Slashdot Mirror
Americans Support Mandatory Labeling of Food That Contains DNA
HughPickens.com writes Jennifer Abel writes at the LA Times that according to a recent survey (PDF), over 80% of Americans says they support "mandatory labels on foods containing DNA," roughly the same number that support the mandatory labeling of GMO foods "produced with genetic engineering." Ilya Somin, writing about the survey at the Washington Post, suggested that a mandatory label for foods containing DNA might sound like this: "WARNING: This product contains deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The Surgeon General has determined that DNA is linked to a variety of diseases in both animals and humans. In some configurations, it is a risk factor for cancer and heart disease. Pregnant women are at very high risk of passing on DNA to their children."
The report echoes a well-known joke/prank wherein people discuss the dangers of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" also known as hydrogen oxide and hydrogen hydroxide. Search online for information about dihydrogen monoxide, and you'll find a long list of scary-sounding and absolutely true warnings about it: the nuclear power industry uses enormous quantities of it every year. Dihydrogen monoxide is used in the production of many highly toxic pesticides, and chemical weapons banned by the Geneva Conventions. Dihydrogen monoxide is found in all tumors removed from cancer patients, and is guaranteed fatal to humans in large quantities and even small quantities can kill you, if it enters your respiratory system. In 2006, in Louisville, Kentucky, David Karem, executive director of the Waterfront Development Corporation, a public body that operates Waterfront Park, wished to deter bathers from using a large public fountain. "Counting on a lack of understanding about water's chemical makeup," he arranged for signs reading: "DANGER! – WATER CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF HYDROGEN – KEEP OUT" to be posted on the fountain at public expense.
The report echoes a well-known joke/prank wherein people discuss the dangers of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide" also known as hydrogen oxide and hydrogen hydroxide. Search online for information about dihydrogen monoxide, and you'll find a long list of scary-sounding and absolutely true warnings about it: the nuclear power industry uses enormous quantities of it every year. Dihydrogen monoxide is used in the production of many highly toxic pesticides, and chemical weapons banned by the Geneva Conventions. Dihydrogen monoxide is found in all tumors removed from cancer patients, and is guaranteed fatal to humans in large quantities and even small quantities can kill you, if it enters your respiratory system. In 2006, in Louisville, Kentucky, David Karem, executive director of the Waterfront Development Corporation, a public body that operates Waterfront Park, wished to deter bathers from using a large public fountain. "Counting on a lack of understanding about water's chemical makeup," he arranged for signs reading: "DANGER! – WATER CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF HYDROGEN – KEEP OUT" to be posted on the fountain at public expense.
Another fun excerpt: "Secondly, participants were asked “Did you read any books about food and agriculture in the past year?” Participants were asked to select “Yes”, “No”, or “I don’t know”. Just over 16% of participants stated that they had read a book related to food and agriculture in the past year. About 81% answered “No”, and 3% answered “I don’t know”. Those who answered “Yes” were asked: “What is the title of the most recent book you read about food and agriculture?” The vast majority of responses were of the form “I don’t remember” or “cannot recall”. Fast Food Nation, Food Inc., and Omnivore’s Dilemma were each mentioned about three times. The Farmer’s Almanac and Skinny Bitch were mentioned twice. One respondent mentioned the bible."
This appears to follow the general pattern that people will lie to interviewers to seem more smart, educated, or intellectual than they are. They don't mention in the study a correlation between those who said yes to reading a book and then couldn't "remember" it when pressed and those who wanted to ban food containing DNA, but I'd be willing put money on their being a correlation.
For April fools jokes, isn't it?
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Remember when news organizations didn't so blatantly try to push agendas? Well, I'm not sure if there ever was such a time but it certainly isn't today.
100% oil free, fat free carb free and certified dna free.
May contain traces of nuts.
A clever article that says that since
people can be fooled by clever lies,
that's proof that the law passed to state
that GRAS foods are to be treated "as if tested"
is the same thing as scientific testing.
This isnt worthy of slashdot, its heckling
not debate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lustig-md/fda-food-additives_b_3384629.html
A lot of shyte in our food stores is shyte, sold to us
by the people who use lobbyists to make laws
that allow the by-passing of testing, for example.
I can see it now. "WARNING: This lettuce contains lettuce DNA. Eat at your own risk. Wholefoods is not liable for side effect due to the consumption of lettuce DNA"
Most people don't have the knowledge to assess by themselves if a product fits their expectation. Not only for food, any product needs a thoughtful advice/label from an independent and competent / national team to guide customers. What difference does it make for a customer who reads for the first time "chicken raised outdoors" and "chicken from battery cages"? The answer is here, and it's a big long, but a summary on a sticker would help customers to chose more wisely - and that would dramatically improve competition between very-low quality products sold 0.9 X against a much better product sold X (while the manufacturing cost of a "good" product would be twice the cost of a "bad" product). People tend to chose the cheapest one, by lack of information.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I'm tired of Organic food! I asked, "Where is the inorganic food! I cannot stand the taste of carbon - even at the molecular level!!"
I googled for "GMO Hazards"
https://www.google.com/search?...
and out of the top 10 sites not one had actual problems that were caused by GMO foods
Lot of might and could be, but no actually. No "Killer corn ate my baby "
So How bout labeling foods that are produced from selective breeding genetically engineered as well ?
Strictly speaking, the phrasing is designed to generate the wrong answer so the respondent can then be mocked.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
From one of the sites
http://foodrevolution.org/blog...
I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.
That's nice he ought to let the farmers know they can buy cheaper seeds and still do as well.
If it seems like I am laughing at these people and the Euros who seem to think it's in their interest to pay more for food, I am.
There's also GAME-C (Group for Atomic Material Exposure Control), a group which has launched a campaign to force the pharmaceutical industry to label medicines comprised partially or entirely of atoms.
An episode of the Man Show asked people to ban Women's Suffrage and got a lot of support, hah! Good times!
This appears to follow the general pattern that people will lie to interviewers to seem more smart, educated, or intellectual than they are.
There is some phenomenon at work. School curriculum seems to contain the essentials of literacy and a general sense that a modern world exists to be explored and understood, but for a great many children now and their twenty-something parents, there seem to be great gaps of knowledge... it is as if a great pool of historical and practical trivia such as that which would be imparted by oral tradition as conversation and interaction with elders, has gone 'missing'.
Perhaps it is not the educational system that has failed us, but a knowledge-transfer process between the generations. I speak not of a direct and simple connection with one's parents and grandparents, but ongoing dialogue with anyone 20+ years older.
From pre-school through college children are becoming independent at younger ages and are managing to slice out their own separate social lives. We encourage this, shape it even. It is possible for them to maintain contact principally with others their own age right into adulthood. Their parents are typically distracted and engaged with work, and everyone has their own directed entertainment to immerse in at the end of the day. Are sundown get-togethers between generations a thing of the past?
Until the post-war '50s there was little in the way of a teen-age subculture. Even before graduation there were life choices to make. You would typically be home by sundown, a great deal more interaction with adults and steady pressure for at least one of the younger to adopt the traditions and vocations of parents was real. Who will manage the farm, who will be the first apprentice at the clock shop? Who will join the Marines, who will be the teacher?
Throughout the Nuclear Age the nuclear family has been in steady decline. Where we had once been paced by the animals and family tradition we were increasingly paced by tides of external stimuli. Diverse political ideology, lifestyle options and the fossil fuel-rich economy encouraged far migration. Today families span more geographical distance on average than at any time in history.
Modern technology helped this to happen. We are a push-button society and kids push buttons as well as anyone. This extends to push-button entertainment and distraction. Maybe we've spent the last three decades of pushing separate buttons instead of spending long hours talking to one another about the little things and the big things.
What if this simple, sad message of generational estrangement as voiced by Harry Chapin... could be applied to a whole country?
Perhaps it's not too late to open those channels again.
Call your Mom.
Ask her what DNA is.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
I need to start marketing the Ronco DNA Extractor. Safely and quickly remove any residual DNA to make smart, healthy family meals.
Ask if they would consider eating radioactive food!
A scientifically inclined artist, Zoe Papadopoulou, had some fun with this idea in an exhibition at the Wellcome Collection in London a couple of years ago. Visitors were invited to eat 'yellow cake' which, while sharing a name with processed uranium ore, was actually a real cake made from edible but naturally slightly radioactive ingredients (enough to pick up on a Geiger counter):
http://zoeworks.co.uk/projects...
I don't know exactly what she used - Carbon-14 is ubiquitous, of course, though hard to detect in small quantities, but the ingredients seem to include brazil nuts (which tend to concentrate environmental radium) and she might have added some 'Lo Salt' for the potassium-40.
This showed up in The Washington Post a week ago... and I'm still aghast.
Slashdot has classified this as a "humour" story, but I find it simply frightening. There's always going to be a certain quantity of dullards on the left end of the curve, but... 80%?! 80% of Americans are unfamiliar with one of, if not *the* most fundamental concepts of biology? This isn't "Dihydrogen Monoxide" trickery, DNA is DNA and it's functionality is taught in high school- usually repeatedly.
However, the thing that really, really scares me and keeps me awake at night is that *these fuckers vote*.
banana bread. Contains bananas which are yellow when very ripe (for some definition of "yellow", they're actually about as banana-like as gourds - the modern yellow bent banana didn't actually exist before 1840, it's an entirely artificial cultivar). Bananas of course, being high in potassium which is slightly radioactive.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
actually, thanks to NCLB they have been afforded the same opportunities in education as everybody else. The fault of their being dumbasses lies solely and entirely on them. Ergo, the funpokery is entirely justified, in my opinion.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
...can finally advertise as 100% DNA free!
Since college, I have been encouraging people to help save the American Clay Pidgeon, colorfully-marked creatures "fragile as eggs" that a slaughtered every day and left to rot in fields at the hands of wildly enthusiastic gunners.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
I mean if they said "Do you think Americans should fear X" and it turns out that X is a simple skin exfoliating technique whose name happens to sound like "global thermonuclear destruction". The respondents just assume the survey is talking about whatever related phenomenon they've heard about in the news, and they have no reason to suspect that it's a "fake ha-ha funny survey" designed to expose subtle flaws in their scientific understanding. So they hear "food with DNA in it" and even if they do catch the mistake they're not too concerned with observing OHMYGOD ALL FOOD HAS DNA IN IT, THIS SURVEY HAS A DRAMATIC FLAW, I'D BETTER NOT RESPOND TO IT!!
Which is all fine so far as it goes. But axe-grinding bloggers will turn that into axe-grinding claims about "the American public". This is the sort of dumb hipster attack logic that has dominated the current Presidential administration for years now.
-Legal.Troll
I'm not sure what the point is here. Could it be:
Furthermore, if you use the name "di-hydrogen monoxide" for water, I'm going to assume you've had no chemistry beyond high school. No chemist would say "monosilicon dioxide" for quartz (SiO2) or "tri-iron tetra-oxide" for Fe3O4, for example. So if you're ridiculing people for not recognizing "dihydrogen monoxide", you're also looking like an noob to people who know better.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Someone told me a big mac is free of DNA.
no, I don't have a sig
This is kind of a dishonest way for the food/chemical industry to try to push an agenda. Most people don't listen to the questions they're asked. They start thinking of an answer before the question has even been completely asked. I'll be most were really answering the question, "Do you support mandatory labeling of food that's been grown using intellectual property developed by companies that are famous for creating the world's most deadly products?" And the answer to that question about labeling of GMOs is always over 90% when the public is asked.
I can understand that faced with such overwhelming public sentiment for labeling that the chemical/food industrial complex would try anything to turn things around, but this is pretty underhanded. The fact is that consumers overwhelmingly want one little bit of information, as innocuous ask the little kosher "K" commonly on food labels. A simple yes/no to the question, "Does somebody own the intellectual property on the corn in this cereal?" is apparently so dangerous that the answer must be forbidden to consumers at all costs.
It can never be "pro-science" for information to be withheld from consumers. Even if that information is inconvenient to certain powerful corporations.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The was my first though with a cursory vieeing of the article headlined. I naturally went to thinking wow, that many people support labeling GMO foods.
It wasn't until i read more that i realised this was about DNA alone. I have no doubt that othes did the same but didn't bother going deeper into it.
It's another way for the Genetically Modified industry to say that clearly people aren't to be trusted with decisions on such things as whether GM foods are not safe... While I guess the technology is basically safe, I don't want see a world where a few big corporations eventually own every basic foodstuff through patents, and I'm not allowed to grow vegetables in my garden because of copyright and patent infringement...
1) people nearly always want to answer a question rather than admit "i don't know" if it is a question which is knowledge oriented.
2) if you frame a question in about "do you think people should be informed about substance A being in consumer product B" many people will simply answer Yes no matter the substance. Try it with something innocuous : it works nearly always.
So the study is not really about that specific question, but about a known psychological pitfall.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
Waka Waka!
Do you think congress should vote on it?
Looking at the survey results, it's clear that the question pertaining to DNA was giving in the context of other questions on governmental policies. If I answered the survey, I would have answered based on what I thought the researcher meant by the question, and not the literal text of the question. When I saw the question, I would ask myself, should I be a smartass and answer the question as written, or should I assume the researcher means to ask, "Mandatory labels on foods containing modified or isolated DNA"
Oh no. I think that trillions in research should be spent on this.
In the McCarthy era a poll quoted the Bill of Rights and people said it was Communist propaganda. This is a symptom of the failure of the US education system. It has nothing to do with people being stupid or not stupid. This is stuff you're supposed to learn in school and if people didn't, it's because the schools suck.
Nothing new here. Move along please.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
The story about the water fountain sign reminds me of the sign at the Foucault pendulum at the uni where I studied. They had problems with people touching the pendulum, stopping it, etc. So they put up a sign that said, "Danger, do not touch! 10,000 ohms." Haven't had problems with people messing with it in many years!
Nobody uses these names, but technically the IUPAC systematic name for ammonia is "azane", and water is "ozane". (Google says they're a Star Refrigeration subsidiary in the US and an exterminator business in New Jersey.)
I'm imagining Slashdot stories like "Fracking Fluid Contains Significant Amounts of Ozane", "Ozane Responsible For Rising Sea Levels", "Guantanamo Prisoners Tortured Using Ozane", "Oncoming Ozane Crisis Threatens Civilization", "Weak Beer Found To Contain Excess Amounts of Ozane", "Linus Torvalds: Ozane Has No Role In Linux", "Ozane Layer Disappearing Along East Coast", "Tesla Motors Introducing Ozane-Based Fuel Cells", etc.
Stick a geiger counter up to your flesh and it will start ticking away. Every living thing is radioactive due to intake of carbon 14.
That's why they can carbon 14 date dead things, they stop taking in carbon 14 so the levels drop at a consistent known rate.
Of course the sun is radioactive as well, take a background reading during the day and compare it to the night. Still you have radiation at night because the entire universe is one giant radiation bath.
Still, if you mention any level of radiation, even something smaller than what you yourself give off, lots of people go into an ignorant panic.
It's the same with many things.
The concentration of carbon-14 is too low for that. The main source of radiation from our bodies is potassium-40.
Struggling back from near extinction after decades of being hunted for their colorful hydes and unusual meat, sold under the brand name "SPAM".
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Well, yes, but what other purpose do politicians serve?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Because people don't know anything about it, GM foods are safe? Is that the message?
That's akin to "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
And the average person (or at least myself) who does realize that the question is about DNA is going to think that the poll is hilarious and answer yes to it anyway.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
I have gout, caused by excess uric acid in the bloodstream. Uric acid is formed from the purines we eat. Purines come from the DNA in cells of plants and animals. It would be nice if food products listed the amount of purine.
I know that lowering my intake of purines won't completely cure gout, but it would be nice to lower the risk of flareups.
Also, following its advice will make you lose weight while you gorge yourself on delicious meat and sauces. Steak with Bearnaise vs rice cakes? It's literally sickening just how screwed up our nutrition advice is.
Terrorists, white sharks, ebola viruses, and lettuce may contain desoxyribonucleic acid, but they may also contain hydroxylic acid a.k.a. DHMO. The latter is more dangerous, but can be rinsed away with water. We recommend against smoking lettuce.
I used to work for a restaurant and I once witnessed one waiter adding some of his personal DNA to a salad for a particularly difficult customer.
Because it's easy to misinterpret the question ..
Do you want to label foods with DNA as
Do you want to label foods with foreign DNA added from other plants, insects and animals (or even entirely created).
Yes... I'd like to know if you added peanut genes to my tomato. It may taste fine- but it would be nice to know.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
... provide an excuse for their buddies in the chemical, pesticide, and GMO industries that allows them to ridicule the American consumer as a bunch of no-nothings. "See... these rubes^Wpeople don't even know what they're talking about so why should we have to label food that contains man-modified genetic material or household chemicals that contain chemicals that nobody's been able to prove with 100% certainty cause cancer?"
Perhaps the paper was trying to indict the educational system but, more likely, that's not how this poll's result are going to be used.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I thought it was very funny.
I remember when I first ran across the "controversy" of dihydrogen monoxide, years ago.
I'm like, "WTH?" and then I Googled "dihydrogen monoxide."
It's kinda like getting bit by The Onion, and stuff.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Do you realize that these idiots are allowed to vote? I know it's all the rage right now to blame politicians for everything, but why don't we take a good, hard look at the people who put them into office.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
I selected "yes" because I support mandatory labeling of all food. The fact that DNA is present in the food is a secondary issue.
The actual survey question is:
“Do you support or oppose the following government policies?”
with several cases, one of which is:
"Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA"
The first thing you should notice is that the word "warning" does not appear. Kudos to the reporters and slashdot poster who either did not read the survey or did not understand what they read.
Almost all foods already have labels, and for most foods (presently) anything more processed than a raw banana must have a label.
So, the question is, should all foods (containing DNA) be required to have a label?
For example, "This is a banana" would meet the definition of the question.
or, "You're looking at a steak"
I can support that, especially for processed foods, and we already have that law, so, yeah, I support mandated labels.
especially for those weird roots that appear in the bin at the grocery store.
WTF is that I ask? I dunno, there's no label.
yeah but the half life of 40K is something like 1.27 billion years. That's not enough of a curve to estimate the age of a nonfossilised biological sample. The half life of 14C is 5280 years, which is good up to around 60,000 years. We know to a fair degree of precision how much 14C is in the environment and the rate at which it is produced and absorbed, and we also know precisely how it decays and into what: alpha decay to 14N at the rate of 14 events per gram of pure carbon per second (Libby). The mechanism of production is so well known in fact that an accurate estimation can be made of the date of birth of any living individual simply by looking at the relative amount of 14C in their teeth*.
(*according to Choppin Liljenzin and Rydberg, there is more 14C in the biosphere due to the decay products resulting from nuclear testing (ie from thorium and radium fallout following atmospheric detonations) than from any other source - including n + 14N -> 14C + p in the upper atmosphere which is the main natural source).
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Including the people taking the survey, I suspect.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Which books did you read? Oh, all of them.
Um, before you go criticizing others on scientific procedure, you might want to brush up yourself. The null hypothesis is NOT what is predicted by a theory. In a traditional experiment, it would be that there is no relationship Between the dependent and independent variables.
"Strong like bull; Smart like tractor." -- old Ukrainian saying about dumb people
No wonder the world is in trouble when people of such high intelligence are allowed to vote and "have a voice." People voting in support of this are stupid enough that they should just shut the hell up, sit down, and watch their damned NFL and NBA.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
there's some beverages with no dna in them, though.
vodka should be pretty clear of it too.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
It's chemical and GMO free, too! I'm excited to receive this vacuum bag. http://www.amazon.com/Salt-Him...
I never eat food containing DNA - it's bad for the digestion and ruins my diet.
My sig is still there. You just need to be logged in to see it, same as always, silly goose :-)
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.