Slashdot Mirror
Gene Leakage
Mike B writes "A leading UK scientist says he thinks genes from
genetically-modified (GM) crops will inevitably escape into other plants.
"What would happen, for instance, if a gene that conferred resistance against insects escaped?
Suddenly we have no insects. With no insects you have no ecology, no ecosystem, no pollinators, no flowers, God knows what. "
"
He brings up the analogy that disproves his point, and then tries to turn it around to prove it...
We introduced penicillin into places it had never been before in order to confer resistance to diseases on humans. And it worked for a bit, then the diseases we used it on built up an immunity to penicillin, and now we've reached the point where it's starting to be ineffective, because the only bacteria still alive are immune to penicillin. What we've seen isn't penicillin genes "escaping" into other molds, it's the bacteria evolving to circumvent the penicillin.
Take the coyote as another example. Western ranchers have been trying to exterminate them for about as long as there've been Western ranchers. Shooting killed the slow ones, trapping killed the stupid ones, poisoning killed the weak ones, and the fast, smart, strong ones that were left produced fast, smart, strong puppies, until now, far from being endangered, they've expanded their range to include places like New York City. Given the forced pace of evolution they're sure to be subjected to there, they'll probably be driving taxis and lifting tourists' luggage in airports and bus stations before long.
That which does not kill you makes you stronger. Evolution beats engineering.
I don't think we need to worry about the bugs. They were here, essentially unchanged, long before there was anything even vaguely human-like on the planet, and they'll probably be here long after we're gone. If we make plants immune to bugs, we'll just end up with bugs that eat plants that are immune to regular bugs.
Suddenly /. is populated with experts in genetic engineering. Hey, some looney limey scaremongering, must be some kind of luddite, evolution has been going on forever etc etc, GM foods are no big deal...
There is a big difference between selective breeding, natural selection, hybridization and genetic engineering. We're creating all kinds of combinations that would just never occur in nature (such as mixing of plant and animal DNA). I would say the burden of proof should be on the companies producing GM crops to explain why there is no way nasty side effects can crop up.
The GM debate in the states has been cleverly framed so that people questioning the safety of GM crops are painted as uneducated and anti-science. (By safety I mean long term effects of existence of modified genes, NOT the danger that the food might be bad for you - that's easily tested). There's an instant aura of rationality that can be obtained by dismissing allegations of possible dangers as nonsense. Who really knows what the effects of introducing radically new gene sequences into the environment will be ? These are sequences which would never arise naturally. There may well be no danger, but would you happily allow life forms from another planet into our eco-system (hey, its probably harmless), or would it make you kinda nervous.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Last week it was reported that the polar caps are melting faster than ever. Do you think this is "FUD"?
The amount of pollution in the air is increasing yearly. Do you think this is a scheme to put the Green party in government?
I can't get over this notion that environmentalism is a political movement. Do capitalists live on another planet? Their mountains of trash and waste are as close to them as to the hippies and tree huggers. This is not a political issue.
Human civilization has been on a major collision course with ecological disaster for decades. Consumption, waste, manipulation of nature/natural processes, global warming, etc.
Behind it lies the dubious economics of growth and consumption as practiced and preached by the G-7.
It can be summed as simply as this (from Adbusters.org):
Economists need to learn how to subtract
Until you reduce demand, you cannot stop the cycle of consumption that is killing the planet.
You're point seems to support my argument all the more...
Only Anglo-American and Russian civilizations have a habit of trying to conquer nature, as per your statement, with Japanese, Chinese, and Indian civilizations much more intelligent about their role with nature...
However, China and India are no less a threat to global war, nuclear holocaust, and other nasty human killing effects than any of the western states. And until they were put down in the WW, Japan was as much a threat as any other nation.
My point still fits your evidence; whatever the threat humans pose to nature, we pose still more threat to each other. China, Japan, and India included.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
I don't have any idea who would outlast the other; nature or humans.
But I do wonder sometimes that our worst foe and enemy are... ourselves.
We create the political mess, the infighting, the squabbling and bickering. I can cite optimism to defend the idea that people will outlive whatever nature can throw at it.
I can cite the grandeur of nature to put humans in their place. Either work, it's your own choice on what to believe..
However, despite nature and it's struggles, can we really survive ourselves?
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
A lot of people are fixating on how dangerous GM foods and genengineering is.
Yes, we're playing with fire here. It's a habit of the human race. Note the ironic application of an old cliche? We're playing with fire.
That's probably how this all got started anyway.
I'm not sure that our priorities are in the right direction...
I'm pretty sure that as a whole, humans are a greater threat to each other than to nature, or than nature to the human race. Nature is reliable in her methods and attempts to deal with us.
We are an evolutionary force of nature unto ourselves, and there isn't anything we can do about it. We can be more careful, certainly, and cautious, and all, but I don't think we mean anything more than minor nuisance, no matter how much we reshape and rework our environment. Whole continents have been rearranged and destroyed, formed and buried under ice, waters have risen and lowered, etc etc, and life has survived and prevailed.
We should worry about what we are doing to ourselves and to each other too.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
There are a whole load of reasons GM food should be a point of concern
1. There is evidence GM soya causes immune system damage
2. One of the primary goals of the GM food industry is crops you have to buy from them each year. Right now third world farmers do rather better by saving some seeds and replanting them. This is like windows licensing your crops.
And if they decide to stop supplying a country that is dependant on these terminator crops (eg the US interfering in another war) everyone starves to death. Good isnt it.
3. One of the reasons for such tight current control on GM plants is we don't know enough about genetics yet. We are at the same stage in genetics as the early explosives people were. They knew it could do wonderful things but were never quite sure what was going to happen, and likewise if you got it wrong you made a very big mess.
4. Faced with a removal of their normal target insects and bacteria either move or adapt. If they adapt your genetically modified food is now useless because they've eaten it, and if they move well then you risk destroying another habitat. Also remember the largest target to move onto is Humans.
In the UK and most of Europe people tend to prefer their food grown to engineered. We don't allow growth hormone in cattle so our meat tastes a lot better, and most UK supermarkets are talking about ceasing to sell any GM foodstuffs.
Alan