Log in

View Full Version : Genetically modified bananas


mrbungalow
11-20-2006, 04:11 AM
Hi all;

I am just wondering after a discussion with someone at work; Are there bananas on the market that would qualify to be called "Genetically modified"? I am asking because of all the bio-molecular methods beeing used to combat sigatoma and Panama disease...

Thanks;
Erlend

Gabe15
11-20-2006, 12:09 PM
All bananas sold commercialy are not GMO. GMO bananas do exist, however there is still lots of work to be done before they can realistically consider growing them for commerce.

momoese
11-20-2006, 04:32 PM
All bananas sold commercialy are not GMO. GMO bananas do exist, however there is still lots of work to be done before they can realistically consider growing them for commerce.

Do you think as consumers we will be informed when this happens or just misled like we are now with other GMO products?

At least the GMO banana crops can't cross pollinate the organic banana crops like what happens with Soy, Corn, Wheat, etc. Who wants some fish DNA with your breakfast cerial? :ha:

mikevan
11-20-2006, 05:17 PM
If you live in the USA, unless laws change, you will most certainly not be notified if the banana you're buying is GMO. If the latest round in Oregon is any indicator, laws are proposed and struck down by the intense lobbying of the GMO industry - money rules, not consumers or reality. So... growing your own is certainly the safest way nowadays. I cannot believe that GMO is making headway into the EU! I thought they'd resist - but again, money talks, consumers suffer.

Mike

Do you think as consumers we will be informed when this happens or just misled like we are now with other GMO products?

At least the GMO banana crops can't cross pollinate the organic banana crops like what happens with Soy, Corn, Wheat, etc. Who wants some fish DNA with your breakfast cerial? :ha:

mrbungalow
11-21-2006, 01:19 AM
GMO is illegal in Norway, and I am unshure about the situation in the EU.
Even triploid fish in aquaculture is illegal, wich apparently does more harm than good. (In the US, many aquaculture species are triploid) I have yet to hear a great reason for not supporting GMO-products. An american lady won the Nobel Peace Award years ago for her work involving GM on corn. This work helped developing countries a great deal. Offcourse, we all want what's natural, but it's easy to let feelings come before facts on the GMO-subject.
The big question I was wondering about, is how to save the cavendish banana without GMO.

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 01:51 AM
I think I posted it here way early (more than a year ago, IIRC) about GMO bananas currently being tested in the US. My complaint was that, the GMO modifications was not related at all to cold hardiness. But noting that how clumsily various GMO spliced genes got away into nature, and the not so controlled environment, it is always a big concern for gene pool contamination, and statistically speaking, preventing contamination is improbable.

Bayer, Genentech and other biotech companies are suing people who happen to have GMO crops if they don't buy from them, but us people could not sue them for contaminating the gene pool. After all, they own the patent rights, and we demand every right to be protected from their patent contamination. The laws are written lopsided in favor of the biotech companies. This has to change, wether you love GMO crops or not, we cannot have any contamination to those who don't want these proprietary owned contaminants.

mrbungalow
11-21-2006, 04:36 AM
I love these discussions, that's why I go to extremes on both sides.

Joe, this is probably just the tip of the iceberg of hazards related to todays' GMO. But can a sterile GMO-cultivar get lost in the gene-pool of nature? And what's the status today, are these cultivars we have allready destroying species? (I really don't know the answer, I am in over my head allready)
I am thinking maybe GMO could be OK, as long as environmental issues and health issues are thoroughly quality-controlled.

What I have observed is that people are generally suspicious to GMO, but primarly for health reasons, not environmental reasons. Also, a general trait of mankind is to be afriad and weary of the new and unknown. (I for example, have recieved hate-letters in my mailbox from neighbors disliking me planting tropical plants/bananas in Norway, thinking this is the end of Norway as we know it!)

I should have highlighted what I insinuated before; I have never heard of a toxic GMO on the market. Contrary, I have heard of GMO improving yields and saving lives in the 3rd world. Also, isn't most corn in the US GMO these days? Americans aren't dying like flies, are they?

mikevan
11-21-2006, 10:14 AM
Americans are dying like flies. And so are the pets and animals Americans are keeping. Cancers, diseases, whathaveyou. No one is fingering GMO, but no one has discounted it's possible cause. You tell me - why do they put hazardous labels on bT toxin, but then turn around and modify plants to produce that toxin in all its tissues - some of which will be consumed? The industry is in control of this and since they're offshoots of existing chemical industries, they're already well practiced in hiding the drawbacks and barking about the benefits, not to mention their power in government. After all, they are using the USA to force GMO on countries that don't want it! What the hell? That's like Chevy forcing me to buy a Kia trade-in using the strong-arm capabilities of government officials! We'll even use the WTO to force GMO on people. I'm sorry - but I don't see anyone forcing, say, Organic produce on people who don't want it. Or even conventional produce! What makes GMO so special that our very government gets involved in peddling it to countries that'd rather not have it?

A lot of people swallow the "developing nation benefits" myth hook line and sinker, but the fact of the matter, every GMO seed is intellectual property - no one owns that seed or the plant it produces or the seeds that plant produces but the people who developed that seed. You're paying for the right to grow that seed and consume it's produce and that's where it stops. Monsanto "giving" seeds to some poor nation is like Drug Dealer Bob "giving" cocaine to 5th grader kids. Before long, those kids are going to be enslaved to Drug Dealer Bob, and the same goes to those nations. They will be forced to stop saving their own seed (something that's actually in the new Iraq Constitution [edited - oops - actually it's the Iraq Legislation, not Constitution]!!!!) and use exclusively the GMO, deleting centuries of established strains of veggies and grain into extinction under the mythological promise of the "superior" GMO product.

If nothing else - the cloak-n-dagger approach to forcing GMO on other nations should raise your suspicions. Why are they going thru the trouble on trying to force people to have something that they don't want? Why are they using political pressure to try to force themselves into markets that simply are not interested?

Control food, control the world.

There is nothing that GMO can do that conventional breeding cannot accomplish. And there's nothing that GMO can do in productivity than good agricultural practices cannot accomplish. Organic methods concentrating on the most important part of any crop - the soil ecosystem - are just the tip of the iceberg here. Terra preta's secrets are also showing great potential. And, none of these methods strip farmers of their rights, and they don't make farmers criminals as GMO has already done. And they don't make all farmers potential criminals as GMO will.

Let's also not forget the Pharm GMO experimentation and our bumbling that with the result of pharm-produce getting into the human food chain. To err is human - which basically means that there's no way we can be certain that what we are eating isn't chock full of hormones, drugs and whatnot if we allow that to continue unabated. Hey guys, feel your figure slimming down and your voice rising and for some reason your chest seems... bigger? Could be the corn-flakes you're eating. Nothing like a bowl of estrogen every morning.

And GMO isn't going to solve banana's problems. The problem isn't the cavendish. It's the method of agriculture. Every cavendish out there is a clone. If one is susceptible to a disease, every other one in cultivation is too - all over the world. Why is that the fault of the plant? In nature, plants overcome disease by breeding resistance. When you bypass that by cloning, you've effectively eliminated the natural method of overcoming disease. Only breeding can solve this problem and seeking a more diverse gene-pool, and perhaps weening the public off their uniform 9" yellow nanner and introducing them to some variety. GMO nanners will have the same problem - they may be engineered to resist fusarium wilt - but as they become ubiquitous in agriculture, it's inevitable that another disease will find them vulnerable and we're in the same boat - after spending a mint in licensing fees for the intellectual property we're still no better off. It's an arms race out in nature and our agricultural methods are giving disease the upper hand.

Mke


I should have highlighted what I insinuated before; I have never heard of a toxic GMO on the market. Contrary, I have heard of GMO improving yields and saving lives in the 3rd world. Also, isn't most corn in the US GMO these days? Americans aren't dying like flies, are they?

mrbungalow
11-21-2006, 11:40 AM
So they are dying like flies:0493:

Thanks for the enlightment, Mike. You seem to have studied this.

As you probably guessed, I know little about GMO. I am by no means supporting GMO, but it's great to get the facts on the table - from both points of view. Boring discussions with everyone beeing politically correct.

I am from the seafood/aquaculture-business. What's scary to know, is that maybe 1 out of 10 consumers believe salmon is a GMO. Contrary, it's one of the cleanest foods in the world. Now there's something you can't challenge me on, Mike!
The idea of triploid fish has been brought up here before. Could save the business millions each year, as well as the destruction of wild-salmon. Still, not even the slightest genetic modifications are allowed in this country.
Supermarkets are these days asking consumers to return rice bought between june and august this year, cause it may contain GMO.

In any case, it seems to me GMO is more political than anything else, if it's like you say, Lobbyism at its' worst.

And what was that happening in the new constitution of Iraq? Better not threaten those delicious Iraqi-dates!

Almost forgot wich board I am on, How are your bananas, by the way? :sumbrero:

Erlend
Americans are dying like flies. And so are the pets and animals Americans are keeping. Cancers, diseases, whathaveyou. No one is fingering GMO, but no one has discounted it's possible cause. You tell me - why do they put hazardous labels on bT toxin, but then turn around and modify plants to produce that toxin in all its tissues - some of which will be consumed? The industry is in control of this and since they're offshoots of existing chemical industries, they're already well practiced in hiding the drawbacks and barking about the benefits, not to mention their power in government. After all, they are using the USA to force GMO on countries that don't want it! What the hell? That's like Chevy forcing me to buy a Kia trade-in using the strong-arm capabilities of government officials! We'll even use the WTO to force GMO on people. I'm sorry - but I don't see anyone forcing, say, Organic produce on people who don't want it. Or even conventional produce! What makes GMO so special that our very government gets involved in peddling it to countries that'd rather not have it?

A lot of people swallow the "developing nation benefits" myth hook line and sinker, but the fact of the matter, every GMO seed is intellectual property - no one owns that seed or the plant it produces or the seeds that plant produces but the people who developed that seed. You're paying for the right to grow that seed and consume it's produce and that's where it stops. Monsanto "giving" seeds to some poor nation is like Drug Dealer Bob "giving" cocaine to 5th grader kids. Before long, those kids are going to be enslaved to Drug Dealer Bob, and the same goes to those nations. They will be forced to stop saving their own seed (something that's actually in the new Iraq Constitution!!!!) and use exclusively the GMO, deleting centuries of established strains of veggies and grain into extinction under the mythological promise of the "superior" GMO product.

If nothing else - the cloak-n-dagger approach to forcing GMO on other nations should raise your suspicions. Why are they going thru the trouble on trying to force people to have something that they don't want? Why are they using political pressure to try to force themselves into markets that simply are not interested?

Control food, control the world.

There is nothing that GMO can do that conventional breeding cannot accomplish. And there's nothing that GMO can do in productivity than good agricultural practices cannot accomplish. Organic methods concentrating on the most important part of any crop - the soil ecosystem - are just the tip of the iceberg here. Terra preta's secrets are also showing great potential. And, none of these methods strip farmers of their rights, and they don't make farmers criminals as GMO has already done. And they don't make all farmers potential criminals as GMO will.

Let's also not forget the Pharm GMO experimentation and our bumbling that with the result of pharm-produce getting into the human food chain. To err is human - which basically means that there's no way we can be certain that what we are eating isn't chock full of hormones, drugs and whatnot if we allow that to continue unabated. Hey guys, feel your figure slimming down and your voice rising and for some reason your chest seems... bigger? Could be the corn-flakes you're eating. Nothing like a bowl of estrogen every morning.

And GMO isn't going to solve banana's problems. The problem isn't the cavendish. It's the method of agriculture. Every cavendish out there is a clone. If one is susceptible to a disease, every other one in cultivation is too - all over the world. Why is that the fault of the plant? In nature, plants overcome disease by breeding resistance. When you bypass that by cloning, you've effectively eliminated the natural method of overcoming disease. Only breeding can solve this problem and seeking a more diverse gene-pool, and perhaps weening the public off their uniform 9" yellow nanner and introducing them to some variety. GMO nanners will have the same problem - they may be engineered to resist fusarium wilt - but as they become ubiquitous in agriculture, it's inevitable that another disease will find them vulnerable and we're in the same boat - after spending a mint in licensing fees for the intellectual property we're still no better off. It's an arms race out in nature and our agricultural methods are giving disease the upper hand.

Mke

mikevan
11-21-2006, 12:49 PM
I love salmon! Haven't heard much about GMO in concern with that. I've heard pros and cons about fish farming - but then, if done right that would alleviate the raping of our oceans, right? I think all criticisms of fish-farming can be addressed and any techniques found wanting can be improved. I've always wanted to "farm" my own fish here on the property and have a few red-claw crayfish as a starter, with hopes for tilapia and perhaps catfish later on. We'll see where that goes...

Oops - The Iraq thing is not constitution, but legislation:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Plant+Variety+Protection+iraq&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a
I hope their dates are preserved too. Hah! Get it? Preserved? Okay, so I'm not a comedian... :)

LOL, bananas? Oh, yeah, almost forgot. Well, they're settled into their greenhouse and growing happily in spite of freezing/near-freezing temperatures. Very happy. I need to pot some up here pretty soon. They have slowed down already tho - shorter photoperiod perhaps? It gets pretty warm in there during the day, and the earthmass helps at night. I certainly hope our market doesn't get polluted by an infiltration of GMO nanners!

Be well,
Mike

So they are dying like flies:0493:

Thanks for the enlightment, Mike. You seem to have studied this.

As you probably guessed, I know little about GMO. I am by no means supporting GMO, but it's great to get the facts on the table - from both points of view. Boring discussions with everyone beeing politically correct.

I am from the seafood/aquaculture-business. What's scary to know, is that maybe 1 out of 10 consumers believe salmon is a GMO. Contrary, it's one of the cleanest foods in the world. Now there's something you can't challenge me on, Mike!
The idea of triploid fish has been brought up here before. Could save the business millions each year, as well as the destruction of wild-salmon. Still, not even the slightest genetic modifications are allowed in this country.
Supermarkets are these days asking consumers to return rice bought between june and august this year, cause it may contain GMO.

In any case, it seems to me GMO is more political than anything else, if it's like you say, Lobbyism at its' worst.

And what was that happening in the new constitution of Iraq? Better not threaten those delicious Iraqi-dates!

Almost forgot wich board I am on, How are your bananas, by the way? :sumbrero:

mrbungalow
11-21-2006, 01:10 PM
I love salmon! Haven't heard much about GMO in concern with that. I've heard pros and cons about fish farming - but then, if done right that would alleviate the raping of our oceans, right?

Well, it depends. If you farm omnivorous fish such as tilapia, carp, catfish, shellfish, etc. it is a very sustainable way of making proteins. With salmon it's a bit different since the feed comes from marine resources, more specifically fish-meal from the Chilean coast. (These are said to be the cleanest waters in the world, with a low concentration of environmental toxins.) So basically for salmon and trout you are roughly taking out 2 pounds of protein-resources and refining it to one. But salmon tastes a heck of alot better than herring!!
None of the salmon stock in Norway are genetically modified, but are in strict breeding programs. Thats' why they can grow 1 lbs of meat from 1 lbs of feed. So with fish you get the most growth per lb of feed compared to hogs, chicken, beef, etc. How is this possible you might ask? Because feed is dry and meat contains water!

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 01:27 PM
i go fishing for king salmon in the pacific once a year. They are very tasty, especially if you eat them raw (sashimi style) or barbecue them right away. Perfect combo with Banana Sherry Wine, to keep this in topic, LOL!

momoese
11-21-2006, 01:54 PM
Offcourse, we all want what's natural, but it's easy to let feelings come before facts on the GMO-subject.

The "facts" you say? What facts. How about you prove to me that GMO products are safe for human consumption? The bottom line is that you can not prove it because the only real human study that has been done on humans was with tomatoes and it was a miserable failure that wreaked havoc on our immune system.

You want another reason why not to support it? How about the "fact" that this untested and unsafe crap is cross pollenating the organic fields of heirloom grain and produce here in the US.

Our food comes from long lines of Heirloom seeds that are in danger of disappearing forever, and if people blindly support this nonsense there may come a day when they finally have to admit this stuff is dangerous for human consumption but it's too late to turn back because we have to feed the masses, just like what's happening with US beef and all the hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, and the mad cow they won't talk about for fear of wiping out the stock markets.

Hopefully at that point the seed savers will save the food chain.

It's not too late to stop the madness!

mikevan
11-21-2006, 02:06 PM
Ooooh - salmon lightly steamed, wrapped in banana leaves! There's on-topic for you! :)

Grin,
Mike

i go fishing for king salmon in the pacific once a year. They are very tasty, especially if you eat them raw (sashimi style) or barbecue them right away. Perfect combo with Banana Sherry Wine, to keep this in topic, LOL!

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 02:31 PM
This GMO topic is truly large, I am just presenting my current state of thought and summaries from years of studies by my friends directly working or even CEO's of some start-up biotech companies and I enjoy grilling them at times, over a couple of wines.

One of my major concern about GMO is that we don't have long term studies on the comprehensive effects of these brand new unnatural recombination (Direct Genetic Sequence Manipulation and cross species gene splicing) of DNA that will form new untested genes. For sure gene splicing and recombination is not new, it has been occuring in nature without human intervention. The gene splicing part is done by viral types. But we usually have several thousand years if not millions of years that the rest of nature reacts, adapts and equilibrate with these recombinations.

That is why with traditional plant breeding, those genes have already been tested through time and we are not concerned about these traditional methods. Unlike today, the biotech companies will short circuit the traditional plant breeding methods, cross transfering genes from various species, and not wait the comprehensive testing of thousands of years to make sure they are safe for nature and humans, perhaps we can cut this down to a lifetime test of 100 years, but surely not trust the currently very short tests on humans.

Even the sterile forms of GMO plants, these gene splices could be transferred by viral pathogens without pollination. How much more if these plants are pollenizers? In a similar way, with antibiotic chemicals that have been fed to healthy chickens, cows and swine, they are now found in our global water cycle, and most bacteria have spliced genes to counteract these antibiotics.

Which brings to my number two concern which is contamination. These companies owns the patent rights to these sequences of DNA and they will surely contaminate the gene pool of related species when planted out there. Do the current copyright and patent laws allow these companies to lay claim to the contaminated gene pool? Who would take the responsibility of preventing contamination and cleaning up of the gene pool? These same intellectual property owners should bear the sole responsibility if they were to reap the benefits.

No, I am not at all against GMO. For me, if the final product has no toxins, no chemicals that are harmful to mankind, no hormones that could alter mankind, why shouldn't it be safe to consume? Of course, that's just the eating part, we also have to look at how such new GMO species would impact nature in the long run, for we know they are bound to contaminate nature, and that would require thousands of years study to complete.

I have eaten a GMO tomato, the Flavr Savr out of curiosity, this is the one that prevents the rapid rotting away of tomato once it has ripened. And so I have become mortal and is bound to die. All Americans will die, and we will be dying like flies. And let me quote Jay Leno:

"With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks,"Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"

Now after taking out God, we will be splicing it with GMO and drug resistant microbes......

momoese
11-21-2006, 03:06 PM
No, I am not at all against GMO. For me, if the final product has no toxins, no chemicals that are harmful to mankind, no hormones that could alter mankind,

Joe, who will you trust to tell you the truth about the safety of GMO's? The same people who told Bush that there IS global warming only to have him not accept their findings and have them altered?

When it come to politics, corporations, and anyone who wants to rule the world by any means possible....I don't trust them! I could never trust them when they won't even inform the consumer that they are eating GMO products that have not been tested on humans? Not me, no way.......they'll have to pry the organic food out of my cold dead hands.

"F" all GMO products! :2691:

jeffreyp
11-21-2006, 03:21 PM
WikiPedia has some good info on GMO's


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food

mrbungalow
11-21-2006, 03:39 PM
The "facts" you say? What facts. How about you prove to me that GMO products are safe for human consumption? :2731:

After reading my posts, I can see how someone might think I am supportive of GMO. Actually I am pretty blank on the subject, and in fact, a littlebit sceptical. More so after hearing from Mike and Momoese.
My questions are meant to provoke (wich leads to good discussions), and not necessarly representing how I feel on the subject.

The question is, is there a possibillity that there can be produced a GMO that is proved perfectly safe to eat, no threat to the environment, invindsable to all disease, and unbeatable in forms of yield? Would such a crop be worth the effort of research? Or should research on GMO stop alltogether and be replaced with traditional breeding?

My true personal opinion on the subject is that GM is fine as long as these factors are 110% certain. But the bottom line is that it never will be, and proving such a claim would be impossible. And if you could, the masses would still be sceptical. The market as a whole doesn't want GMO either. So I'd rather be happy eating ice-cream, lacatan, or even nibble on a pitogo if Cavendish should disappear for good.

By the way, anyone here involved in breeding of bananas experimentally or professionally?

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 03:40 PM
I happen to have first hand research testing data from UC Davis, of people whom I can trust with my life, and they have done related works and testing about GMO. That is why to a certain extent, I have tried their products. But outside of this circles of colleagues, that would be an entirely different matter when it comes to trusting the FDA and people with political non-scientific agenda.

You have every right not to trust non-scientist politicians, aka, the government and political appointees, those mal-informed decision makers. It is so hard to trust the government because of political rather than scientific discussions, and I'm with you on how they have handled issues related to global climate change ... but I still try to keep an open mind on them, they are the only ones we've got, and I have voted a lot of them out last November 7.



Joe, who will you trust to tell you the truth about the safety of GMO's? The same people who told Bush that there IS global warming only to have him not accept their findings and have them altered?

When it come to politics, corporations, and anyone who wants to rule the world by any means possible....I don't trust them! I could never trust them when they won't even inform the consumer that they are eating GMO products that have not been tested on humans? Not me, no way.......they'll have to pry the organic food out of my cold dead hands.

"F" all GMO products! :2691:

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 03:47 PM
But by and large, GMO is not yet ripe for public release, not in my lifetime.

Gabe15
11-21-2006, 04:09 PM
In regards to bananas specifically, the GMO issue has one main goal, disease and pest resistance. There are 2 ways to create new varieties that are disease resistant, conventional breeding and the GMO route. The big issue on this subejct is which to use. For the past 25 years, breeders have been creating countless varieties of improved banana through conventional breeding, although it takes a lot of work and time, it is possible and thats how we have varieties such as Goldfinger which is already being grown commercially in Australia as a Cavendish replacement. These improved and commercial ready plants are perfect and ready to go into plantations, but why arent they you may ask? The GMO companies insist that a "new banana" will turn off consumers because suddenly the banana isnt quite how it used to be, so there plan is "lets spend millions of dollars to improve the Cavendish through GMO", instead of using a plant such as Goldfinger which is already in existance, unlike these "GMO super bananas". In reality though, new banana varieties taste a lot better to new people, Cavendish is a very ordinary, plain, and in regards to whats out there, a very low quality banana. anyways. Its all about money, the GMO companies need some kind of excuse to play with DNA and get paid for it. Now, there are some potentially great uses for GMO in bananas, there are some issued that have not been adressed with conventional breeding, but in the case of large scale export banana trade, GMO is in my opinion just stupid.

MediaHound
11-21-2006, 04:21 PM
By the way, anyone here involved in breeding of bananas experimentally or professionally?

Gabe is doing some banana breeding research.

momoese
11-21-2006, 05:29 PM
I happen to have first hand research testing data from UC Davis, of people whom I can trust with my life, and they have done related works and testing about GMO. That is why to a certain extent, I have tried their products. But outside of this circles of colleagues, that would be an entirely different matter when it comes to trusting the FDA and people with political non-scientific agenda.


Joe, just curious if they tested on humans, what product did they test, how extensive was the testing, and how long ago did it take place, in other words, have the subjects had adequate time to show symptoms yet?

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 06:17 PM
Joe, just curious if they tested on humans, what product did they test, how extensive was the testing, and how long ago did it take place, in other words, have the subjects had adequate time to show symptoms yet?

Mitchel what they did, as in the case of Flavr Savr tomato is showed the extensive chemical analyses, nutrient contents, and indeed showed it has more and better antioxidants and vitamins. They also have to apply permits from FDA after submitting those analyses, to have a go for animal trials, then after observing animals for an approved time frame, then actual taste tests by adventurous humans for the sake of scientific advancements, being paid or volunteered willingly, signing disclaimers, waiving your rights to sue, etc. But that is very simplistically said. For the other GMO crops whose analysis haven't done by trusted friends, they can't make me try them out, unless they pay me full amount of my insurance benefits.

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 06:20 PM
Also take note, I participated in one, it doesn't mean this is the process for all. Laws and regulations may have dramatically changed since then, that was more than ten years ago.

momoese
11-21-2006, 06:52 PM
Joe, here is a little mention of the tomato test you speak of. Doesn't sound so great here.

"The unacceptably wide range of rat starting weights (±18% to ±23%) invalidated these findings.
No histology on the intestines was done even though stomach sections showed mild/moderate erosive/necrotic lesions in up to seven out of twenty female rats but none in the controls. However, these were considered to be of no importance, although in humans they could lead to life-endangering hemorrhage, particularly in the elderly who use aspirin to prevent thrombosis.
Seven out of forty rats on GM tomatoes died within two weeks for unstated reasons.
These studies were poorly designed and therefore the conclusion that FLAVR SAVRTM tomatoes were safe does not rest on good science, questioning the validity of the FDA's decision that no toxicological testing of other GM foods will in future be required."

The whole story can be found here.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/pusztai.html

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 06:59 PM
Well, I ate only two whole pieces of fruit, I think it was worth it for the sake of science, now I am having goose bumps, and won't be able to sleep tonight! Just kidding.

I will die someday, might as well help others one way or another. Thanks for the links, I have another set of articles to grill some of my friends. I just hope that the site you mentioned contained credible scientific links which I am hard pressed to evaluate at the moment.

Lookie these articles:
http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BA/Flavr_Savr_Arrives.html
http://dragon.zoo.utoronto.ca/~jlm2000/T0501D/methods_index.html

momoese
11-21-2006, 07:03 PM
Just dream of wearing your space suit, munching on some tasty GM naners while floating through space and time! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ lol

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 07:08 PM
Just dream of wearing your space suit, munching on some tasty GM naners while floating through space and time! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ lol

That would be the day, or I mean night!

momoese
11-21-2006, 07:08 PM
Erland, here is a few more reasons. :2783:

2006 Genetic Engineering News
11/21 - US Still Trying to Force GMOs on Europe
11/20 - Global Market for Genetically Engineered Seeds Reaches $6.5 Billion
11/17 - Biotechnology in Puerto Rico: Myths and Hazards
11/12 - Monsanto Vows to Force its Genetically Engineered Corn on Mexico
11/09 - Racketeering Charges Filed Against Donald Rumsfeld & Monsanto
11/08 - Monsanto Moving to Gain Global Cotton Monopoly
11/08 - More on Bayer/USDA Biotech Rice Fiasco
11/07 - Supercows & Glowing Pigs--The Brave New World of Genetic Engineering
11/03 - Consumer Demand for rBGH-Free Milk Growing, Dairies Responding, and Monsanto is Upset
11/03 - Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods--Serious Scientific Questions
11/01 - Mexico Slams the Door on Gene-Altered Corn
11/01 - Biotech Bullies Still Trying to Force Frankenfoods on EU
10/31 - Romania Harvests Trouble With Its GM Crops
10/28 - Is Gene-Splicing an Obsolete Technology?
10/28 - U.S. Embassy Keeps Pressing the Vatican to Back Genetically Engineered Crops
10/26 - Organic Rice Companies Impacted by GM Rice Contamination
10/26 - Scientists to Study Whether GE Foods Can Cause Food Allergies
10/26 - EU Consumers Demand Better Monitoring of GE Contaminated USA Exports
10/26 - Genetically Engineered Grapes Have South Africa's Wine Producers Alarmed
10/20 - Another GE Rice from Bayer Contaminates EU Food Supplies
10/20 - Mexico Rejects Biotech Corn
10/19 - EPA's Nanotech Regs: Ironic Parameters
10/18 - Monsanto Vice President Joins the Gates Foundation
10/17 - Biotech instills fear and loathing in California rice belt
10/14 - GE Technology out of Control: Contamination from Genetically Engineered Rice in Middle East
10/12 - Hundreds of Personal Care Products Contain Untested Hazardous Nano-scale Ingredients
10/11 - N.Y. Times Cites Consumers Union & OCA--Nanotech Food is Ten Times Scarier Than Genetically Engineered
10/11 - Univ. of Hawaii Cuts off Funding after Failing to Silence Anti-Biotech Professor
10/11 - Washington Growers Plant Controversial Biopharm Safflower for Canadian Drug Firm
10/09 - Beginning of the End for Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone
10/08 - Vermont Secretary of Agriculture Calls for an End to Injecting Cows with Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone
10/04 - Government Pushes for Bioprospecting in U.S. National Parks
10/03 - Rice Industry: Keep Genetically Engineered Varieties in the Lab
10/02 - Despite National Controversy Biopharming Center Planned for Kansas
10/02 - India Halts Field Trials of Genetically Engineered Crops
10/02 - WTO Ruling on GMOs Threatens EU Precautionary Approach
09/30 - World?s Largest Rice Company Halts All Imports from USA
09/28 - Call to Stop All Rice Imports from the U.S. After Contamination by GMO Variety
09/28 - Monsanto's GE Crops Spawn Herbicide-Resistant Weeds in North Carolina
09/27 - Parents Demand for Milk Free of Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Bovine Growth Hormone Changing Dynamics of Marketplace
09/26 - Major Dairies in New England Dropping Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone
09/26 - GM Yeast Enters US Wine Production
09/26 - Open Letter to the FDA to Stop Corporations from Lacing Foods, Body Care Products, & Supplements with Dangerous Nanoparticles
09/24 - Bill Gates/Rockefeller Programs to Alleviate Hunger in Africa Via GMOs and Industrialized Farming Are Doomed
09/22 - Is Monsanto Playing Fast and Loose With Roundup Ready Soybeans in Argentina?
09/22 - Do the Gene Engineers Know Best?
09/22 - A Slight Taint of Biotech Rice Puts Farmers' Overseas Sales in Peril
09/20 - Consumer Demand Causes Most New England Dairies to Ban Monsanto's Controversial Bovine Growth Hormone
09/20 - USDA Urged to Deny Approval of Illegal Genetically Engineered Rice Found in Food Chain
09/20 - Genetically Engineered Plums May Not Find a Willing Market
09/19 - Genetically Engineered Foods: Experimenting with Our Food Supply
09/13 - US Illegal GE Rice Contamination Spreads Further into Europe
09/13 - Will Growing Corn Crops for Fuel Leave the World Hungry?
09/12 - Genetically Modified Wheat Still Shunned
09/12 - USDA to Rubber-Stamp Contamination of Food with Illegal, Genetically Engineered Rice
09/08 - Illegal, Likely Allergenic Genetically Engineered Chinese Rice Discovered in Europe
09/08 - Unapproved GM Rice from China Pops Up in European Stores
09/08 - GE Crops Destroying Monarch Butterfly Habitat
09/07 - When genetically modified plants go wild
09/07 - Controversy over GE Rice Contamination Continues
09/06 - GMO Chinese Rice Found in EU
09/05 - USDA Says GM Crop Plantings Increased 9.5% Over Last Year
09/05 - EU Official Says U.S. Government Puts Corporations Over Consumers
09/05 - From GMO to Nano: A Familiar Debate Over A New Technology
09/05 - Bayer: Contaminated Rice & Pain Relief
08/31 - BioDemocracy Safe in California, for Now
08/31 - US Oversight of Biotech Crops Seen Lacking
08/31 - Consumer Pressure Causing Wal-Mart & Others to Request rBGH-Free Milk from their Suppliers
08/31 - New Book 'Genetically Modified (GM) Food: A Guide for the Confused'
08/31 - Almost Entire Crop of USA Long Grain Rice Contaminated by Genetically Modified Organisms
08/30 - U.S. Rice Contaminated by Genetically Engineered Weedkiller Variety Sold for Months Before Public Disclosure
08/30 - Biotech Bullying: Showdown on Bill Restricting County Rights in California This Week
08/29 - Monsanto Whistleblower Says Genetically Engineered Crops May Cause Disease
08/28 - US rice farmers sue Bayer CropScience over GM rice
08/28 - More on Global Fallout from Genetic Contamination of U.S. Rice
08/28 - Biotech Bullying: California Legislature Votes to Take Away the Rights of Counties to Ban Genetically Engineered Crops
08/25 - Is the Mainstream Media Starting to Turn Away from Genetic Engineering?
08/25 - U.S. rice dives as GMO issue stirs export fears
08/22 - Escaped GE bentgrass sounds a warning
08/22 - American Rice Banned in Many Countries After Genetic Contamination
08/21 - Check to See if You Local Dairy is Using Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone
08/21 - Bayer Admits Gene-Altered Rice Has Contaminated Food Supply
08/21 - New Book Exposes the Hazards of Bovine Growth Hormone by Dr. Samuel Epstein
08/18 - Study: Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Grasses Will 'Wreak Havoc' on Native Species
08/18 - Debate over Biocrops heats up in California
08/17 - Monsanto Announces Takeover of Delta & Pine Cotton Seed and Terminator Seed Technology
08/17 - Public Opposition to GE Crops Increasing
08/17 - Monsanto Moves Closer to Monopoly Control over Cotton Seeds
08/16 - Organic Versus Industrial Milk--Are We Winning the Battle?
08/16 - Federal Judge Castigates Biotech Industry for Planting Gene-Altered Crops that Will Spread Genetic Pollution
08/15 - Biopharm: First US Federal Court Order on Environmental Impacts
08/10 - Genetically Engineered Grass Spreading into the Wild in Oregon
08/04 - Overview of Field Trials of Biopharmaceutical Crops Across the World
08/04 - Protestors, With Public Support, Keep Destroying Genetically Engineered Crops in France
08/04 - Citizens Report on the Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods & Crops
08/04 - Why genetic engineering is dangerous
08/03 - Plantations, Indigenous Rights, & Genetically Engineered Trees
08/03 - Risks of Growing Genetically Engineered Cotton Have Been Covered Up
08/03 - Study Shows Pollen from Genetically Engineered, Bt Spliced Crops, Deadly to Butterflies
08/02 - San Luis Obispo Citizen Report on the Health Effects of GE Foods
2/28 - Civil Society Slams BIO PR Lies
2/27 - This Week's Biggest Environment, Health and Consumer News Tidbits (Organic Bytes #76)
2/24 - Approving Genetically Modified Crops : A Bureaucratic Ecology
2/24 - Public Interest Groups & Farmers Sue Monsanto Over Genetically Engineered Alfalfa
2/17 - Biotech's Sparse Harvest
2/17 - New Suspicions About Genetically Modified Organisms
2/17 - 2005: A Scary Year for GE Crops
2/16 - White House Master Plan to Force Frankenfoods & Crops on the World
2/14 - France Debates GMO Contamination Law
2/13 - New York Bill Would Require Labels on GE Seeds
2/13 - U.S. Wheat Industry Wants to Bring Monsanto & Syngenta's Gene-Altered Frankenwheat Back from the Grave
2/12 - Despite Industry Claims, Insect Resistant GE Crops Will Not Reduce Use of Toxic Pesticides
2/10 - Illnesses & Deaths in Philippines Linked to Gene-Altered Corn
2/10 - This Week's Biggest Consumer, Health and Environmental News Tidbits (Organic Bytes #75)
2/10 - EU Steadfast in Rejecting Genetically Engineered Food, Despite WTO Pressure
2/7 - People Say No to WTO Attempt to Force GMOs on the Public
2/7 - Background Articles on Genetically Engineered Crops & Biosafety
2/6 - OCA & Other NGOs: Gene-Altered Foods Will Remain a Losing Proposition for U.S. Farmers - Despite WTO Decision
2/6 - WTO Trade Ruling Latest Attempt by White House & Biotech Industry to Force GE Foods on an Unwilling Europe
2/6 - WTO Trade Ruling Latest Attempt by White House & Biotech Industry to Force GE Foods on an Unwilling Europe
2/4 - Vatican Ponders Endorsement of GE Frankenfoods & Crops
2/4 - Illinois Farm Bureau & Monsanto Disagree on Technology Fees When Farmers Save Their GE Soybean Seeds
2/3 - Genetically Engineered Seed Labeling Law in Vermont Not Being Enforced
2/2 - Farmers In Africa & India Reject Monsanto's Gene-Altered Cotton
2/2 - How to Avoid Eating Genetically Engineered Foods
1/31 - Moratorium on Terminator Technology Reaffirmed, but with Qualifications
1/30 - Consumer Alert: Terminator is Back from the Grave
1/27 - "Suicide Seeds" Could Spell Death of Peasant Agriculture
1/26 - Week's Biggest Environment & Health News Tidbits (Organic Bytes #74)
1/24 - Austria Bans Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Canola
1/24 - The EU Must Resist U.S. Pressure and Protect Consumer Rights on GE Foods
1/23 - Once Again WE Must Act to Stop the Terminator Seed Technology
1/20 - Monsanto & Biotech Monopolies Sued for Forcing Frankencrops Seeds on Farmers
1/20 - A Decade Later: Are GE Crops Winning Hearts and Minds?
1/20 - Biotech Bullies Monsanto & Dow Make a Deal
1/19 - With GE Soybean Food Safety in Doubt, Biotech Turns to Biodiesel
1/19 - Un-Spinning the Spin Masters on Genetically Engineered Food
1/19 - National Regulations Should Reflect Risks of GE Crops
1/18 - Big Biotech Going After Community Control in Michigan
1/17 - GE Frankencrops Continue to Spread Worldwide
1/12 - Monsanto Moves to Force-Feed Europe Genetically Engineered Corn
1/12 - This Week's Biggest Food, Health and Environment News Tidbits (Organic Bytes #73)
1/12 - Ten Years of Genetically Modified Crops Fail to Deliver Benefits to Africa
1/11 - Indian Farmers Sue Monsanto Over Bt Cotton
1/11 - Native Hawaiians to Protest Biotechnology Conference
1/10 - Terminator Technology, Like Frankenstein, is Back from the Grave
1/10 - US & Canadian Grocers and Co-ops Launch Non-GMO Certification Project
1/10 - The Global Spread of Genetically Modified Crops
1/9 - New Study Shows Unborn Babies Could Be Harmed by Genetically Engineered Foods
1/5 - GM foods verdict unlikely to alter EU rules
1/5 - Vermont Legislature Waters Down GMO Crops Liability Bill
1/2 - USDA Slammed for Failing to Monitor Pharmaceutical Frankencrops
1/2 - Kraft Promises to Stop Selling Frankenfoods in China--What About the USA?
1/2 - Concern in EU Over Contamination of Organic Food & Crops with GMOs
1/2 - New GM Law Threatens Iraq’s Wheat Heritage
1/2 - Vermont May Become First State to Extend Protection to Farmers from GMO Contamination

Almost forgot the link to all this wonderful news.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/gelink.cfm

momoese
11-21-2006, 07:42 PM
How about some milk from this GE beast to go with you GM corn Flakes? :2780:

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/11/supercow_228x215.jpg

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 08:04 PM
Does this one says moo? :0487:

STEELVIPER
11-21-2006, 08:32 PM
:0488:

momoese
11-21-2006, 08:45 PM
Does this one says moo? :0487:

Not sure if it talks but from what I can gather it makes fat free milk and it's three times the size of a regular cow.

JoeReal
11-21-2006, 09:44 PM
Not sure if it talks but from what I can gather it makes fat free milk and it's three times the size of a regular cow.

Oh man!!!
What will they think of next?

momoese
11-21-2006, 10:22 PM
Oh man!!!
What will they think of next?

Sugar free gum

mrbungalow
11-22-2006, 02:31 AM
GMO or not, that cow made me want a big STEAK right now!:chefnaner:

MediaHound
11-22-2006, 11:27 AM
:0488:

^That says it all :)
:nanerwizard:

bigdog
11-22-2006, 07:37 PM
Wow, where have I been? Nice discussion here! I am a student (again) at UT-Knoxville, and am majoring in Plant Sciences - Science and Biotechnology. I'm still early on in my courses, so no biotech courses yet. I have had discussions with Neal Stewart, a faculty member and biotech guy there. I find this area to be particularly fascinating, as the possibilities are seemingly endless! I am interested in the ornamental side though, not really the agricultural side so much. Unfortunately, there are only a small handful of companies involved in transgenic ornamentals, so looks like I'll probably start out with the ag side.

Mitchell and Mike, I respect your opinions on GMOs, but disagree with your outlook. Mitchell, I also found this article on that first website:
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/borlaug.html
Seems that biotechnology isn't the devil in disguise after all!

As for the second website, here is their agenda, taken directly from their website:

OCA's overall political program is the Organic Agenda 2005-15, a six-point platform calling for:

The conversion of American agriculture to at least 30% organic by the year 2015, including major reforms in agricultural subsidies and appropriations to help family farmers make the transition to organic, develop local and regional markets, and adopt renewable energy practices.

Fair Trade and economic justice, not so-called corporate-driven "Free Trade" as the global norm.

A global moratorium on genetically engineered foods and crops.

I stopped there, after seeing that it is a painfully biased website. I am all for organic foods, and buy them frequently myself. I even have a garden and grow my own organic foods! For them to call for a "global moratorium" on GMOs makes me sick. Let's look at some of the GOOD things that biotechnology has done for the world:

Golden Rice. Developed in 1999, this rice has beta-carotene (and hence, Vitamin A) in it. In many third world countries, kids are going blind from vitamin A deficiency, and later dying from malnutrition. It's no secret that rice is a staple crop in lots of these countries, and sometimes the only food for people to eat. However, rice (as it exists naturally) has no vitamin A in it. Golden Rice, a GMO, does have Vit. A. Also, this rice is being provided to these countries at no cost! There goes Mike's theory of companies trying to bleed 3rd world countries completely dry. Here's more on Golden Rice: http://www.goldenrice.org/

Neal Stewart, mentioned earlier, is involved with a transgenic plant (that I can't remember what it is) that is able to detect TNT in the soil. When a laser is beamed at it from above, it will glow fluorescent if TNT is underneath it. This plant is to be used to detect land mines in areas of the world where there are still large mine fields.

As already brought up, we in the U.S. eat transgenic corn and soybeans every day. No ill effects have been detected as of yet. Yes, there are some allergens associated with some GMOs, but no more than with naturally occurring plants! People fear what they do not know. I agree that the ramifications of GMOs haven't yet been fully realized, especially as to the effects to other species of plants that may accept pollen from these GMOs and produce seed. Last time I checked, the average life expectancy in this country was still going up also. Before 1940, all food produced in this country was organic. There are some naturally occurring, organic plants that we eat, that can have trace amounts of harmful chemicals in them that are toxic or carcinogenic.

OK, enough about that. Just wanted to represent the other side of the debate is all.

Bananas are notoriously difficult to transform anyway. It can and has been done, but not easily. I have looked into it already, and have some great ideas of my own. They will probably never be fully realized though, unless I end up being a biotech researcher at a university. This is one of the only companies (it may be THE only one) that uses transgenics on the ornamental side: http://www.florigene.com/
Guess I could move to Australia! :woohoonaner:

mikevan
11-22-2006, 08:14 PM
The rice is under license and not "free" even if the current terms of that license requires no financial compensation, and once you get them used to a product, it's a simple matter to begin profiting off it, much like drug dealers do for newcomers (something I've seen personally). Interestingly, to eat enough of that rice to match the vit A in a couple tablespoons of sweet-potatoes would leave one quite bloated - it's more a marketing gimmick than an actually useful product. After all, how many kids do you know that can eat 300 grams of this stuff for a mere 20% of the recommended vitamin A intake? And yet, the problem may not even be there - dietary fat is required for the body to be able to uptake vitamin a - and I don't see too many Indonesian children gnawing on a t-bone, donchaknow! So even then far less of this vitamin a is available! Making the rice all but useless as a dietary means of nutrition. It's purpose is to give people a warm and fuzzy feeling about GMO, rather than actually help people. Don't forget that little testing of this rice has occurred. Sure, what can a daffodil gene do? But there's also genetics from a bacterium in there too. When mixing things willy nilly, you can never be certain of all the risks and safety, not to mention the possible allergens - something that will be a problem here since the GMO industry has prevented us from knowing what's in our food.

As to ill effects of eating corn - none have been publicly disclosed and here in the GMO USA, the threat of discerning and disclosing clear GMO causes of disease bear heavy penalties to doctors who wish to continue working.

As with that mine-detecting plant - again, there is nothing that cannot be accomplished with selective breeding and research than what is happening with GMO's. There's even a strain of oyster mushroom that consumes waste oil in soil! Just gotta look for what's already there than our insistence on corrupting what we can.

Nevertheless, input from the Dark Side isn't bad :) - but don't criticize bias - you're have every reason for your own bias since you intend your career to be in biotechnology.

Mike

Wow, where have I been? Nice discussion here! I am a student (again) at UT-Knoxville, and am majoring in Plant Sciences - Science and Biotechnology. I'm still early on in my courses, so no biotech courses yet. I have had discussions with Neal Stewart, a faculty member and biotech guy there. I find this area to be particularly fascinating, as the possibilities are seemingly endless! I am interested in the ornamental side though, not really the agricultural side so much. Unfortunately, there are only a small handful of companies involved in transgenic ornamentals, so looks like I'll probably start out with the ag side.

Mitchell and Mike, I respect your opinions on GMOs, but disagree with your outlook. Mitchell, I also found this article on that first website:
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/borlaug.html
Seems that biotechnology isn't the devil in disguise after all!

As for the second website, here is their agenda, taken directly from their website:

OCA's overall political program is the Organic Agenda 2005-15, a six-point platform calling for:

The conversion of American agriculture to at least 30% organic by the year 2015, including major reforms in agricultural subsidies and appropriations to help family farmers make the transition to organic, develop local and regional markets, and adopt renewable energy practices.

Fair Trade and economic justice, not so-called corporate-driven "Free Trade" as the global norm.

A global moratorium on genetically engineered foods and crops.

I stopped there, after seeing that it is a painfully biased website. I am all for organic foods, and buy them frequently myself. I even have a garden and grow my own organic foods! For them to call for a "global moratorium" on GMOs makes me sick. Let's look at some of the GOOD things that biotechnology has done for the world:

Golden Rice. Developed in 1999, this rice has beta-carotene (and hence, Vitamin A) in it. In many third world countries, kids are going blind from vitamin A deficiency, and later dying from malnutrition. It's no secret that rice is a staple crop in lots of these countries, and sometimes the only food for people to eat. However, rice (as it exists naturally) has no vitamin A in it. Golden Rice, a GMO, does have Vit. A. Also, this rice is being provided to these countries at no cost! There goes Mike's theory of companies trying to bleed 3rd world countries completely dry. Here's more on Golden Rice: http://www.goldenrice.org/

Neal Stewart, mentioned earlier, is involved with a transgenic plant (that I can't remember what it is) that is able to detect TNT in the soil. When a laser is beamed at it from above, it will glow fluorescent if TNT is underneath it. This plant is to be used to detect land mines in areas of the world where there are still large mine fields.

As already brought up, we in the U.S. eat transgenic corn and soybeans every day. No ill effects have been detected as of yet. Yes, there are some allergens associated with some GMOs, but no more than with naturally occurring plants! People fear what they do not know. I agree that the ramifications of GMOs haven't yet been fully realized, especially as to the effects to other species of plants that may accept pollen from these GMOs and produce seed. Last time I checked, the average life expectancy in this country was still going up also. Before 1940, all food produced in this country was organic. There are some naturally occurring, organic plants that we eat, that can have trace amounts of harmful chemicals in them that are toxic or carcinogenic.

OK, enough about that. Just wanted to represent the other side of the debate is all.

Bananas are notoriously difficult to transform anyway. It can and has been done, but not easily. I have looked into it already, and have some great ideas of my own. They will probably never be fully realized though, unless I end up being a biotech researcher at a university. This is one of the only companies (it may be THE only one) that uses transgenics on the ornamental side: http://www.florigene.com/
Guess I could move to Australia! :woohoonaner:

momoese
11-22-2006, 09:19 PM
Bigdog, thanks for your "dark side" input. I will always support anyone who is Biased against non-organic or non-sustainable farming methods, period, no exceptions. Sound scary? Are you scared of organic produce? Didn't think so. There is nothing scary or wrong or politically biased about supporting organic 100%

Organic growing methods have proven over the course of human history to be the right way. There is no reason to look any further. If not for laziness and corporate greed we wouldn't even be discussing this. We are talking about a very, very slippery slope here and once organic grain and produce growers and supporters have been brainwashed and converted to the "dark side" it's all over and there will be no going back and fixing things as the damage will have been done at that point. Like I said, it's not too late to stop the madness!

"Soylent Green Is People" Not sounding too far fetched these days!

You can choose to be a part of the solution(organic), or a part of the problem(GMO), the choice is yours. :rappinnana:

Tropicallvr
11-22-2006, 09:30 PM
Not sure about nation wide(US), but here in California you can tell if produce is GMO. If the produce has 5 numbers and the first number starts with a 9 then it is GMO. If it has 5 numbers and the first one starts with an 8 then it is Organic. I think conventional veggies and fruit only has 4 numbers, but I'm not totally sure about that one.
I often wonder what kind of crap I'm ingesting when I eat anything with corn products, since the majority of corn in the US is now GMO, or has been cross pollinated by it. Researchers are also testing new crops that have pharmaceutical drugs built into them since it could be a much cheaper way to produce the drugs. These areas are said to be ajacent to other for human consumption crops. Imagine getting some Viagra in your corn flakes first thing in the morning, then having some antidepressents in your veggie salad at lunch. No thanks.

mikevan
11-22-2006, 09:58 PM
The greatest "consumer" of produce is the food-processing industry. And they're by no means required to indicate what's GMO and what's not, at this moment. Laws requiring this have been snuffed by the incredible power and clout of the GMO industry giants. Indeed, laws forbidding GMO plants in counties are being overturned by the Nazi strategy of war that the GMO industry is taking. They are not satisfied with people not wanting their product - their goal is to get everyone enslaved to it - control the food and you control the world. Why do you think the USA government is so far in bed with these guys? The Iraqi legistlation alone should tell you how far the US is in bed with the GMO industry - Iraqi farmers will lose their generations-developed and saved seeds by law and be forced to buy GMO patented seeds instead, just the way the GMO industry is trying to do here. They have already made criminals out of farmers who did nothing more than suffer cross-pollination from neighboring fields. Their tactics are ruthless and without mercy - and regardless of any benefits one can see in GMO - their SS-like tactics alone should raise a red-flag on their goals! Researchers and scientists are afraid to say anything lest they lose their jobs - the few that do stand up to the industry get keel-hauled pretty severely! The government (read - FDA) isn't going to do anything - they've been very deeply infiltrated by the GMO industry. Our entire agricultural system has been compromised by an enemy from within while we're distracted by external "threats" to national security.

This isn't just a complaint against GMO - but the way it's being handled and pushed - GMO is merely a tool for a final goal. Because of that, it's not tested adequately, and it is pushed on us when superior products and methods already exist that can be exploited without the dangers, cost and trouble of splicing genes. While in another world it may have its uses, because of it's abuse, any "good" that could have come from GMO has been forever tainted and our very health and lives are at stake for little more than the greed for money and power.

Organic is not about spraying manure on ones fields as people think occurred back before the 40's - it is miles different from anything we did back in the Dark Ages of agriculture. And it has come as far if not further in sophistication and progress than any GMO lab can brag. It has brought together the soil food-web and the crop as well as the very structure and composition of the cropping method into a more cohesive unit than a horse-n-plow in the 40's could ever have done. It in itself can solve the worlds hunger problems because unlike GMO, organic methods and plants can rehabilitate damaged soils and revive the soil-foodweb in a way that magnifies productivity and reduces cost that no GMO project can ever hope to accomplish. And even reviving knowledge lost back in the days of the Aztec can outproduce GMO with the revival of terra preta. So, with existing, and pre-existing and progressing development in organic methods - one has to wonder about all this furor occurring over GMO? Like I said - nothing GMO can do cannot be done already with our current and sustainable safe organic development. What, can we breed vitamin A into rice? Probably, but there's also a common sense aspect to it - why bother when sweet potatoes grow where rice grows without the need for flooding and it in itself is so much richer than rice? Let them have natural rice and natural sweet-potatoes and encourage more diversity in diet and you'll solve their nutritional problems. Showering them with some yellow rice does little more than showering them with yellow snow...

And if one must grow drugs in plants, they should first prove that they can do so in a hermetically sealed system and process the plants there at the same location and prove that they cannot mix this with food crops. However, not only will this never happen, pharm produce has already been mixed with food crops. And you have to wonder - many times more gets by than gets discovered - just how much more goodies have we been unknowingly ingesting?

Mike

Not sure about nation wide(US), but here in California you can tell if produce is GMO. If the produce has 5 numbers and the first number starts with a 9 then it is GMO. If it has 5 numbers and the first one starts with an 8 then it is Organic. I think conventional veggies and fruit only has 4 numbers, but I'm not totally sure about that one.
I often wonder what kind of crap I'm ingesting when I eat anything with corn products, since the majority of corn in the US is now GMO, or has been cross pollinated by it. Researchers are also testing new crops that have pharmaceutical drugs built into them since it could be a much cheaper way to produce the drugs. These areas are said to be ajacent to other for human consumption crops. Imagine getting some Viagra in your corn flakes first thing in the morning, then having some antidepressents in your veggie salad at lunch. No thanks.

momoese
11-22-2006, 11:02 PM
Geez Mike, you are really well spoken! Thanks

STEELVIPER
11-22-2006, 11:15 PM
I do not know to much about GMO. And i just grow Plants.Musas etc.. but i know one thing. You "F" with nature, and she will "F" you back. In one way or another.:0488:

bigdog
11-22-2006, 11:51 PM
How did I get to be the one with the "Dark Side" input? Somehow that labels me as a villain for pointing out that GMOs aren't the evil danger that some would have us believe? I said before, I support organic gardening, and even practice it here in my own backyard. And I support GMOs. I support food! Is there a way to breed a soybean or corn that is resistant to Roundup? I'm all for it if there is! Is there a way to breed a plant to glow when planted over TNT? I'm listening!

The GMO industry is Nazis? Funny, all this time I thought it was some scientists searching for ways to better improve ways of farming and improving plants. Roundup Ready plants have saved farmers in this country countless $$$. Do they really want to enslave us and take over the world? WHAT? Am I missing something here?

I don't mean to criticize bias - just pointing it out. When doing research papers, they teach you to look for "scholarly" papers for your research. They tell you that if you want to use a website for your research, make sure that it is an unbiased one. A website that is clearly biased will tell you anything that furthers their own cause. Period.

Showering them with some yellow rice does little more than showering them with yellow snow...

Do you honestly think that the inventors of Golden Rice really intended just to pee on them? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, there was good intentions to try to help solve some of the world's hunger and malnutrition problems here? I think that's rather insensitive, Mike.

Sure, what can a daffodil gene do? But there's also genetics from a bacterium in there too. When mixing things willy nilly, you can never be certain of all the risks and safety, not to mention the possible allergens - something that will be a problem here since the GMO industry has prevented us from knowing what's in our food.

I agree with this statement. Agribacterium tumifaciens has been genetically modifying plants for thousands of years!! You can never be certain of all the risks, of course. Naturally occurring plants contain lots of allergens also. I can't eat raw peaches, apples, pears, plums, almonds, cherries, nectarines, apricots, or brazil nuts. Allergic to all of them. They all occur naturally. And guess what? Some food companies don't always include all of their ingredients on their product!

I'm not scared of eating GMO food, or organic food for that matter. I am scared to death of eating anything with almonds in it. This whole subject is kind of silly, really. GMOs are not "the problem". Ignorance and fear of change are the problem.

I'm not trying to start a flame war here, guys. I respect all of you. Just thought I'd try to shed some light on what you refer to as the "dark side." :bananajoy: .

mikevan
11-23-2006, 12:24 AM
There is a cocaine plant that was developed to be resistant to Roundup that is doing great South of the Border nowadays. Anything is possible when there's a will - but farmers in the US typically take what's shoved at them. There are many plants that have been demonstrated to pull in toxins/chemicals - it would be trivial to capitalize on a plant that concentrates explosives in their tissues. Why go splitting genes to get there? That GMO plant will be sown over vast areas and as is usual, crossing will occur with unpredictable results.

And, RoundUp isn't even necessary for farming! It was a big money-maker for Monsanto while the patents were active tho. What better way than to market RoundUp ready seeds - they made a mint on Roundup, which has also in turn poisoned our environment and waters. Glysophate may break down, sorta kinda, tho it does bind with soil and is toxic to fish - but any idea what's in the surfactants used in RoundUp? RoundUp hasn't made a farmer any money - it's cost farmers mega-bucks in overhead they didn't need to have. Would you believe nowadays it's recommended practice to sow cover-crops in with your corn? Clovers for instance? It is the fear of weeds that has made Monsanto lotsa money - an unwarranted fear that could instead have been nullified by proper agricultural practices and a more holistic approach to farming. Bare soil is as bad as any weed...

I firmly believe well-meaning scientists and geeks are unwitting pawns in a vastly different picture from what you paint. Such has been demonstrated over and over again - it's all over the news for you and anyone else to see. Your work is worth nothing to your boss except for yet another patent to use in their overall goal. Scientists have been used like this for a long time like this in a variety if fields with full blinders on because they thought they were doing a good thing, tho, so it's not surprising.

I think Biotech has it's place. However, greedy powers that be have all but eliminated that place. Biotech can meld with traditional selective and hybridizing methods by helping map out the road to desirable traits faster, for instance. No gene melding necessary there. While it may indeed do some of that, unfortunately, the lion's share of Biotech is intrinsically involved in taking over control of the world's food. And do you blame them? Everyone has to eat, after all! And nowadays, only the tiniest minority grows their own anymore. Want to control the world - control the food. And, of course, create warm and fuzzy brochures about it - depending on the public gullibility to see them thru.

You have to ask yourself. Sometimes there's a reason for fear of new things. No one is afraid of organic. Not many are afraid of conventional - tho there is a greater knowledge of pesticide consumption in kids nowadays. But you have a mess when it comes to the GMO field the likes that Nuclear hasn't even faced! And the PR created by the strong arm of the GMO industry hasn't helped either. Why the strong-arm tactics? No one is trying to force people to eat organic - why then are they being forced to eat GMO, and worse - without their knowledge of what they're eating? If the GMO industry were so safe, why the big fight to hide its activities on one hand, and try to work on a government level to force it on other nations on the other hand? That makes me ill! Why force it on other nations? These nations are customers and customers are supposed to get what they want - why are we trying to force them to take something they don't want? We're leveraging the WTO for crying out loud! Can't you smell a rat???? If it was such a good thing, it would be side-by-side with organic in it's benignness! If there were questions, they would be patiently addressed and proven. But, it's the Nazi way the industry is acting that puts a stinker on the whole issue to me!

And - caution should be at the forefront of anything that will affect millions of people. Those who protested nuclear were also called crack-pots. Fear of change. Yet, Long Island. Chernobyl. Spent nuclear fuel with no place to go. At least 2 wrecked nuclear subs sitting on the bottom of the ocean... leaking perhaps? Are they crackpots now?

No one is protesting Organic. But entire countries are protesting GMO. And even in the GMO Capital of the World, entire counties are attempting to go GMO clean. Irregardless of the strong-arm tactics of those that would force it on us. Freedom? Nope. Control. That's what it's about. It's not down on your end - but up where the big-dogs play. I would love to see you use your interests to help guide selective breeding and hybridization into the future. There's room for Biotech in that. Build a map for breeders to follow. This is the direction BioTech should have gone in the first place:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1931467,00.html
No Dark Side of that. Tho - there's still the patent issues since life should not be patentable...

And no flame-war here. Do as you please and believe as you please. I just wanted you to see what the other side thought. Fear's not always a bad thing - keeps one alive when crossing the street. And when ingesting stuff. I hope they don't use almond genes for something you like, for instance. But with the draconian pressure put up to prevent labeling requirements, you won't know until you're in the hospital...

Happy Thanksgiving,
Mike

How did I get to be the one with the "Dark Side" input? Somehow that labels me as a villain for pointing out that GMOs aren't the evil danger that some would have us believe? I said before, I support organic gardening, and even practice it here in my own backyard. And I support GMOs. I support food! Is there a way to breed a soybean or corn that is resistant to Roundup? I'm all for it if there is! Is there a way to breed a plant to glow when planted over TNT? I'm listening!

The GMO industry is Nazis? Funny, all this time I thought it was some scientists searching for ways to better improve ways of farming and improving plants. Roundup Ready plants have saved farmers in this country countless $$$. Do they really want to enslave us and take over the world? WHAT? Am I missing something here?

I don't mean to criticize bias - just pointing it out. When doing research papers, they teach you to look for "scholarly" papers for your research. They tell you that if you want to use a website for your research, make sure that it is an unbiased one. A website that is clearly biased will tell you anything that furthers their own cause. Period.

Do you honestly think that the inventors of Golden Rice really intended just to pee on them? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, there was good intentions to try to help solve some of the world's hunger and malnutrition problems here? I think that's rather insensitive, Mike.

I agree with this statement. Agribacterium tumifaciens has been genetically modifying plants for thousands of years!! You can never be certain of all the risks, of course. Naturally occurring plants contain lots of allergens also. I can't eat raw peaches, apples, pears, plums, almonds, cherries, nectarines, apricots, or brazil nuts. Allergic to all of them. They all occur naturally. And guess what? Some food companies don't always include all of their ingredients on their product!

I'm not scared of eating GMO food, or organic food for that matter. I am scared to death of eating anything with almonds in it. This whole subject is kind of silly, really. GMOs are not "the problem". Ignorance and fear of change are the problem.

I'm not trying to start a flame war here, guys. I respect all of you. Just thought I'd try to shed some light on what you refer to as the "dark side." :bananajoy: .

momoese
11-23-2006, 12:35 AM
Flame wars aside, you obviously have a personal agenda like most people do, only yours is not the welfare of the earth and the things that live on it, including you and me. Yours is about making money and or fame or possibly immortality through science. I would like to say we should agree to disagree but I don't think in your heart you really believe your own spin.

I'm just going to say this and then I'm out for the long weekend.

GMO's are NOT proven :islandsharkbanana:

Organics ARE proven. :weightliftingnaner:

Nuff said

jeffreyp
11-23-2006, 02:36 AM
How did I get to be the one with the "Dark Side" input? Somehow that labels me as a villain for pointing out that GMOs aren't the evil danger that some would have us believe? I said before, I support organic gardening, and even practice it here in my own backyard. And I support GMOs. I support food! Is there a way to breed a soybean or corn that is resistant to Roundup? I'm all for it if there is! Is there a way to breed a plant to glow when planted over TNT? I'm listening!

The GMO industry is Nazis? Funny, all this time I thought it was some scientists searching for ways to better improve ways of farming and improving plants. Roundup Ready plants have saved farmers in this country countless $$$. Do they really want to enslave us and take over the world? WHAT? Am I missing something here?

I don't mean to criticize bias - just pointing it out. When doing research papers, they teach you to look for "scholarly" papers for your research. They tell you that if you want to use a website for your research, make sure that it is an unbiased one. A website that is clearly biased will tell you anything that furthers their own cause. Period.


.


The problem I see with plants that have been engineered to resist herbicides is that they most likely have been exposed to those chemical herbicides and have them in or on them when they make it to market. I don't see that as very healthy. Think of it like this, would you want to take a spoonful of roundup with your veggies at supper time? I think I'd support GMO and think it could be a good thing if the crops are sterile and cant lend their genes to wild or not so wild relatives. I think more benign uses of gmo would be to incorporate genes that improve the nutritional content of certain food crops. Like for example, maybe a type of corn or wheat that has twice the protein content.

I don't know if these are gmo or not, but it is interesting...

http://www.rirdc.gov.au/reports/Ras/02-154sum.html



:islandsharkbanana:

mrbungalow
11-23-2006, 08:07 AM
Mike, if what you are saying about the government, this agriculture-legislation in Iraq, and the companies using nazi-methods to push GMO on other countries & continents holds water, someone should sound the alarm.

In my country, agriculture is disapperaing. Heard on the news today that there are less than 50.000 farmers left. Remember, farms in Norway are nothing like the ones they have in the US and Canada. Here they are small and more traditional. In food-production, fish-farming is dominant here.

According to the facts of international trade, all countries can benfit from trade, as long as they produce what they are good at. Still, the thing with food is that it''s too important to mess with. It's one of the primary needs. Every country should have their own varied food-production. You should atleast be able to choose.

BTW, who do you guys think is northern europes largest banana-producer? Iceland, actually!

I've lived in the United States for 6 years, and have noticed some differences in several types of food. I think the chicken in america doesn't taste anything really, and is probably 3 times as big as the ones in Norway. But the steaks in america tastes better and are superior to the ones they sell in Norway - atleast in terms of taste. America are said to only have had a very few cases of mad-cow disease, while England and France have had way too many. So you must be doing something right "over there"!

mikevan
11-23-2006, 09:24 AM
Well, in the States, those sounding the alarm are the "crack-pots" afraid of change. After all, if it comes from a lab, it must be safe, right? Those in EU resisting GMO are now illegal in their resistance per the WTO. And those countries banning GMO like Brazil are having those bans reversed by activist judges. There's stiff resistance out there - the alarm has already been sounded. But - it doesn't appear to be enough...

Our chickens are factory-farmed, which is why they're tasteless. Give free-range chickens and eggs a try and you'll be surprised at the difference.

As to mad-cow and family - we're just lucky. We bumble as much as any other nation and what gets found is a fraction of what gets thru as with everything else. Not to mention possible suppression of incidents, of which I would not be surprised, knowing some of the ranchers that I do. The elk and deer form is fairly rampant, IIRC. Really sad, this disease.

They're also trying to control water here - making us register our wells and whatnot. But, water falls from the sky, making it harder to control tho in some places it's illegal to collect rain-water! How weird is that. But food has to be produced - if you can centralize the food production and control it and eliminate the competing food-producers, you have the world by the gonads in a way that OPEC has never dreamed. I can walk to work - but I cannot go without food!

Which is why I try to grow as much as I can here and save seeds like mad and concentrate on heirloom crops and varieties on the brink of disappearing.

This is the direction BioTech should have gone in the first place:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1931467,00.html

Be well,
Mike

Mike, if what you are saying about the government, this agriculture-legislation in Iraq, and the companies using nazi-methods to push GMO on other countries & continents holds water, someone should sound the alarm.

In my country, agriculture is disapperaing. Heard on the news today that there are less than 50.000 farmers left. Remember, farms in Norway are nothing like the ones they have in the US and Canada. Here they are small and more traditional. In food-production, fish-farming is dominant here.

According to the facts of international trade, all countries can benfit from trade, as long as they produce what they are good at. Still, the thing with food is that it''s too important to mess with. It's one of the primary needs. Every country should have their own varied food-production. You should atleast be able to choose.

BTW, who do you guys think is northern europes largest banana-producer? Iceland, actually!

I've lived in the United States for 6 years, and have noticed some differences in several types of food. I think the chicken in america doesn't taste anything really, and is probably 3 times as big as the ones in Norway. But the steaks in america tastes better and are superior to the ones they sell in Norway - atleast in terms of taste. America are said to only have had a very few cases of mad-cow disease, while England and France have had way too many. So you must be doing something right "over there"!

jeffreyp
11-23-2006, 09:55 AM
BTW, who do you guys think is northern europes largest banana-producer? Iceland, actually!

I've lived in the United States for 6 years, and

I remember reading about Iceland and banana production years ago. I always thought that was an amazing thing they could pull that off. I knew someone who lived in iceland for a while and he said one of his neighbors had an orange tree in their yard. Supposeably the house was near a hot spring and the steam from it kept the surrounding area balmy enough for the tree to grow. I bet the food grown in Iceland is incredibly tastey since it's grown in volcanic soil.

Mr. Bungalow, so you lived in the usa for 6 years? That explains why you speak/write like an american! I was wondering how a norwegian like yourself sounded like one of us? :nanerwizard:

bigdog
11-23-2006, 12:31 PM
Flame wars aside, you obviously have a personal agenda like most people do, only yours is not the welfare of the earth and the things that live on it, including you and me. Yours is about making money and or fame or possibly immortality through science. I would like to say we should agree to disagree but I don't think in your heart you really believe your own spin.

Mitchell, everyone has their own personal agenda. Here's mine: Try to please God, so He has a smile on His face when I'm at the Gates (I sure don't want to see Him frowning! lol!), graduate from college, maybe get married and have a couple of kids, try to make a positive difference in the world (however small it may be), settle down on a few acres, grow lots of bananas and cold-hardy palms, retire with enough to not worry about my last years on Earth, and die a happy old man. A lot to ask for, I know. I don't know why you would say such bad things about me, Mitchell. Have I done something to you to upset you on a personal level? I've gone back and read my posts, and don't see anywhere that I have personally attacked you. You obviously don't know me, or you would never say that I don't care about "the welfare of the earth and the things that live on it." How can you be sure of such things from my postings on bananas.org? Believe what you want, Mitchell. I know who I am, and don't have to defend myself here. You shouldn't make judgements about people based on 2 posts on a banana forum. It's uncalled for and downright mean. Happy Thanksgiving.

momoese
11-26-2006, 08:12 PM
Well I just wrote a whole reply to your post and it disappeared when I clicked submit. Hate that!

Anyway, if my detest of anything GMO hurts your feelings then you have my apologies.

Cheers :nanadrink:

PS: if your going to work in the field of GMO then you will need to grow a thick skin.

bigdog
11-26-2006, 09:05 PM
Mitchell, as you know, it's not your detesting of anything GMO that "hurts" my "feelings." You didn't mention anything about GMOs in your attack. You got personal, and you know it. Your half-hearted attemp at an apology is lame. Grow up.

momoese
11-26-2006, 11:33 PM
Mitchell, as you know, it's not your detesting of anything GMO that "hurts" my "feelings." You didn't mention anything about GMOs in your attack. You got personal, and you know it. Your half-hearted attemp at an apology is lame. Grow up.

Actually my apology was real. Maybe I'm not the best at expressing it over the internet.

You said a few things that lead me to believe you were not only supporting GMO as being safe, but that you wanted to pursue a career in working with them.

Now get over yourself

mrbungalow
11-27-2006, 12:18 PM
Maybe this guy will cheer things up a bit.
http://atvs.vg.no/player/player.php?id=6188

Apparently, making the same noise as the microwave makes this young swedish guy laugh! :cool:

modenacart
11-27-2006, 02:42 PM
They're also trying to control water here - making us register our wells and whatnot. But, water falls from the sky, making it harder to control tho in some places it's illegal to collect rain-water! How weird is that.

really? I have never heard of that. Where is that going on?

mikevan
11-27-2006, 03:08 PM
Ironically, Washington State has a 1917 law that claims state ownership of rainwater and requires a permit to even put a barrel under a down-spout. Reason given - harvesting even a little bit of rainwater affects aquifers and rivers and they're attempting to defend the water supply for everyone. Strange, for such a wet state. Colorado also has some interesting permit requirements for water-collecting, IIRC. Interestingly, for such a dry state, Texas fortunately encourages rainwater collection. I'm sure there are other restrictions. Some are not state-wide, but rather are by the county. And with the greater demand for a diminishing resource, water is coming under more and more scrutiny as far as control is concerned.

Be well,
Mike

really? I have never heard of that. Where is that going on?

MediaHound
12-03-2006, 08:56 AM
I just read this thread again. We may not always agree on things, and GMO is certainly a sensitive subject, but let's try to be more civil with each other. You guys know Gabe and I don't do much intervening but I don't want this thread to get out of hand (though it has been quiet for a bit).
:nanablowskisses:

With talks like these, when nobody gets offended, everyone wins. It stays on topic and more useful information gets passed along.
Thank you for understanding!

GATrops
12-03-2006, 01:05 PM
I also have been reading the posts on this thread and cannot believe some of the comments (almost personal attacks) that have been made in some of the messages. You may disagree with someone else’s opinions but if I remember correctly everyone is entitled to their opinion and the right to voice it. Just because you firmly believe something does not necessarily mean it is correct. I find it very disappointing and am not sure if I will continue to participate in the discussions on this board given the lack of respect shown by some of those involved. I am also glad to see that Jarred spoke up to try to bring a voice of reason and respect to the discussions.

monkeypickle
12-08-2006, 03:30 PM
Gene modified corn has another drawback for those of us who happen to enjoy the sight of migrating Monarch butterflies. Corn, modified by adding a genetic sequence that allows it to produce Bacillus Thurengiences Kills the larvae of Monarch butterfles. The gene enhanced corn produces pollen that is laced with BT. The pollen dshisces form tne tassel early in the morning while the dew is still on the leaves of the Monarchs favourite food plants. These plants commonly grow in ditches and other waste areas where corn is grown. The pollen adheres to the leaves of the milkweed plants that the larvae require to feed on. The larvae feed upon the leaves and are killed by the BT from the pollen grains. I know that this is true. I researched it and used it as a basis for my Biologymassters theme paper several years ago. Everyone got all upset by it, but guess what. Monsanto filed a lawsuit and everything got all hushed up. Result: You cannot find enough Monarch butterflies migrating through here to fill a decent matchbox, and this used to be a prominent flyway for Monarchs migrating through here in the fall. They used to cover the cedars here for several days. but no more. I haven't seen more than 1 or 2 each fall now for at least 7-8 years. Sigh I surely do miss them. they were sooo beautiful, but aparently also disposable. Monkeypickles It is not just a matter of "will it harm humans." What about "will it cause the extinction of other life forms." True. the Monarch butterfly is just another insect so who cares? But sometimes, the extinction of some seemingly unimportant member of the ecosystem leads to the extinction of another, which leads to the extinction pf another.......until one day maybe, it will make humans life impossible. Oh well. No one ever listens anyway. I am an old duffer, so it probably won't impact me . I'll be gone anyway. Good luck to the rest of you!

bigdog
12-09-2006, 12:06 PM
Are you scared of organic produce? Didn't think so. There is nothing scary or wrong or politically biased about supporting organic 100%

Organic growing methods have proven over the course of human history to be the right way. There is no reason to look any further.

You can choose to be a part of the solution(organic), or a part of the problem(GMO), the choice is yours.


Thought you might be interested in this article I found today, Mitchell:

Pesticides found in 'organic' food
November 6, 2004
Stuff
Leanne Bell
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3087903a10,00.html
Pesticide residues found in "organic" produce have, according to this story, prompted fresh concerns that New Zealand shoppers are being misled.
The Food Safety Authority was cited as saying shoppers should be aware that some food sold as "organic" might not be produced organically, after taking 41 samples of "organic" fruit, vegetables and wine from shops and found nine of them – 22 per cent – had pesticide residues.
Residues were found in lettuce, tomatoes and grapes. There was so much residue that they had probably been deliberately sprayed, the food safety watchdog said.
Executive director Andrew McKenzie was cited as saying the food was not unsafe but it did not comply with the organic standard, adding, "The sample size is quite small – it's not like a real good scientific study – but it points that there's a bit of a problem." Consumers could have confidence in food that was certified organic, "but if it's not certified, you're not quite sure what's going on. We never differentiated between certified and non-certified, we just went into shops where the consumer would logically think these things were organic."
A spokeswoman was cited as saying that the Commerce Commission, the enforcement agency for the Fair Trading Act, is assessing the information before it decides if it should investigate.
Technical director Seager Mason of organic certifier BioGro New Zealand was cited as criticizing the authority's test because it did not distinguish between certified and self-proclaimed organic foods and that BioGro did more than 250 pesticide residue tests a year on produce and had not found any residues for five years, adding, "I'm sure that test is correct but it means nothing about organics if they have selected a product which has an invalid claim of organic on it."

From:http://archives.foodsafetynetwork.ca/agnet/2004/11-2004/agnet_nov_8.htm#story1

Seems that the organic industry has its own problems as well. Sounds like some companies are being a bit misleading, trying to pass their product along as "organic," when in fact it isn't.

Both industries have their own, separate problems to deal with, and to overcome. There is room for both.

bigdog
12-09-2006, 12:31 PM
Gene modified corn has another drawback for those of us who happen to enjoy the sight of migrating Monarch butterflies. Corn, modified by adding a genetic sequence that allows it to produce Bacillus Thurengiences Kills the larvae of Monarch butterfles. The gene enhanced corn produces pollen that is laced with BT. The pollen dshisces form tne tassel early in the morning while the dew is still on the leaves of the Monarchs favourite food plants. These plants commonly grow in ditches and other waste areas where corn is grown. The pollen adheres to the leaves of the milkweed plants that the larvae require to feed on. The larvae feed upon the leaves and are killed by the BT from the pollen grains. I know that this is true. I researched it and used it as a basis for my Biologymassters theme paper several years ago. Everyone got all upset by it, but guess what. Monsanto filed a lawsuit and everything got all hushed up. Result: You cannot find enough Monarch butterflies migrating through here to fill a decent matchbox, and this used to be a prominent flyway for Monarchs migrating through here in the fall. They used to cover the cedars here for several days. but no more. I haven't seen more than 1 or 2 each fall now for at least 7-8 years. Sigh I surely do miss them. they were sooo beautiful, but aparently also disposable. Monkeypickles It is not just a matter of "will it harm humans." What about "will it cause the extinction of other life forms." True. the Monarch butterfly is just another insect so who cares? But sometimes, the extinction of some seemingly unimportant member of the ecosystem leads to the extinction of another, which leads to the extinction pf another.......until one day maybe, it will make humans life impossible. Oh well. No one ever listens anyway. I am an old duffer, so it probably won't impact me . I'll be gone anyway. Good luck to the rest of you!

Monkeypickles (great name, btw!), I did a little research on your findings, and it seems that there was a very extensive study done on this since yours. You'll be happy to know that their results reported that BT corn poses no significant risk to monarch butterflies! I thought that was good news, because I was concerned after reading your post. Here's a little excerpt from the USDA report:

There is no significant risk to monarch butterflies from environmental exposure to Bt corn, according to research conducted by a group of scientists coordinated by the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. This research was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

That Bt corn might present a risk became a matter of scientific and public concern when a small experiment in 1999 indicated caterpillars suffered when given no choice but to feed on milkweed leaves heavily dusted with Bt corn pollen.

The full story can be found here: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/br/btcorn/index.html#bt1

Certainly good news!

Gabe15
12-09-2006, 12:33 PM
Good article Frank, this is the kinda thing bananas are facing. Even organic bananas cannot escape all the pesticide spraying that must be done on a weekly basis to prevent mainly Black Sigatoka infections. This is the whole problem facing export bananas right now, they already have to spray way too many chemicals just to keep the sigatoka at bay, and then once Panama Disease Race 4 comes over to the Americas, there will be no way to stop it, the Cavendish is not resistant and pesticides do not work. Whats the answer? Either spend millions trying to genetically modify the Cavendish, or just replace them all with something like 'Goldfinger' which already exists and is a proven winner.

mikevan
12-09-2006, 12:47 PM
That is a problem with a lax certifying agency and unscrupulous growers looking to make more money with a label and hoping not to get caught. As with everything else in this world, it's buyer beware, unfortunately, in this world of greed, and there are members in any industry that are willing to use dishonesty to make a quick buck - not just farmers seeking to sell for more with the Organic label. I for one would like to see Organic sold for less than non-Organic - that would eliminate that kind of fraud for the most part and, after all, Organic is less costly to produce in the first place. That won't happen until supply catches up with demand and production becomes more local rather than distantly distributed. In the meantime, the safest way to have Organic with complete assurance is to grow it yourself. Nevertheless, even with a bit of salt, you'll still hopefully be more lucky buying organic than not - widespread industry-wide fraud cannot be hidden for long. And it helps if the buyer is alert and more than willing to be heard by the right people, organic or not.

Now, if they'd just stop feeding cattle corn and eliminate this e-coli problem - that interestingly seems to be plaguing non-Organic farms in California almost exclusively.

Mike

Thought you might be interested in this article I found today, Mitchell:

Pesticides found in 'organic' food
November 6, 2004
Stuff
Leanne Bell
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3087903a10,00.html
Pesticide residues found in "organic" produce have, according to this story, prompted fresh concerns that New Zealand shoppers are being misled.
The Food Safety Authority was cited as saying shoppers should be aware that some food sold as "organic" might not be produced organically, after taking 41 samples of "organic" fruit, vegetables and wine from shops and found nine of them – 22 per cent – had pesticide residues.
Residues were found in lettuce, tomatoes and grapes. There was so much residue that they had probably been deliberately sprayed, the food safety watchdog said.
Executive director Andrew McKenzie was cited as saying the food was not unsafe but it did not comply with the organic standard, adding, "The sample size is quite small – it's not like a real good scientific study – but it points that there's a bit of a problem." Consumers could have confidence in food that was certified organic, "but if it's not certified, you're not quite sure what's going on. We never differentiated between certified and non-certified, we just went into shops where the consumer would logically think these things were organic."
A spokeswoman was cited as saying that the Commerce Commission, the enforcement agency for the Fair Trading Act, is assessing the information before it decides if it should investigate.
Technical director Seager Mason of organic certifier BioGro New Zealand was cited as criticizing the authority's test because it did not distinguish between certified and self-proclaimed organic foods and that BioGro did more than 250 pesticide residue tests a year on produce and had not found any residues for five years, adding, "I'm sure that test is correct but it means nothing about organics if they have selected a product which has an invalid claim of organic on it."

From:http://archives.foodsafetynetwork.ca/agnet/2004/11-2004/agnet_nov_8.htm#story1

Seems that the organic industry has its own problems as well. Sounds like some companies are being a bit misleading, trying to pass their product along as "organic," when in fact it isn't.

Both industries have their own, separate problems to deal with, and to overcome. There is room for both.

imdocrob
12-09-2006, 12:50 PM
I agree with Gabe the simple solution is to replace the Cav. with the Goldfinger, but when we look at the big pic. isn't the Goldfinger a genetically modified banana from Honduras? The world has changed a lot from the Idustrial age due to the wonders of Science. I feel that if these labs are govt. monitored are we not going to be better off? After all isn't just a matter of time before something will come along that the Goldfinger will not be able to be resistant against. The key is to be open-minded.

Gabe15
12-09-2006, 12:55 PM
The 'Goldfinger' as well as anything from FHIA are not GMO, they were produced through years of conventional breeding, as in pollen transfer and seed harvest, just like early bananas were produced by nature.

mikevan
12-09-2006, 01:12 PM
Heh - you kidding? I keep wondering if the labs should be monitoring the government! :04:

The biggest problem is the tendency to focus on ubiquitous clones rather than even a diversity of clones. If the market were used to a more diverse nanner, preventing disaster would be easier than trying to produce that boring yeller 9" long grocery nanner. Thusly, with a very small number of parents being widely cloned, the prospects of disaster is much higher. A greater diversity in nanners - even if cloned - would reduce the catastrophic effect of disease, IMHO. And of course replacing and infusing selectively bred refreshments to the gene-pool. So, our main problem isn't the disease, but the lack of genetic diversity thru agricultural practices that unfortunately are dictated by the preconceptions of a finicky market.

Be well,
Mike

I agree with Gabe the simple solution is to replace the Cav. with the Goldfinger, but when we look at the big pic. isn't the Goldfinger a genetically modified banana from Honduras? The world has changed a lot from the Idustrial age due to the wonders of Science. I feel that if these labs are govt. monitored are we not going to be better off? After all isn't just a matter of time before something will come along that the Goldfinger will not be able to be resistant against. The key is to be open-minded.

bigdog
12-09-2006, 01:20 PM
Whats the answer? Either spend millions trying to genetically modify the Cavendish, or just replace them all with something like 'Goldfinger' which already exists and is a proven winner.

Man, isn't that the truth! The whole ridiculous idea that consumers won't warm up to a different banana seems a bit absurd to me. I think that's the primary reason that Cavendish is still THE banana found in supermarkets. With so many great varieties out there, seems like diversity in the supermarket would be a good thing for the industry.

Gabe15
12-09-2006, 01:24 PM
Mike you have hit the nail on the head. All over the world, many different banana varieties are grown, no other banana production system is as boring as the export bananas. This is the proposal that has been brought up countless times, if the current variety isnt working replace it with a different variety, doesnt sound so hard because its not. But there is a huge force that is stopping this from happening, and that is the industry is afraid that consumers will not like a new bananas, well thats just bullocks because they already did it in Australia, and guess what, no one cared! Infact they liked the new Goldfinger. Their only excuse to not replace the Cavendish is really just a lame excuse to give the GMO companies some business. Ive said it before though, GMO may have other great applications in improving the banana, but in my opinion its not the wisest thing to do and this point in time for the export industry (which actually when you look at the numbers is only 13% of worldwide banana production so in the end its not even the biggest issue facing bananas).

imdocrob
12-09-2006, 01:52 PM
I don't think that if we replaced the Cavendish with the Goldfinger or any other banana that the majority of the people out there would even have a clue. Thanks Gabe for correcting me on the Goldfinger.

imdocrob
12-09-2006, 01:54 PM
By the way Gabe how does one get the pic to come up under your name on these posts?

monkeypickle
12-11-2006, 04:53 PM
So glad to hear that bt corn is not killing Monarch butterflies, but,er...where ARE all the butterflies? hmmmm

you know what? why don't some of you who have a large number of unusual varieties of edible bananas get yourselves together and have a 'banana taste-off' or something to let people know what thry are missing out on?There are probably a lot of people out there who would like some of the 'new' varieties to start asking for them? what do you all think. The tomato people are doing that and the result is that seeds of antique [but wonderfull] varieties are again being carried in seed stores.

mikevan
12-11-2006, 05:29 PM
While the tomato enthusiasts have kept heirloom tomatoes alive and a diversity in seed stores, it's the grocery produce section that bananas reside and grocery managers that tend to stick with what they're comfortable with and used to, as well as with what has a regular supply of. There are a few pro-active grocers out there that actually do carry a small diversity of nanners from what I've read, but the overwhelming majority are only interested in boxes and boxes of the traditional yeller nanners - change is risky for them and money lost while waiting for it to catch on, taste-offs or no. Also, the tropical farmer is the one who provides the nanners and precious few of them are interested in growing a large diversity of nanners with no guarantee of sales - only breeders maintain a diversity. They focus on what makes money and that's the boring grocery-store nanner. So, even if we did do taste-offs, I doubt many of us would make any difference when our grocery nanners come from another part of the world that most of us have little contact with.

Be well,
Mike

So glad to hear that bt corn is not killing Monarch butterflies, but,er...where ARE all the butterflies? hmmmm

you know what? why don't some of you who have a large number of unusual varieties of edible bananas get yourselves together and have a 'banana taste-off' or something to let people know what thry are missing out on?There are probably a lot of people out there who would like some of the 'new' varieties to start asking for them? what do you all think. The tomato people are doing that and the result is that seeds of antique [but wonderfull] varieties are again being carried in seed stores.

JoeReal
12-11-2006, 06:32 PM
Sorry, can't resist. How about these ones?

Banana-Melon from Chiquita!
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/5446/bananamelonwop9.jpg

Banana-Kiwi
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/2716/bananakiwiag0.jpg

Banana-Pineapple
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1691/bananapineapplewet8.jpg

mikevan
12-11-2006, 07:01 PM
LOL! Where's the beef nanner tho? Or chicken nanners? Hey, everything tastes like chicken anyway, right? :)

Grin,
Mike

Sorry, can't resist. How about these ones?

monkeypickle
12-12-2006, 09:06 AM
Yuuuck! Chicken nanners sounds downright disgusting to me, but...hows about lime/coconut bananas or orange Papaya?:2236:

GAPEye
12-12-2006, 07:43 PM
My Vote Goes To The "WMN" = WaterMelon Nanner :2791:

Anaxagoras
02-18-2010, 04:14 AM
This is a good thread. I learned some nuances of this problem.

Bananaman88
02-18-2010, 12:49 PM
I agree with Frank; it's ridiculous to think that the American consumer would freak out if a different banana were offered. I mean, they already had to adapt once from the 'Gros Michel' to the Cavendish, so what's the difference now? I'd love to be able to go into my local supermarket and have four or five different banana cultivars to choose from. I think finding ones that ship well is another piece of the puzzle. The big banana companies just don't seem to want to take the chance. Too bad for us-and them.

Richard
02-18-2010, 02:02 PM
Here's a company in the business of testing for GMO plants:
GMO Testing (http://www.gmotesting.com/GMO_Testing.html)

Nicolas Naranja
02-18-2010, 03:36 PM
Wow,

Apparently I missed out on a really heated GMO conversation. I have a vested interest in the whole GMO debate, which comes from my own health and the reality of food production. I live across the street from some farmland that gets sprayed by air on a regular basis. The plane flies over my house and drops down to about 10-15' to start spraying about 100' from the end of my driveway. The first house I had in town he would actually start spraying at the end of my backyard. And we aren't talking about benign chemicals either, things like Chlorpyrifos, Parathion, and Methomyl. If farmers down here could use Bt(GMO) sweet corn those chemicals wouldn't be getting sprayed. And I'll bet if you asked the guys that lived around or in banana plantations if they would rather have GMO bananas that didn't have to be sprayed or have bananas that had to sprayed every two weeks I guarantee they would rather have the ones that weren't sprayed. Sure we would all like to go organic, but it just isn't totally feasible. Think about how many cows would be required to produce the manure required to switch the world to organic production. Somebody has already done the math behind it, and you would need billions more animals to make the manure required. Chemical fertilizer has saved more people from starvation than anything else, and right behind that you have agrochemicals. If you have ever had to hoe a crop like bananas, peanuts or cotton you would also readily appreciate things like herbicides that make the job much easier.

You know what really irks me: People that have never spent time farming who want me to use composted manure, manual weeding, and just accept the inevitable loss due to disease and then they want to pay the same price for it.

Question: What's the bigger moral hazard GMO crops grown in your region or organic tomatoes picked by children 100s of miles away?

Bananaman88
02-18-2010, 03:47 PM
Interesting points, Nicolas.

harveyc
02-23-2010, 04:54 PM
Sorry, perhaps a bit off-topic, but we maybe could just get organic "California" bananas from China...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JQ31Ljd9T_Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JQ31Ljd9T_Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

dana mastro
10-16-2013, 01:00 PM
okay well to answer your post first question commercially they grow Cavendish but some producers grow genetically modified Cavendish's its called the double mahoi YES this banana is actually a genetically modified Cavendish it grows 2 bunches of bananas at a time and there have been records of some doing three and even a dwarf 4th so u can see why they would want to do this for mass production. banana facts :)

servatusprime
10-16-2013, 01:27 PM
okay well to answer your post first question commercially they grow Cavendish but some producers grow genetically modified Cavendish's its called the double mahoi YES this banana is actually a genetically modified Cavendish it grows 2 bunches of bananas at a time and there have been records of some doing three and even a dwarf 4th so u can see why they would want to do this for mass production. banana facts :)

Can you show me where you got the information stating that its a GMO? Thank you. (i am currently growing it)