GMO vs Organic

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I like to go into vegan restaurants and demand, in a loud, annoying voice, 'BRING ME A LARGE PLATE OF GMO ANYTHING AND DO IT NOW!!!'

Seriously, though, all food is organic (you can't eat non-organics and stay alive) and all foods we eat (unless you live on a steady diet of tree bark and moss) have been genetically modified.

Boru

[Kitan Etos]

[scoobysnack]

[scoobysnack]

[brewer]

Anyone got a position on antioxidant food additives?

[Alex K]

Anyone got a position on antioxidant food additives?

I put lemon on my avocado dip so it doesn't turn brown. Does that count?

[brewer]

Anyone got a position on antioxidant food additives?

I put lemon on my avocado dip so it doesn't turn brown. Does that count?

Of course it does.

Got any ascorbic acid junkies out there? Linus Paulings fans?

[Aractus]

It follows the same principles as any other system. If it works and has benefits you have to ask what are the unintended negatives.

To me it makes sense to ask that question about specific GMO applications, but it doesn't make sense to apply it to the entire field and for posterity. The general technique works, some applications are largely benign (such as putting vitamin A in plantains), others are more problematic, some things are not yet understood. Calling into question whether genetic modification of organisms in general works out seems very misleading. Not comparing genetic modification to current techniques which are relying on uncontrolled mutations is dishonest.

Genetic material like DNA and RNA contains a kind of compression not understood by humans at this time. We only thus far understand about specific genes, we don't understand about instructions given in the meta-structure of DNA that comprise multiple points of DNA code. Yes you can add a gene to produce a certain nutrient, but it might upset the genetic instruction in another way not yet understood. This is the conservative view, but my point is that we should default to scepticism in all scientific matters.

[Aractus]

[Alex K]

To me it makes sense to ask that question about specific GMO applications, but it doesn't make sense to apply it to the entire field and for posterity. The general technique works, some applications are largely benign (such as putting vitamin A in plantains), others are more problematic, some things are not yet understood. Calling into question whether genetic modification of organisms in general works out seems very misleading. Not comparing genetic modification to current techniques which are relying on uncontrolled mutations is dishonest.

Genetic material like DNA and RNA contains a kind of compression not understood by humans at this time. We only thus far understand about specific genes, we don't understand about instructions given in the meta-structure of DNA that comprise multiple points of DNA code. Yes you can add a gene to produce a certain nutrient, but it might upset the genetic instruction in another way not yet understood. This is the conservative view, but my point is that we should default to scepticism in all scientific matters.

Do you really think that this uncertainty is under better control with the other methods for obtaining new varieties commonly used now?