From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Fri Jun 29 2001 - 11:17:21 MDT
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Brian D Williams wrote:
> Genetic engineering and crossbreeding are completely different
> things. No amount of cross breeding is going to introduce genes
> that are not already within the species, not even so called
> directed evolution to induce somoclonal variation.
Brian, a *lot* of the crops we have today have come from interbreeding
various wild varieties (as has been pointed out with wheat). That
interbreeding does introduce "divergent" genes. Also, though I've
never studied the field extensively there *are* plant viruses.
(Genetic engineers even sometimes use them to create the GM foods).
Those plant viruses *are* transferring genes from other species
into the plants.
There is currently an active debate occuring amongst the genome
researchers as to exactly how several hundred bacterial genes
ended up in the human genome. Nature doesn't come in nice neat
little "pure" boxes. Genetic material is getting sloshed from
species to species all the time. All the genetic engineering
is doing is speeding up the process. And because it has to go
through a fairly rigorous review [Look up the stuff about what
the Starlink approval had to go through.] it is probably much
safer than those varieties "naturally" bred to be insect resistant.
The cases cited in the BIO newspeice *did* end up in the
food supply. At least in one case they only got pulled after
they noticed that they were causing skin rashes in the harvesters!
>
> Labeling doesn't have to be difficult, as Harvey has pointed out in
> numerous excellent posts today, we're not talking warning labels
> here.
>
> GMO: corn type XXXXX
>
> Is it patented? even easier:
>
> GMO: corn patent XXXXXXXXXXXX
How about simply "Corn (http://www.corn.org/type/XXXX)".
If the consumer wants to know it is GMO is is up to them to look
it up. In other words the government would be encouraging the
consumer to actually *educate* themselves about their food
and therefore take some personal responsibility for what they
consume.
Alternatively, you could use the bar code to hold the
product up to your hacked bar code reader attached to
your Linux box and go to the manufacturer's web site where
you could get more information than you ever wanted to know!
Grocery stores could install terminals to allow you to check
product contents in the aisles.
> I don't know if you caught my post of a few weeks ago but
> information from focus groups has indicated that opposition to GMO
> products evaporates once they are labeled.
But as I've pointed out the GMO label doesn't give the consumer
the choice he or she might really like to make. I might want
to make a key distinction between GMO with lower toxins or
GMO that had less herbicides applied or GMO with higher nutrient
levels. The GMO label doesn't handle that. Access to both
"average consumer condensed" and "full molecular analysis"
information *does*.
> Besides you want guys like Harvey and me on your side.... ;)
I'm not so sure, one of the reasons I folded my last hand was
it got to be so painful trying to talk sense into the people
I had to work with. The nice part about beating your head against
the wall is that it feels really good when you stop. Its so
much easier to live in a house somewhere in the desert and
just let the world go to hell in a handbasket.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:21 MST