What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
211 Comments
- MDKAOD, on 11/17/2008, -10/+94Did anybody else think General Motors were turning into farmers as a last ditch effort to save themselves?
- poidh, on 11/17/2008, -6/+50Ethical considerations should be...... considered.
Religious ones shouldn't. There's no way I want the imaginary sky fairy being involved in any matters of science. - dblespresso, on 11/17/2008, -2/+37Says the person from the first world to the third, who can not afford it.
- ciordia9, on 11/17/2008, -3/+32If you kept the soil healthy it is both drought resistant and pest resistant. However when Monsanto both makes roundup, and the fertalizers, that create the problems, then sell the seeds that grow in their problematic soils, to overcome their problems.. does anyone see the circular agenda here?
If you want to comment in these sectors, don't be belligerent on what you think GMO is, learn why it is here, learn what it is doing, learn what it has done to places in India and Africa, and then bring wisdom to the conversation.
I believe in studying GMO's, in learning and growing scientifically. However we need those to stay in the Universities and not pushed by a corporation. A corporate agenda should not dictate our food policies or genetic patenting. - kinerry, on 11/17/2008, -3/+24animal DNA is never added to the mix, you are ill-informed on this topic my friend
- DOCNM, on 11/17/2008, -5/+25FTA: "There is absolutely no way we can move towards a world with food security without using GM technology"
And here is me, thinking that the main problem was access to food rather than production. I must have been reading FAO reports and not GM industy newsletters. - Spoomeister, on 11/17/2008, -6/+24Is it part of a secret government program to make British food edible?
- beesaretasty, on 11/17/2008, -1/+17Stop right there. Religious considerations? Who will dictate which religion(s) will be considered? One can say god did not intend for me to be drinking this delicious coke from a plastic bottle right now, but it's damn tasty and I'm glad I'm drinking this sugary caffeinated beverage.
Religion has no place in science. If there is a god/many gods it would be presumptuous of man to purport to understand His intentions. If something exists whose intentions are impossible to ever understand, it should not be considered because it simply cannot be considered. - IAmTheGuy, on 11/17/2008, -6/+20There has been no scientific study published in a reputable scientific journal that supports the notion that genetically modified food has adverse health effects. Become informed before making an opinion.
- TheZorch, on 11/17/2008, -14/+28Something needs to be done, both about the growing food problem and the out of control religious nutjobs who are holding humanity back from achieving greatness. So, UK government, grow those crops in secret, you are paving the way for humanities bright future. Don't let paranoid insane idiots living in the past stop you from improving everyone's lives.
- billricardi, on 11/17/2008, -3/+16I have 2 words for you: Dwarf Wheat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
These are the kinds of people that are trying to solve the world's hunger issues. This is the kind of breakthrough that they're trying to accomplish. They aren't splicing your mom into a tomato, this isn't Little Shop of Horrors.
We're talking about more nutrition in less square meters feeding and saving more people than has been possible in human history. That's all. - zdislaw, on 11/17/2008, -1/+14The words "secret" and "genetic modification" together in an article makes me just the slightest bit nervous.
- billricardi, on 11/17/2008, -2/+15Here in the U.K., people don't take 'every day' food very seriously unless it gets them some attention by doing so.
There is a culture of eating out, eating crappy pub food, with everything deep fried including Mars Bars. I kid you not. Actual authentic ethnic food has to be watered down to be more bland and include battered and deep fried versions of the dishes, or the restaurant goes out of business.
The most telling blow: Actually cooking at home in the U.K. is at such an all time low that celebrity chefs (like Jamie Oliver and Gordon Ramsey) are going on crusades to get people to turn on their ***** ovens at least once a week. Again, I'm not joking. The stories about why they can't cook at home are shocking, from no interest to 'welfare depression' and everything in between.
So if these deep fry oil inhaling, nightly take-away ordering drama queens have the gall to protest GM/GE crops, please ignore them. The government is 100 percent correct to do this in secret and take the decision out of the hands of a food-culture that is rapidly killing itself with laziness and misinformation. - poidh, on 11/17/2008, -3/+15@directive0
People who want to eat halal meat should be able to purchase halal meat. The demand for halal meat should create a market for such a product or products.
However, people who wish to have a halal diet should not be catered for out of "respect" or "sensitivity". If they don't want to eat non-halal meat then they don't have to. If that means they get less choice, then that's the price of believing in absudities such as halal, Islam, Allah, etc. - omgwtflawl, on 11/17/2008, -2/+13"So you'd rather sell food to the third world which don't seed, forcing them to be dependant on first world corporations to sell them seeds each year?"
Actually quite a few third world countries can't grow any crops at all besides the GM ones because of the harshness of the country. GM crops can be made to grow in areas with little water, or very hot or cold conditions, etc. So actually GM crops are the only hope for those countries to grow their own food. - terenceyap7, on 11/17/2008, -16/+27While genetically-modified crops hold much potential in solving food supply where quantity and yield are concerned, other parts of these experiments involving the introduction of animal DNA to plants remain both religious and ethical considerations. Also, the fear of genetic cross-mutation is also a very real threat to all inhabitants of our planet. It might be a good idea for governments to address these issues before anything else.
- serif69, on 11/17/2008, -5/+15The Corvette crop sure is coming in nice this year.
- TheUngod, on 11/17/2008, -1/+11As long as GM products are labeled as such, if you follow Kosher or Halal, then don't buy the GM products. It's not like they're going to solely produce GM products throughout the world. It may cost more, it may be less choice, but if that's what you believe then you're going to pay for it. Your religion shouldn't affect my ability to buy cheap, giant vegetables.
- AaronCo, on 11/17/2008, -2/+10The problem is that when you artificially inject genes into a crop you don't know if they'll stay in that crop. Oftentimes pollen from a genetically-altered crop gets into the air, and crosses w/ non-altered plants. In many cases the altered plants are unable to breed naturally from that point on, and since genetically-altered plants are patentable... your entire crop now belongs to someone else.
This alongside the fact that we don't know the full scope of giving random bacteria genes to corn is or what side-effects might result makes genetic engineering a risky business if it's not handled w/ great care. And yet they rarely are handled w/ adequate care. - omgwtflawl, on 11/17/2008, -6/+14If we all grew organic, there would be enough food for 66% of the earths population right now. In order to make that utopia a possibility, I am nominating you to be the first to go. Please report to the designated suicide booth and blow your head off. Then the rest of us can make our own choices about what food we eat. Thanks!
- aimhelix, on 11/17/2008, -1/+9It would kind of be a giveaway if I was driving in the middle of nowhere and then suddenly find myself surrounded by 20ft. tall corn.
- dagnome1984, on 11/17/2008, -1/+8GMO Potatoes
"During the experiments 4 rats died: two rats from the GM-RB group (showing abrupt changes in the large gut and in the liver), and two rats from the "control" group (due to pneumonia). Serious changes in the liver, kidneys and large gut were observed in the rats from the GM-RB group after their killing, in contrast to other groups. The liver in the rats from the GM-RB group had lighter yellow-brown colour, and was easily torn. Cysts in the kidney and in the liver were discovered in 3 rats out of 8 during the six month study (i.e. ~ 40% of rats). Signs of adipose dystrophy appeared in the cells of the liver (the hepatocytes) in rats from the RB-GM group, which were rarely noted in the RB group. Different sizes of cellular infiltrations were discovered in the large gut in rats from the GM-RB group. Changes in the large gut were not discovered in either the "control" or RB groups."
"Medical biological investigations of transgenic potatoes, resistant to the Colorado beetle" Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Institute of Nutrition, Moscow, 1998. page 275
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/1 ... - moulin1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+9The viewpoint that GM crops save starving children assumes that agribusiness actually gives a rat's ass about starving children. It's not a charity. It's a business. A business that maximizes its profits by driving local agriculture out of business with cheap imports. Third world economies are mostly agriculture based so shutting down that sector leads to massive unemploymnet and migration to urban areas (where they can get handouts of GM foods). That provides a ready supply of cheap labor for the conglomerates other activities.
- TroutNinja, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7@Screwy1138
Yep, that's an issue isn't it. But it's a choice that farmer can make on their own without the 'smart' first world countries telling them what decision to make. If they want to save seed, they can buy traditionally hybridized seed.
Oh, and I don't know where you read about the crops not producing seed. They do, but growers sign contracts with big Agro agreeing not to save the resulting seed.
If they want the specific crop features advertised by the big agro companies like Pioneer and Monsanto, they will need to sign the contracts. Those companies put ~10 years of research and hundreds of millions of dollars into developing those GM seeds. Allowing one farmer to buy the seed, save and then profit by selling it to their friends doesn't reward the company for it's work and they probably wouldn't want to develop it otherwise.
Dunno about your area, but the local Co-Ops here don't have that kind of expertise or money to develop that kind of product. - dartmanx, on 11/17/2008, -2/+8Yes, everyone in Britain needs to be sent Guy Fawkes masks immediately.
- KibibyteBrain, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7Genetic cross-mutation is a natural risk as it is, as well as a risk already greatly amplified by eugenics in farming which humans have been doing for thousands of years now. And in their vein, we have already done a lot of environmental damage from these practices, as well as breeding superweeds and other problems. So the damage is already done, but this is what we need to do to live. Of course, more direct means of genetic modification amplify it more than ever, but at some point, we are either in or out on this issue. If humans need this risk to sustain our population, which we already did, why not just continue?
As usual, it would be nice if the opposition to GM crops was not as...insane...in the way they handled themselves. I do think GM crops require heavy scrutiny by science at large and even the public at large. But if to even hold a single trial they have to do it in secret to stop it from being vandalized, that is not going to help useful regulation of the practice. - moulin1, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7And when these secret crops cross polinate and contaminate the crops growing next door that will be a secret too. Unless of course Agrico wants to sue for patent infringement.
- borez, on 11/17/2008, -10/+15They're growing crops in Porton Down? Crops that I will be eating, from the same site that developed chlorine, phosgene and mustard gas, Anthrax and Botulinum toxins, Tabun, Sarin and Soman, VX, CS gas and god knows what other nerve and biological agents.
Are they seriously having a ***** laugh?
Note to British government: Leave my food alone you C**TS!! - CarStan, on 11/17/2008, -10/+15I dont want any genes in my food!
- Screwy1138, on 11/17/2008, -6/+11So you'd rather sell food to the third world which don't seed, forcing them to be dependant on first world corporations to sell them seeds each year?
- ciordia9, on 11/17/2008, -6/+11You have no idea what you are talking about. You're reading the talking points like the RNC would give out. Learn how transmutation is killing animals in India where Monsanto has gone in with GMO. Learn why GMO is not needed but healthy farm practices are.
GMO is not the worlds solution, but it is as fantastic a marketing message as the "Green Revolution" was with fertilizers.
We are far too early in the creation of GM products to understand the long term ramifications for what they will do to our world. Anyone who thinks that we should deploy these weapons of the natural world show a severe lack of education in the sector.
I am not against GM, I am against the corporation pushing this down our throats because of a marketing agenda and not a real humanitarian one. GM needs more research, more study, and it needs to be contained until it can be throughly understood. If we're willing to so directly manipulate the natural order we need to be ready for the ramifications it can deliver. - inactive, on 11/17/2008, -2/+7These people should protest a worthwhile cause like the fact that Britain is quickly turning into a Police State.
- jdotter, on 11/17/2008, -0/+5Same here, then I started thinking they meant General Mills...
- poidh, on 11/17/2008, -3/+8Haha. Isn't it funny how those opposed to eating GM food don't understand that it's not the genetic material itself which can be poisonous.
- CarStan, on 11/17/2008, -1/+6exactly. I wish there'd be a stilistic device one could use to point this out that rhymes with Arrgh, spasm.
But looking at all the negative diggs of my comment, no such thing seems to be known Digg - tgc1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+7I think the food supply shortage thing is a myth. I think it's more oppressive governments and political issues that causes that. I also think it's a technological limitation in certain areas (access to proper tools, electricity, water filtration etc). It's not like we don't get food coming in from all over the world. People obviously survive in many impoverished countries. But they are not impoverished because of the food issue (that's part of it), they are impoverished because their economies suck. They suck because of the governments mismanagement. Lack of education, no infrastructure to support technological advancement etc.
That being said, GM foods have no place in this world. None. There is no need for us to go ***** around with nature and basically playing connect the dots with genomes. As much as we DO know about DNA and the like we still have not even scratched the surface. And fooling around with it like that, and somehow allowing it to get into the open and take over local crops (as it is already doing) is going to lead to a disaster of unimaginable proportions. What we are doing with DNA today is the equivalent of someone ***** around with one of my programs. Just randomly taking lines of code from one area and putting them into another to see if they do anything other than ***** up everything.
And that's just it. DNA is a lot like a program. And sometimes what you don't see happening is because the condition under which the function / gene expresses itself is not present. You just wait until things start going to hell. They'll go very, very quickly. Ie. Just because the program doesn't seem to be ***** up right now, you just have a while to go before it causes your system to crash and then we're all facing a literal blue screen of death. But instead of a blue screen it's going to be every life form on this earth.
These GM crops, foods etc. All need to be classified and quarantined as a biological hazard. They represent something way beyond any threat you can imagine, way beyond nuclear bombs and the like. This is a whole other level. Because once our food supply is compromised we are *****. Period. - kemp34, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Just like many scientific advances, there are positives and negatives associated with genetically modified crops. People need to be aware that there are significant potentials for abuse by unscrupulous entities. There is also potential for good use. What needs to be highly focused on is the ETHICAL use of such science and technology.
- Screwy1138, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Guys... I'm not against GM crops. And I understand the value of their resilience. I just don't want these companies to justify everything by altruism when clearly they're only using that reasoning when it's convenient.
- bjornski, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4This documentary, "The Future of Food", is an eye-opener too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNezTsrCY0Q
(part 1 of several)
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3385087/Future_of_ ...
(torrent) - directive0, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Poidh, you have a valid point. And while I agree with your conclusion, I did argue a point of which I felt was valid (and then actually shot it down with what is essentially your argument, albeit condensed). However, even with these concerns being relevant (which we agree they are not), they would not apply to this argument regardless as GMO's are considered both Kosher and Halal by different independent but respected (within their field) organizations. So it appears there are no religious concerns to even be considered. Hmmm.
Now what I took exception to was your statement that ethical concerns should be "considered" when ultimately they are probably one of the most important to me. In a field like GMO the capacity for ethical malpractice is varied and for the moment completely unforeseeable. We should never lose complacency, especially when dealing with something like the very food we need to perpetuate the species. While an application of the scientific method, agricultural science spills over into the commercial world rapidly, much like pharmacology only with fewer restrictions. In terms of that argument all I'm suggesting is some oversight. - poidh, on 11/17/2008, -2/+6@Hush
Ah, it's the old "world doesn't revolve around you" argument.
Who is anyone to say that religious concerns are complete tripe?
Who is anyone to say that the old Hindu practice of burning old women alive is a bad thing? After all, opinions are divided on the matter.
Who am I to say that secular citizens should have their availability of food dictated by religious concerns, when any right-minded person knows that religion is *****?
Yup, let's just apply equal validity to all opinions and see where it gets us. Maybe we can sort it out with a massive war or something. - kemp34, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Companies actually sue other companies to ensure that they CANNOT label their food as not including some of these "developments". It is insanity.
- josephbloseph, on 11/17/2008, -1/+5You're an idiot if you think that current crops are the result of natural evolution.
- jimfeet, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Wrong!
"Dr. Árpád Pusztai a leading UK scientist who had been hired by the Rowett Institute to develop the new safety protocol for genetically modified foods in Europe. He found that the rats in his study had developed potentially precancerous cell growth in the digestive tract, inhibited development of their brains, livers, and testicles, partial atrophy of the liver, enlarged pancreases and intestine, and immune system damage. He concluded that it was not the insecticide gene that was inserted, but was the process of genetic engineering itself.[6] Upon appearing on television where he said he expressed his concerns that the government and companies were using the population as Guinea pigs. Europeans were outraged, and within a week every major food company on the continent including McDonalds, Nestlé and Burger King, all committed to not purchase GM foods. To date this remains one of the best designed and carefully controlled feeding studies of genetically engineered foods on mammals."
[6] Stanley WB Ewen, Arpad Pusztai, Health risks of genetically modified foods The Lancet Medical Journal: Vol. 354, Issue 9179 August 1999. - dblespresso, on 11/17/2008, -5/+9Question:
Which is better:
- GM crops that require less pesticides, herbicides, land for the same output
- Standard crops that require more
We have the luxury of excess, but keep the bigger/global picture in mind. - inactive, on 11/17/2008, -1/+5Theyre trying to kill you all with GM crops but you dont have to worry cuz they have a fun phrase (conspiracy theorist) to dismiss reality
- anticon, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4It interesting, all these people leaving comments and making fun of the headline. I however know the difference between GM and GM Crop. I guess it says something about the consumer state of American Society when people thing that the term "GM Crop" is misleading.
- davebg8r, on 11/17/2008, -7/+11You present a false choice and are either uniformed of what GM food is or being purposefully misleading. No one really has a problem with selective breeding, we have been doing that for eons. People do have a problem with genetic modified (GM) foods where you manipulate the genes to produce plants with traits that have never existed or are cross species (animal, viral, etc). The potential for serious damage to us, animals, and our food supply is incredibly large (ie the existence of any of these things). So without long term, controlled testing, I dont want this stuff out in the wild where it can and would get away and out of control.
Just look at Monsato's current terminator lines of plants and how it has contaminated many others farmers crops. They have already built plants that are designed to not reproduce and this is a source of food. Imagine if that truly got wild and spread to all lines of those plants. Then Monsanto (or whoever) controls your food (until it mutates for any number of reasons). - wunksta, on 11/17/2008, -1/+5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminator_seeds
these are one of the most vile things that have ever been created, talk about profits before people, a ***** treason to the human race - crapuccino, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4Not in the UK it isn't.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 216 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is