Official: Cultivation of GMOs "will not be allowed"

The genetic engineering you refer to as going on for thousands of years involved selective breeding of plants of the same species.

GMOs, however, involves mixing genes from different species altogether and we don't yet fully know the long term effects of doing this.

GMOs are part of an attempt by large corporations to control food, and in some countries it has led to making growing ones own food and natural (but not synthetic) vitamin supplements illegal. In some cases, if GMO seeds accidentaly blow onto the fields of a organic farmer, Monsanto sues that farmer and usually wins, even though the farmer is innocent. This, and their reluctance to let consumers know when food contains GMOs, demonstrates the ruthlessness of corporations. I have heard that GMOs are also, by the way, banned form Monsanto's own staff restaurants.

Control food and you control people.

Do not call anyone who disagrees with you illiterate because such a comment tell us more about you than it does about them.

I am amazed at how illiterate the public, the minister, and the media in this part of the world is when it comes to basic biology. First of all, the picture used to go with this article has nothing to do with genetic engineering. Using such a picture will definitely scare Joe Blo from such an idea. Second if all, we have been consuming genetically engineered fruits and cereals for thousands of years already. Plant breeders have been selecting for certain plant feature since we first started cultivating grains, 10 000 years ago. Genetic modification using current tools is no different and there is no evidence to suggest that such products are detrimental to human health. Just recently, a gene that encodes for a protein that leads to the spoilage of tomatoes was knocked out resulting in tomatoes with significantly longer shelf life. I personally do not see anything wrong with it but this hysteria around genetically modified food, born out of ignorance, has got to stop.

(TP, 25 March 2015 21:16)

You make a great point about how a lot of people miss the mark about GMO.

The real issue of GMO is propertizing (if I can make up a word) nature and huge corporations controlling the world's food supply. This is a very serious issue.

However, the actual scientific objections are usually based on nonsense. Agriculture has been breeding different species all the time. That's what a donkey is. Apples and pears get made into a new fruits. We genetically modify (by breeding) fruits so they have fewer, or no, seeds. It's a good thing to create new species of plants that require fewer pesticides, for example. This is normal scientific progress which, of course, like everything, needs to be constantly studied and reexamined.

It's the amassing of food production into monolithic international corporate entities is the real problem, not some scary image of a syringe going into an apple.

(visar, 25 March 2015 18:41) Plant breeders have been selecting for certain plant feature since we first started cultivating grains, 10 000 years ago. Genetic modification using current tools is no different and there is no evidence to suggest that such products are detrimental to human health.

---

As TP aptly explained, natural breeding is significantly different from genetic engineering. You should realize that in the latter, the process of engineering a novel genetic trait into a plant requires co-transformation with a second, linked, genetic marker that facilitates selection. This selection process generally involves the co-transformation with an antibiotic-resistance marker. One concern is that the mass release of such markers in GM plants may (or has) result(ed) in an increase in the rate of antibiotic resistance in human pathogens.

I am amazed at how illiterate the public, the minister, and the media in this part of the world is when it comes to basic biology. First of all, the picture used to go with this article has nothing to do with genetic engineering. Using such a picture will definitely scare Joe Blo from such an idea. Second if all, we have been consuming genetically engineered fruits and cereals for thousands of years already. Plant breeders have been selecting for certain plant feature since we first started cultivating grains, 10 000 years ago. Genetic modification using current tools is no different and there is no evidence to suggest that such products are detrimental to human health. Just recently, a gene that encodes for a protein that leads to the spoilage of tomatoes was knocked out resulting in tomatoes with significantly longer shelf life. I personally do not see anything wrong with it but this hysteria around genetically modified food, born out of ignorance, has got to stop.

The genetic engineering you refer to as going on for thousands of years involved selective breeding of plants of the same species.

GMOs, however, involves mixing genes from different species altogether and we don't yet fully know the long term effects of doing this.

GMOs are part of an attempt by large corporations to control food, and in some countries it has led to making growing ones own food and natural (but not synthetic) vitamin supplements illegal. In some cases, if GMO seeds accidentaly blow onto the fields of a organic farmer, Monsanto sues that farmer and usually wins, even though the farmer is innocent. This, and their reluctance to let consumers know when food contains GMOs, demonstrates the ruthlessness of corporations. I have heard that GMOs are also, by the way, banned form Monsanto's own staff restaurants.

Control food and you control people.

Do not call anyone who disagrees with you illiterate because such a comment tell us more about you than it does about them.

(TP, 25 March 2015 21:16)

You make a great point about how a lot of people miss the mark about GMO.

The real issue of GMO is propertizing (if I can make up a word) nature and huge corporations controlling the world's food supply. This is a very serious issue.

However, the actual scientific objections are usually based on nonsense. Agriculture has been breeding different species all the time. That's what a donkey is. Apples and pears get made into a new fruits. We genetically modify (by breeding) fruits so they have fewer, or no, seeds. It's a good thing to create new species of plants that require fewer pesticides, for example. This is normal scientific progress which, of course, like everything, needs to be constantly studied and reexamined.

It's the amassing of food production into monolithic international corporate entities is the real problem, not some scary image of a syringe going into an apple.

(visar, 25 March 2015 18:41) Plant breeders have been selecting for certain plant feature since we first started cultivating grains, 10 000 years ago. Genetic modification using current tools is no different and there is no evidence to suggest that such products are detrimental to human health.

---

As TP aptly explained, natural breeding is significantly different from genetic engineering. You should realize that in the latter, the process of engineering a novel genetic trait into a plant requires co-transformation with a second, linked, genetic marker that facilitates selection. This selection process generally involves the co-transformation with an antibiotic-resistance marker. One concern is that the mass release of such markers in GM plants may (or has) result(ed) in an increase in the rate of antibiotic resistance in human pathogens.