[mriff]

Crops can be modified by manipulating their DNA through genetic engineering. The benefits include increased yeild, tolerance to commonly used herbicides, and being able to use plant growth to manufacture drugs. Many crops grown in the US already use GMO (genetically modified organisms) technology. These include corn, soybeans, canola, and cotton.

Any opinion on this? Good thing or bad thing?

[ezrunner]

Wirelessly posted (hope is everything!)

I prefer organic food. As natural as possible!

I think the manipulation is needed as the worlds population grows. Not overly opposed to it but not 100% convinced either

[test54]

Originally Posted by ezrunner

Wirelessly posted (hope is everything!)

I prefer organic food. As natural as possible!

I think the manipulation is needed as the worlds population grows. Not overly opposed to it but not 100% convinced either

i agree with EZ.

[mriff]

Some of these crops are modified to produce an insecticide which keeps worms from eating it. Which you then consume. Does that step over the line?

[djm2]

What's the half life of the insecticide?

What are the effects of the insecticide on humans? How tested and for how many repeatable studies?

[test54]

Originally Posted by mriff

Some of these crops are modified to produce an insecticide which keeps worms from eating it. Which you then consume. Does that step over the line?

I think that does. Many affects are not known about for years, so in my mind its usually best to avoid them.

[mriff]

Originally Posted by djm2

What's the half life of the insecticide?

What are the effects of the insecticide on humans? How tested and for how many repeatable studies?

Now that, my friend, would take about a month to answer! But without going into detail, the half life of the insecticide is fairly long in the plant. It has to be to maintain insect control since these crops are attacked pretty much up to harvest. The effects on humans have been tested extensively and found to present no known problems (although there are some that would disagree with that statement!). And many, many repeatable studies have been conducted under Good Laboratory Practices.

[mriff]

Originally Posted by test54

I think that does. Many affects are not known about for years, so in my mind its usually best to avoid them.

Oops. You are consuming these kinds of crops now and have been for probably 10 years or so.

[test54]

Originally Posted by mriff

Oops. You are consuming these kinds of crops now and have been for probably 10 years or so.

I know thats why I try to buy everything organic, the reason is to try to avoid the products that have unknown chemical consequences. But the situation almost changes daily and you get conflicting results from about every study it seems.

[juwaack68]

I have to admit I'm not much into buying organic foods, not because I don't like them (never tried them), but because they seem to be more expensive around here.

I read this article this morning about a new breed of rice that can last much longer when the rice fields get flooded (which seems to be happening a lot more often).

Fighting hunger with flood-tolerant rice - CNN.com

[test54]

how about "Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury"
washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

I do try to avoid high fructose corn syrup products, and thats hard to do.

others do too, for instance people import mexican made Coca Cola because it is made with cane sugar rather than corn syrup.

[djm2]

Originally Posted by mriff

Now that, my friend, would take about a month to answer! But without going into detail, the half life of the insecticide is fairly long in the plant. It has to be to maintain insect control since these crops are attacked pretty much up to harvest. The effects on humans have been tested extensively and found to present no known problems (although there are some that would disagree with that statement!). And many, many repeatable studies have been conducted under Good Laboratory Practices.

OK, then I would move my personal evaluation to the quality of the taste and the quality of the nutrition. You can take reasonable efforts to contain risk, but you can never eliminate it entirely. Innovations like this are part of the reason food prices have lagged inflation over the past 50 years.

Oh, and to some others posting in the thread, just because something is "organic" does not mean that it is free of risk. Raw milk is just one example of that.

[jsconyers]

This is slightly off topic, but what do you guys feel about eating meat of cloned animals?
FDA OKs meat, milk from most cloned animals - CNN.com

[mriff]

Originally Posted by juwaack68

I have to admit I'm not much into buying organic foods, not because I don't like them (never tried them), but because they seem to be more expensive around here.

I read this article this morning about a new breed of rice that can last much longer when the rice fields get flooded (which seems to be happening a lot more often).

Fighting hunger with flood-tolerant rice - CNN.com

I saw that this morning. That's what prompted the idea for this thread. I think their discovery is a very significant move forward for rice, the most important global crop.

[TroyDBrown]

Originally Posted by ezrunner

Wirelessly posted (hope is everything!)

I prefer organic food. As natural as possible!

I think the manipulation is needed as the worlds population grows. Not overly opposed to it but not 100% convinced either

I agree with you:

1. Need to produce the food for the worlds population. I have no question about that and non GMO crops really cut down on that.

2. Organic is great for those that can afford it. Organic farming has smaller yields and in turn cuts the farmers profit which in turn raises the price.

[mriff]

Originally Posted by djm2

OK, then I would move my personal evaluation to the quality of the taste and the quality of the nutrition. You can take reasonable efforts to contain risk, but you can never eliminate it entirely. Innovations like this are part of the reason food prices have lagged inflation over the past 50 years.

Oh, and to some others posting in the thread, just because something is "organic" does not mean that it is free of risk. Raw milk is just one example of that.

I agree, it is all about risk/benefit. I think the organic movement, to some extent, is a marketing gimmick. Also, the definition of Organic has been a moving target in the past. There are organic standards now, that must be met. Corporate farms are even getting into the act in an effort to make money on these new technologies. But when you get right down to it, the food supply in this country is overwhemingly safe. (The recent problems with those idiots at The Peanut Corp of America notwithstanding.)

[mriff]

Originally Posted by jsconyers

This is slightly off topic, but what do you guys feel about eating meat of cloned animals?
FDA OKs meat, milk from most cloned animals - CNN.com

I can't imagine that meat and milk products from cloned animals would be harmful in any way. I say clone em and eat em.

[ezrunner]

we have a couple farms that use NO chemicals. costs a bit more but the taste is unbelievable. also with the higher cost I am forced to portin more appropriately so do not over eat

[mriff]

I wonder ez, if you'd be able to tell the difference in a blind taste test?

[djm2]

Well, New York City public water regularly beats the designer waters in taste tests. EZ, be careful! Mriff is looking to take your $$!