Slashdot Mirror
Drug Making Genes Added To Corn Jump To Soya
Anonymous Cowdog writes "Google News turned up a scary item today: Apparently, genetically altered corn, designed not to repel pests or withstand bad weather, but rather to grow pharmecuticals (for diabetes and diarrhea) has been accidentally mixed with soy plants in the field, resulting in 500,000 bushels of contaminated soybeans being quarantined by the US FDA. Ooops. Here's the story, and here's another story about the same case. The company who brought us this nice event is called ProdiGene. Looks like they're also working on an edible AIDS vaccine (kinda makes sense, eat Tofu, enjoy free love!) Now, I was thinking, will our government protect us from doom-by-hand-me-down-genes? and on a hunch (honest!) I did this google search for keywords ProdiGene and "george w bush". Result? A not so reassuring article."
'Mistakes' like this are common. The average journalist (or person in general - including /. readers) doesn't know enough about science to know that genes can't "jump species" as diverse as corn to soybean.
See, this is getting ridiculous. Posting process on slashdot:
1. Slashdotter finds distuirbing article.
2. Slashdotter doesn't read it closely.
3. Slashdotter makes gross oversimplifications, including specifically some sort of doomsday scenario.
4. Slashdotter assumes there must be some GW Bush conspiracy going on.
The sad thing is that there is potential for harm here, but the overstated claims and conspiracy theories really hurt the credibility of the posted story, which itself was good.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Monsanto has a known history of misplacing toxic waste. If someone firebombs the wrong facility, they could irreversible contaminate the environment for hundreds of thousands of people. It is a good idea to first know what you are firebombing before the actual commision of the act.
I grew up farming corn and beans. Soybeans are a broadleaf plant. Corn is a grass. Grass killer sprayed on soybeans will kill the corn plants that come up.
Also, corn grows about four feet taller than soybeans. Picking out the corn should be no problem.
Really though, GM stuff should be grown in totally separate fields and the fields kept separate.
Last I checked Corn and Soybean plants can't cross-pollinate. Nor do they have any other means to transfer their genes from one species to another.
I highly doubt that the Corn stalks were 'gettin it on' with the Soybean plants, spreading free love and pollen accross the species barrier. This would be like a pig mating with an elephant, and is thus merely the stuff of dreams and fantasies in a biologist's world.
It's highly likely that what actually happened was wrongly interpreted, and a totally misinformed journalist created a hyped up headline that didn't even begin to convey what actually happened. Most likely the farmers that grew the genetically altered corn used harvesting equipment (combines) which like nearly all combines are unable to be 100% effecient in gathering the crops, and as such allow some of the corn to fall back to the earth and become seed. Next year the farmer goes back in, tills up the land, plants his soybean crops in the same field, and soon enough a couple of corn stalks crop up. You'll see this in many soybean fields in the midwest, a couple of stalks of corn standing up in a vast field of what is otherwise soybeans. Even if there are few to no weeds, you'll still usually see some corn, because the herbicides are designed not to kill corn and soybeans, but everything else. When the soybeans were harvested, a couple of corn stalks were harvested along with it, even though a bean head on a combine is not designed to harvest corn, it usually is able to pull a few kernels off the cobb when plowing through the beans. Low and behold, some genetically altered 2nd generation corn gets into the soybeans. Big deal.
Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
The article says that an inspector first became suspicious because he noticed corn plants among the harvested soybeans. IANAF (I am not a farmer), but I would imagine that it doesn't take too much intelligence to discern corn from soybeans and any mixing of the plants can be quickly dealt with at a processing plant.
Also, given that only a few corn plants were present among tons of soybeans, what is the real danger of poisoning someone? Since soybeans are processed into edible and non-edible products, is there a REAL, measurable danger?
Vaccines and pharmaceutical drugs generally help a lot more people than they hurt. Are we going to ban GE foods because a few people might have a problem with them? Why not ban the peanut plant, since peanuts DO cause allergic reactions in some people?
5. Slashdotter submits oversimplified misinterpretation of would-be conspiracy for publishing.
6. Slashdot editor press "Publish" button without even thinking twice.
If you think that scientists are just randomly changing genes in foods intended to be sold, you've lost your grip on reality. Experimentation happens, but no sane food/drug company would risk the impact of such a level of carelessness/unconcern.
While I tend to agree with that assessment, I am still troubled by the amount of resources these same food/drug companies spent in order to defeat bills that would have required mandatory labelling of any products containing GM products.
If GM foods are *so* safe, why do they not want us to know when they are being consumed? It's sad that the last line of defense is the threat of massive class-action lawsuits in the event that GM foods are not quite as safe as their purveyors would have us believe!
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Actually if you lived in europe you'd have heard plenty of screaming about GM food. Any food products containing GM material MUST (by law) say so, and many stores have stopped selling GM products at all because of consumer unease.
/.rs know about RIAA and their pet senators, but how many pet senators does Monsanto have and why do they need them if the food is so safe?
You say "no sane food/drug company would risk the impact of such a level of carelessness/unconcern", but many would say you were insane for making such a dangerous and naive assumption.
The big biotech companies have spent vast amounts of money on developing these new products. Do you really believe that they would be beyond "selecting" scientific data that supports claims that they are safe? All
Well one reason they need the senators is obvious actually. They need them to force the US government to persuade the WTO, UN etc that GM food is safe, so that any country which blocks the sale of US food goods is in breach of WTO rules, and so is any country that refuses GM food aid.
Just another example of US corporate imperialism by proxy.
You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
Caution is right. The genes didn't jump anywhere.
Both "news" stories are from an agenda-driven web site and read more like propaganda press releases than real news stores. Hemos was either asleep at the switch or has an axe to grind. Regardless, this is just nonsense.
I don't really understand the "I did this google search..." part of the post. Who was Bush supposed to appoint, some retard that can't read, spell, or understand simple plant cultivation? If there's a job with those requirements, "Anonymous Cowdog" should submit his resume & you could be his travelling secretary.
You can't say that anyone knows that genes can't jump species as diverse as corn to soybean. It may not have been observed, yet, which isn't suprising, since it would probably be a rare occurance, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. Of course, most people on slashdot don't know enough to make such distincitons.
In fact, I think there is every reason to think that they can, especially when we are dealing with genetically modified organisms. One method of inserting genes into genomes uses sequences that are known to be associated with the mobility of DNA sequences. Given the low level this is working at, I would expect a transposable sequence from one species to work equally well for getting a sequence into the genome of another species.
The issue then becomes, how likely is this comingling of DNA between species outside the lab. It is probably relatively rare, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Especially when you consider the scale at which crops are grown.
Please stop the FUD man.
When was the last time a farmer cross-pollinated a tomato with corn to stop insects?
Or when did cross-breeding allow corn to produce human proteins and drugs?
Their do NOT completely understand the consequences of their actions. Taking genetic sequences from a horse and inserting it into a dog is not analogus to cross-breeding a german shepard with a cocker spaniel.
The adverse reaction to genetically altered foods comes from a populace that has been repeatedly lied to by government and industry. "Harmless" nuclear tests in the Nevada desert are now estimated to have caused 70,000 cancer deaths. The use of "Harmless" PCB-contaminated waste oil donated by GE to tar roads in the Northeast has resulted in cancer rates 250% higher in towns that accepted it over the last 30 years. Cost cutting and consolidation in the meatpacking industry has resulted in hundreds of people being sickened or killed by contaminated meat.
Maybe bioengineered products should get a good, hard look in open tests before being let loose on the world.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
The article reads more like an Opinion piece than a scientific article. The paper contains no "proof", only scary statements and unprovable assertions. For example, the author writes: "...false assurances were made that "humans were not at risk."" Is the author accusing someone of lying? What proof is there? How does the author know? Statements such as "I was not surprised...", are found throughout. the article concludes with "All the risks...far outweigh any potential benefits." I'm glad Dr. Ho took the time to perform a full non-biased cost/benefit analysis. Or perhaps he's just stating an opinion here.
Additionally, more than half of the citations are written by the author of the paper. These citations are ones with obviously biased titles such as: "GM maize approved on bad science in the UK". Let me cite myself, and I could "prove" anything too!