www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/world/americas/oaxacas-native-maize-embraced-by-top-chefs-in-us-and-europe.html
Now that landrace maize is becoming more mainstream outside of Mexico, do you think the general public will find it easier to understand why genetic contamination from vile strands of transgenic frankengenes poses such an enormous risk to humanity's gastronomic heritage?
Will students organize to force their schools to divest from Monsanto, much like the BDS movement successfully opposed apartheid?
>>7370376
>comparing GMOs to apartheid
yeah no m8
>>7370376
Are you the new Edgar, or have you been Edgar all along?
There is space for both crops engineered for efficiency and cool heirloom shit for taste.
>>7371464
Not when the GMO crops are contaminating everything else. And then the Monsanto lawyers come and sue you for being downwind. Which makes the problem difficult to deny if you have any appreciation for logic. But logic can be fixed: you silence the critics.
>The story starts on the frenetic streets of Mexico City after a scientist alerted his government to a discovery he'd made of national importance...
>He soon found himself unceremoniously deposited into one of the City's familiar green and white beetle taxis ... and escorted on an unfamiliar journey up a long road out of the city...
>Here I am being led to a very important Mexican government official and under very strange conditions... we were driving into this very seedy part of town ...where people often go and hide from the police or dump people who have disappeared ...I really didn't know what was going to happen but there was this sense of intimidation going on and of course that was confirmed when ...he proceeded to tell me how terrible it was that I was doing the research and how dangerous it would be for me to publish
>So just what WAS Ignacio Chapela's research? And why was he given the impression it would be better not to make it public...
>It all comes down to the humble tortilla...it's made from maize - and Mexicans are proud that this is the birthplace of this staple food. It's a cultural icon and it's illegal to grow GM maize here. But when Dr Chapela tested crops in the field he found GM maize a huge embarrassment to officials.
>GM maize CAN be imported for food. Dr Chapela believes peasant farmers grew the modified seed and that pollen blown in the wind carried the added genes into native varieties. He was shocked enough to warn the government. He says officials were split, with Environment concerned... and Agriculture keen that his finding didn't get out.
>When he refused to keep quiet about what he'd found in the maize , he says the Agriculture official made an extraordinary suggestion...that he join a research project DESIGNED to show that what he'd picked up was just the NATURAL presence of the same infectious agents used by the GM companies...
>>7371052
>GMO shills believe they know what's best for simpleton brown people
>with this One Cool Trick we'll solve world hunger and childhood blindness!
There's no world food shortage. Inequality causes malnutrition. GMO makes inequality worse, not better.
>>7373586
u wot
pls explain the entirety of human history prior to the industrial revolution
>>7373586
>simpleton brown people
>literally fucking starving to death on the streets
Yea we can step in as much as we want you bleeding heart liberal
>Inequality causes malnutrition
Yea let's just unite under the banner of communism, then their soil will magically grow food as the angels smile on the one true government. Eat shit commie.
>>7373602
Ok. First there were eukaryotes. Then Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves in the Civil War (which was about slavery). Then we had Watson & Crick, around the time Monsanto was raping the earth with DDT and Agent Orange. Eventually they realized GMO (which wasn't around in the times of the ancient romans despite what Monsanto wants you to believe) was a great way to create lock-in on the food supply.
Eventually, armies of shills such as yourself were employed to flood the internet with disinfo about how Borlaug, decades before any known transgenic techniques, was magically injecting transgenes into the wheat genome using space-alien voodoo and Jesus and that's how literally the entire world hunger was solved. Later hippies cancelled the solution via protests against Vietnam, which is why billions of Africans are dying, this is entirely the hippy stoner pot head's fault. Anyone who disagrees with this preposterous hurricane of lies is a hippie stoner communist muslim who hates science and doesn't believe in antibiotics.
>>7373586
>People are still hungry because while there's enough food in the world, there's not enough in certain areas and the people there can't afford it
>technologies that will make food cheaper and more plentiful without requiring any additional equipment or even a change in farming techniques on the part of the farmers won't make a difference
>2016
>Still being this stupid
>>7373624
>Yea let's just unite under the banner of communism
You're starting to come around at last!
>>7370376
>humanity's gastronomic heritage?
You eat. You survive.
You make chemistry with food so it tastes nice, it's an added bonus, a residue from our tongues and their ability to detect food that is spoiled, too hot, too spicy or still alive and moving.
That's all cooking is, take your fucking transhumanism philosophical wannabe bullshit outta here.
>>7373870
>muh soylent
>>7373870
why are you here? /ck/ doesn't sound like your kind of board
ITT hurr durr mosatanto iz bad therefore GM is more badder. Idiots. Boeing makes bombers that kill minorities to further the Zionist cause. Do you then not fly Boeing airliners? Mosanto is almost Apple SHiT tier in its assholism but GM is the way forward.
>>7375091
>the introduction of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers
But that's science. So is GMO. If you accept that nitrogen fertilizer is real, then you must accept that Monsanto knows what's best for you and just let them run roughshod over the rights of farmers everywhere.
>>7375091
>it's often more profitable to let food rot in a warehouse than to distribute it for free to the poor.
Why should companies waste logistical resources on handouts?
>>7375203
>handouts are ok if it's part of a GMO shill project, otherwise not ok
>>7370376
another GMO conspiratard
please go back to pol
>>7373634
>technologies that will make food cheaper and more plentiful without requiring any additional equipment or even a change in farming techniques on the part of the farmers won't make a difference
Making food more plentiful will lower the price, forcing farmers out of the market.
Big commercial farmers will increase their yields but people won't magically produce more food. There is plenty of unused farmland in the world, it remains unused for economic reasons.
>>7375224
I've never seen a bigger crock of shit condensed into image form.
>>7375241
>I can't refute any of it so it's a crock of shit
Maybe if GMO apologists weren't hell bent on suppressing knowledge, you'd be able to write an articulate response.
>>7375171
Not that anon,but,you ar a fucking stupid!!
>>7370376
I work in an immunology lab. So while I don't genetically alter plants or foodstuffs, I do alter the genome of a variety of mouse strains for the purposes of my research. Even so, MANY of the genetic sequences which encode for proteins in mice and humans are VASTLY different to the point where some of them has lost or gained different functions and can no longer bind targets in one species or another. And that's between two mammals. This is to say nothing of two different phylogenetic kingdoms.
You are categorically and fundamentally incorrect with your statement that genetically modified organisms as a whole are unsafe. A lot of the proteins that you fearmonger about don't even have any interactive ligands (that's what binds to the protein) with many GMO-inserted genetic sequences. It's also unlikely that the products of such an insertion will have any interaction either, due to the vast difference in the genomes of any given GMO product.
So while you are correct in your assertion that *SOME* GMOs *MAY* cause problems in humans, you are painting it with a VERY broad brush. You fearmongers really don't understand the science behind it. And that's ok. You don't have any real power in the sphere of GMOs anyways. Everything is in its proper place.
Also, coming from a tripfag, this is the kind of full-retard shit I would expect. Consider suicide.
>>7375224
You're using the proof of concept numbers, because they will only be able to select the varieties after they have been crossed with native rice. The realistic number is anywhere from 60-240g of rice/day. Get your shit together.
>>7370376
>schools
post secondary education is a money grab
>>7375503
Is this pasta? It's referring to statements that aren't in the op post.
>>7375503
Look at you, you faggot. Think you know everything, don't you? Given the general lack of understanding of biology and our bodies I find it absurd you claim to know exactly what you are talking about. You've already drawn all your conclusions. Go be a government worker and leave science to someone who isn't so goddamn pompous
>>7375259
Further, fuck you too. Each of these knock-in strains is different. Applying a single label to vastly different organisms which perform vastly different functions is stupid as fuck.
GMOs are a lot like prescription drugs in the context that they each have pros and cons, depending on how they deliver and what they deliver. The real funny thing is that even the "natural" foods that you eat now may contain adverse proteins which may be affecting your health even more negatively than the average GMO can. You're trying to label a variety of DIFFERENT FOODS using DIFFERENT GENES with the SAME LABEL, despite their vast differences in purpose, function, and negative effect on human beings (which is highly unlikely).
The fact of the matter is that when you eat food you take in a variety of DNA, RNA, and proteins that are completely unrelated to any function in your body, and in most of the cases those are degraded for use in the human body. This is happening in every single thing you eat and every single thing you drink. Even if you drink fucking water, the bacteria in that water has a variety of organism-specific genetic products that will never interact with you, especially if it goes into your fucking turbo-acidic stomach cavity.
God damn I just want to look at food and shit, but you fucking retards just have to try to shit on the biological sciences. Then I get pulled into these stupid threads filled with fucking neanderthals.
God damn. biotech firms are complete assholes, but the people working there know their shit. Any undergraduate bio-sciences student (excluding medical instrumentation) should be able to tell you that nearly all of the shit you ingest is broken down and re-purposed into other necessary components for the body.
tl;dr Each GMO should be evaluated according to its merit; retards should be strapped to a Conan wheel for life
>>7370376
Just like how cars put humanity's horse riding heritage at risk
>>7375544
>each GMO should be evaluated on its merits
By Monsanto scientists, once. Then after approval, anyone who tries to evaluate the safety will be sued and, separately, slandered and blackmailed into shutting up.
Anyone who thinks the narrow commercial interests of a large biotech firm aren't perfectly aligned with public safety needs to have his head crushed with a medieval torture device.
>>7375516
No. But the broader implication is that GMOs are going to be bad for other reasons as well.
>>7375518
I know what the prevailing trends and knowledge of basic biology is. You have failed to state a single that that I have incorrectly noted, and I doubt that you will. Try me, faglord. I didn't come here to jerk off about myself. I came here to spread light on the deception that you're peddling.
And it's as easy as opening a fucking biology textbook. Each GMO is unique. Each protein has (or more likely doesn't) a unique interaction with the human physiology. When you say they all do, you speak untruthfully in front of all of your peers. My understanding of my discipline changes every week when I discover more and more. And while immunology may not be directly, many of the processes and methods overlap. Genetic modification, for one. 2 weeks ago I developed a fucking GMO E. coli to generate a protein for my research, which I then harvested.
I would be willing to assert that I know more about genetic modification and protein interaction (because that's my fucking field) than 99% of the people in this thread.
Stop trying to label shit improperly. You can't even make a salient point calling out one of the things that I am 'wrong about.'
>>7375554
But that doesn't make any sense when you factor in the possibility of class-action lawsuits which would be the driving force of any litigation which may happen as a result of this sort of thing.
What you're talking about is a subset of epidemiology. It's the same kind of thing that the CDC uses when they're attempting to isolate patient zero.
If you suddenly have children popping up with congenital disorders or people developing metabolic syndromes, or other adverse events, then it can all be tracked back to the GMO that is responsible for it. You can do this by checking market introduction, the results of animal trials, and other biological assays which can identify interaction of proteins of interest with the human physiology by tagging them with conjugate dyes or any one of many other options. And that's assuming that there will be a problem, which is highly unlikely. You guys keep saying it like it's a foregone conclusion that every single GMO is going to negatively affect the human body, but biology just doesn't work like that.
It's really hit-or-miss. And in the case of cross-species genetic interaction, it's really slated for the 'miss' side of things.
But if something like that DID happen, then I agree Monsanto is pretty shit. Maybe they'd be able to weasel out of it. Maybe not. But what is certain is that the GMO that caused the problem would likely be destroyed or altered to prevent this negatively interaction from occurring..
>>7375563
You used phrases like "categorically incorrect" and indicated that a specific statement (that only existed in your head) was wrong.
Are you very well paid for your shilling? Because you're very emotionally invested to the point of making irrational, hysterical comments about imaginary adversaries. So it must be a very lucrative job, this shill job of yours.
>>7375586
So let me get this straight. First I made salient arguments conveying the lack of interaction between the proteins of different organisms of even narrow phylogenetic backgrounds (ie mice and men) and then expanding that to entirely different kingdoms. Then I tell you that the interaction that I'm talking about, based on this information, is
>...categorically and fundamentally incorrect with your statement that genetically modified organisms as a whole are unsafe.
I can see your point about me reacting to a statement that wasn't there. And that's fair. I jumped the gun a bit, there.
Be that as it may, it does not detract from the truth of any of my statements in regard to the biological sciences.
Great job, though. You have successfully attacked my character while leaving my arguments intact. Bravo. You're a true fighter for the cause, my friend.
So is that your only critique? Maybe you have some typos to point out to bolster your argument or perhaps you could say 'shill' a few more times. Maybe that'll make your imaginary bogeyman fantasy really come to life.
Immunobro here. Gonna go to sleep.
If anyone else has any interest in looking at conserved genes between species, I'd like to direct you here: I know it's only a wikipedia page, but it covers the basics of conserved genetic sequences and how important/rare they are depending on the function that they encode for.
That is to say that a protein involved in cell division (a hallmark of all life) will be highly conserved versus a protein encoded for something like prolactin, which I'm not even sure exists in plants.
You can see a lot of interesting things with this kind of study as well. For example, humans and dogs both encode the same gene to generate vitamin C, but the human gene has a single nucleotide polymorphism (a change in 1 DNA base pair) to make this gene nonfunctional. Therefore, humans must gather vitamin C from their environment while dogs don't need to. It's super tied in to evolution, which is one of my favorite topics in biology.
If you really want to get informed about this issue, try to look into cross-species protein interaction. That really is the crux of the matter in this issue.
>>7375678
Forgot link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conserved_sequence
