoid a discourse on the difference between happen and possible.
So to sum up, what if the cure for cancer makes is susceptible to the parvo virus?
One non-contagious potentially fatal disease, being replaced by one highly contagious potentially fatal disease, afterall anything can happen with this science.
Ooops, to avoid confusion, I mean anything is possible.
The reality that a disease can/could mutate affect humans is something that makes me wary.
The idea that in the pursuit of profit all institutions will operate to the same rigourous standards is questionable.
I object to testing G.M crops in fields, because we don't know the effects of cross pollenation, we simply still don't know enough full stop.
The reality is that we have plenty of food and plenty of ways to farm them efficiently, we just don't want to share it, we just want to keep prices at a certain level to suit ourselves.
If we deal with the socio-political problems then G.M becomes irrelevant, which brings me to the Irish famine, if the London government had acted in a more sensible manner then the crisis wouldn't have occurred.
Corrupt landlords utilised the famine as part of the wider reaching land clearance program for the conversion to sheep farming, the same conversion that England and Scotland had previously undergone, read Wordsworth and Burns respectively for the affects of these policies.
Irish nationalism with it's American sponsors has placed their experience above all others in this pysche.
Impertinent as I can be, I merely wanted to avoid a discourse on the difference between happen and possible.
So to sum up, what if the cure for cancer makes is susceptible to the parvo virus?
One non-contagious potentially fatal disease, being replaced by one highly contagious potentially fatal disease, afterall anything can happen with this science.
Ooops, to avoid confusion, I mean anything is possible.
