Are GMO foods really substantially equivalent

[bilby]

Substantially equivalent ... I doubt it.

GMO's = patented ownership .

Oddly, I think this is much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much more important that the whole GMO is going to kill us.

While I understand the desire to protect investments into crop development, the idea of a corporation being able to own a crop food seems open to significant exploitation. If certain chemicals are used for growing crops, a corporation could manipulate agriculture to create monopolies for any number of crops. As we've seen with medications, this can be dangerous and exploited.

Sure, there are a lot of problems with patents. But that's got no more to do with GM technology than it has to do with any other technology.

Patents expire. Monopoly use of a new technology is intended as a temporary reward for innovation; when IP law doesn't work like that, it is the law that is the problem, not the technology.

 

[Kharakov]

Has anyone asked the important questions?

Does glyphosate inhibit or activate enzymes that break down NO?

Does it enhance the flavor of various foods?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Never realised the potential of exploitations like the example of costly medications. I was remembering at the time when a friend mentioned to me about terminator seeds(patented) which I had no clue about. These seeds are said to yield only once therefore can't be saved for future crops. You would need to keep buying seeds or have some permit for the usual GMO crops . For the poor farmer this is scary.

Probably one of the reasons they are banned in Europe.

Such things were emphatically outlawed in India some years ago.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oddly, I think this is much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much more important that the whole GMO is going to kill us.

While I understand the desire to protect investments into crop development, the idea of a corporation being able to own a crop food seems open to significant exploitation. If certain chemicals are used for growing crops, a corporation could manipulate agriculture to create monopolies for any number of crops. As we've seen with medications, this can be dangerous and exploited.

Sure, there are a lot of problems with patents. But that's got no more to do with GM technology than it has to do with any other technology.

Patents expire. Monopoly use of a new technology is intended as a temporary reward for innovation; when IP law doesn't work like that, it is the law that is the problem, not the technology.

Which is what I said, why the echo?

 

[Underseer]

We have had many discussions here about GMO foods and one of the main arguments presented by the anti-science boneheads is that GMO's are substantially equivalent, and therefore safe.
It is also a crucial argument made by the American FDA.

This has been called into question.

An integrated multi-omics analysis of the NK603 Roundup-tolerant GM maize reveals metabolism disturbances caused by the transformation process

Glyphosate tolerant genetically modified (GM) maize NK603 was assessed as ‘substantially equivalent’ to its isogenic counterpart by a nutrient composition analysis in order to be granted market approval. We have applied contemporary in depth molecular profiling methods of NK603 maize kernels (sprayed or unsprayed with Roundup) and the isogenic corn to reassess its substantial equivalence status. Proteome profiles of the maize kernels revealed alterations in the levels of enzymes of glycolysis and TCA cycle pathways, which were reflective of an imbalance in energy metabolism. Changes in proteins and metabolites of glutathione metabolism were indicative of increased oxidative stress. The most pronounced metabolome differences between NK603 and its isogenic counterpart consisted of an increase in polyamines including N-acetyl-cadaverine (2.9-fold), N-acetylputrescine (1.8-fold), putrescine (2.7-fold) and cadaverine (28-fold), which depending on context can be either protective or a cause of toxicity. Our molecular profiling results show that NK603 and its isogenic control are not substantially equivalent.

GMO produce includes something called "deoxyribonucleic acid," which is a long, scary sounding chemical, and therefore poison.

Oh sure, most scientists from relevant fields will tell you that there is no good reason to believe that GMO is in any way harmful, despite the fact that they know it contains deoxyribonucleic acid, which proves that they are all paid shills working for Monsanto, and therefore part of the conspiracy, and everything they say should be ignored. You should only trust Internet sources like David Wolfe and Food Babe. They are the real experts.

 

[bilby]

Sure, there are a lot of problems with patents. But that's got no more to do with GM technology than it has to do with any other technology.

Patents expire. Monopoly use of a new technology is intended as a temporary reward for innovation; when IP law doesn't work like that, it is the law that is the problem, not the technology.

Which is what I said, why the echo?

My sincere apologies, I shall do my best not to agree with you in future.

 

[Kharakov]

Horizontal Gene Transfer (HGT): Are there any studies that confirm that the majority of shared genes between plants and bacteria are mainly vertically propagated (VGT)?


Lethal mutation skipping: Say we want to create a new protein, but all evolutionary pathways (to the protein) in nature are blocked by lethal mutations. In other words, any step in the mutation process towards the new protein results in a sterile organism.

Can we create monster proteins that give the species that carry them some freakish advantage over competing species?

What happens if the new genes are stepping stones to further evolutionary paths that have and could never evolve in nature?

Is it wise to release genes created by lethal mutation skipping into nature, if there are no studies that confirm the extreme rarity of horizontal gene transfer?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Which is what I said, why the echo?

My sincere apologies, I shall do my best not to agree with you in future.

You can go straight to hell with you consenting views!

 

[J842P]

Horizontal Gene Transfer (HGT): Are there any studies that confirm that the majority of shared genes between plants and bacteria are mainly vertically propagated (VGT)?


Lethal mutation skipping: Say we want to create a new protein, but all evolutionary pathways (to the protein) in nature are blocked by lethal mutations. In other words, any step in the mutation process towards the new protein results in a sterile organism.

Can we create monster proteins that give the species that carry them some freakish advantage over competing species?

What happens if the new genes are stepping stones to further evolutionary paths that have and could never evolve in nature?

Is it wise to release genes created by lethal mutation skipping into nature, if there are no studies that confirm the extreme rarity of horizontal gene transfer?

Horizontal gene transfer isn't very rare.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Never realised the potential of exploitations like the example of costly medications. I was remembering at the time when a friend mentioned to me about terminator seeds(patented) which I had no clue about. These seeds are said to yield only once therefore can't be saved for future crops. You would need to keep buying seeds or have some permit for the usual GMO crops . For the poor farmer this is scary.

Probably one of the reasons they are banned in Europe.

You realize hybrids in general are capable of reproduction but will not breed true? You want a plant as good as you had and you need to buy more seeds next year.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Horizontal Gene Transfer (HGT): Are there any studies that confirm that the majority of shared genes between plants and bacteria are mainly vertically propagated (VGT)?

Human gene transfer usually is horizontal--people rarely have sex while standing!

 

[Kharakov]

Someone argued that it was almost non-existent in another place on the intertubes.


Which was supposed to be below:

Horizontal gene transfer isn't very rare.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1131872/#ref1

 

[fromderinside]

Thanks for that.

 

[Kharakov]

Thank the intertube message timing convention.

 

[Underseer]

https://www.geneticliteracyproject....-people-ignore-science-and-reject-gmo-safety/

Wrong. The rhetoric of anti-GMO proponents as Joseph Mercola, Jeffrey Smith, Natural News, and activists at Greenpeace and Consumer Reports, among advocacy NGOs, would have you believe that genetically engineered foods can give you cancer, reduce biological diversity, and spike the use of dangerous pesticides. Natural News head Mike Adams garnered a headline or five when he publicly equated supporters of GMOs with those who collaborated with Nazis. Meanwhile, anti-GMO activist philosopher Vandana Shiva simply asserted that “GMOs are about appropriating life.” Among true believers, it doesn’t seem to matter that none of these claims have any basis in fact. Presenting hard science doesn’t make much of a dent.

This also applies to climate change denial, creationism, evolution denial, anti-vaccine, naturopathy, and even platygaeanism and health claims about organic foods.

 

[Under the Rose]

Substantially equivalent ... I doubt it.

GMO's = patented ownership .

Oddly, I think this is much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much more important that the whole GMO is going to kill us.

While I understand the desire to protect investments into crop development, the idea of a corporation being able to own a crop food seems open to significant exploitation. If certain chemicals are used for growing crops, a corporation could manipulate agriculture to create monopolies for any number of crops. As we've seen with medications, this can be dangerous and exploited.

There has been recent activity in Europe to patent heirloom and natural varieties of seed by applying some interesting data to them in order to accomplish this. While the battle and debate continues over GMO varieties, the real concern is stealthily mounting an attack from a different direction. As a gardener, I recognize that many hybrid plants offer advantages to the grower and also that the seeds from F1 hybrids do not breed true to the parents hence the need to buy the seed again if I want to retain these features. I am very concerned, though, that anyone should be granted a patent on heirloom seeds as those should be exempt from privatization. I have concerns about water rights and food being manipulated in the interests of profit over retaining diversity and stewardship by all peoples.
http://www.alt.no-patents-on-seeds.org/
http://www.ruralcat.net/c/document_...a88-74aa-44ab-922c-facac1ddf058&groupId=10136