Jane Goodall is now anti-GMO [rolling eyes]

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, very different. The principles used and effect achieved are the same (but one could argue that genetic engineering drastically reduces the "turnover time"). In the case of roundup ready corn - we could have done this without genetic engineering (we didn't realize that then). Basically, the gene that codes for EPSPS(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPSP_synthase) has been replaced in the corn with a similar gene from bacterium - which allows the EPSPS to function normally in the presence of glyphosate (the active ingredient in roundup) through horizontal transfer(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer)

Other GM crops have different situations. In the case of RRCorn no new proteins are expressed. In some GMOs - it's a whole different ballgame. Bt crops are in a league of their own (pesticide producing crops).

[thesummerqueen]

Anti Monsanto should not mean anti GMO.

[Minimalist]

Seems hard to separate the two, my dear.


http://www.mnn.com/food/healthy-eating/b...ection-act

( Make sure to play both parts of the video.)

Perhaps it is merely my natural cynicism shining through but why does a company need to bribe congressmen to protect it from being sued....unless it knows it deserves to be sued?

[The Grand Nudger]

If you don't do anything and everything you can to protect your interests you are not operating in the best interests of your business. If you have some conflict - you could always resign ...but you'll simply be replaced. Whether or not you've done anything to "deserve being sued" doesn't factor in. The operative here is minimizing risk and exposure in the event that you -do- do something. They've done plenty, btw.

Genetic modification is a tool, a process. Monsanto is a business with a massive interest in that process.

[Ryantology]

Seems hard to separate the two, my dear.

That's what is so infuriating about Monsanto. GMO crops could be a boon to humanity if they were regulated and governed responsibly. Instead, a single company has taken the reins, done a lot which is irresponsible and probably immoral (patenting crops? who the fuck even), and now people think of Monsanto and bad food crops the way people think of Xerox and copiers. It's a terrible shame.

[thesummerqueen]

That's not the fault of GMO tech, Min - merely the fight between Monsanto and the fucknuts who can't separate their corporate hate and their science illiteracy from a Very Good Thing.

[Minimalist]

When one lie is detected a thousand are suspected, Summer. Human nature.

[thesummerqueen]

Too fucking bad for the hippies.

[Autumnlicious]

Doesn't help that Monsanto, in the area of GMO food, owns a tonne of the patents.

When you are anti-Monsanto, you are indirectly anti-GMO-that-Monsanto-makes.

Unless the patents were sold to a more scrupulous organization.

[Ryantology]

When you are anti-Monsanto, you are indirectly anti-GMO-that-Monsanto-makes.

I am only anti-GMO-that-Monsanto-makes. I can't stress enough that people really need to separate one from the other in their heads. It may eventually be the difference between a lot of people eating or starving.