I don't respond very often but I see so so many misconceptions I have to clarify.
BTW, I AM molecular biologist...
Why make GM foods?
There are many reasons, but mainly because they offer a NON-TOXIC way to grow food without using HIGHLY TOXIC pesticides and fertilizers. More yield, and more food for poor countries.
Why is this "CryXXX" line of GM food non-toxic?
Cry lines of maize are not harmful to humans when consumed as the normal amount found foods. Without getting into too much biochemistry the Cry peptide is broken into two parts in the gut of insects only. This active portion is toxic, only to insects, when broken in half. No cleavage or toxic action is found in humans. Large amounts of ANYTHING (including corn) however, is often toxic.
Wait, I heard about a toxic line...
One issue was found with a particular cry line which was resistant to digestion. This line was designed to be more effective against other species of insects by hanging around in the midgut for a longer period. What happened is it was too stable, and was not broken down immediately in the human gut as in the other cry lines. It was also found to be very weakly antigenic to humans (ie, a possible allergy). The combined antigenic properties and extended biological half-life made this protein a VERY UNLIKELY, but possible, human allergy. The line was abandoned, and THE SAFETY SYSTEM WORKED. The anti-GM community rejoiced, and used this as evidence that all GM foods are bad for you, regardless of the fact that the simple peanut is far far more toxic and has killed/injured/maimed more people then this line ever could.
But GM foods are unnatural!
All lines of corn descended from a small, highly poisonous seedpod where the ear was about the size of a thumb. Native Americans grew this crop and selected out the toxins, of which many still remain in small amounts. Modern crossbreeding usually introduces many such natural toxins, and does so in a incredibly chaotic and dangerous manner. GM offers a way to only add one trait that is well understood. Hybridization is FAR more dangerous then a single genetic addition, and for some reason, is allowed without virtually any safety concerns.
What is Terminator Technology?
Terminator Technology IS NOT a bio-weapon.
Terminator technology is NOT a method of stifling nearby farmers, or making a farmer dependent on a technology.
Terminator technology IS NOT used in food crops (to date) because farmers like to store seeds from one generation to the next, and WOULDN'T buy such a thing.
Terminator technology is a method of CONTROLLING contamination. Terminator technology ususaly makes the plants (IE, pollen) male-sterile. this is quite easy to do with a diploid organism (aka: contains two copies of genes). This could be useful for growing pharmaceuticals in plants. Vaccines, plantibodies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantibody or molecular enzymes designed to breakdown toxins as a dosed injection in hospitals would be designed to not enter the food supply.
Regardless, It is impossible to have terminator technology "escape" and ruin some other adjacent farm. The said crop would not produce viable pollen, and could not breed with a wild-type nearby. Arguing otherwise it akin to stating the world is flat.
What about Schmeiser and Monsanto? The typical David and Goliath opera, right?
What really happened:
Schimeiser, a Canola farmer in Canada since the 70's. He usually lays out about 1/4-1/2 of his land with Canola, the rest with other crops. Around the early 2000s, he sprays a couple acres of non-arable land near some telephone poles with Roundup. Almost all vegetation is killed, but a few Canola plant grow. KNOWING his neighbor is growing roundup-resistant Canola, he collects this seed and plants about 1 acre of Canola apart from his usual crops. This Canola is not
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, I AM molecular biologist...
Why make GM foods?
There are many reasons, but mainly because they offer a NON-TOXIC way to grow food without using HIGHLY TOXIC pesticides and fertilizers. More yield, and more food for poor countries.
Why is this "CryXXX" line of GM food non-toxic?
Cry lines of maize are not harmful to humans when consumed as the normal amount found foods. Without getting into too much biochemistry the Cry peptide is broken into two parts in the gut of insects only. This active portion is toxic, only to insects, when broken in half. No cleavage or toxic action is found in humans. Large amounts of ANYTHING (including corn) however, is often toxic.
Wait, I heard about a toxic line...
One issue was found with a particular cry line which was resistant to digestion. This line was designed to be more effective against other species of insects by hanging around in the midgut for a longer period. What happened is it was too stable, and was not broken down immediately in the human gut as in the other cry lines. It was also found to be very weakly antigenic to humans (ie, a possible allergy). The combined antigenic properties and extended biological half-life made this protein a VERY UNLIKELY, but possible, human allergy. The line was abandoned, and THE SAFETY SYSTEM WORKED. The anti-GM community rejoiced, and used this as evidence that all GM foods are bad for you, regardless of the fact that the simple peanut is far far more toxic and has killed/injured/maimed more people then this line ever could.
But GM foods are unnatural!
All lines of corn descended from a small, highly poisonous seedpod where the ear was about the size of a thumb. Native Americans grew this crop and selected out the toxins, of which many still remain in small amounts. Modern crossbreeding usually introduces many such natural toxins, and does so in a incredibly chaotic and dangerous manner. GM offers a way to only add one trait that is well understood. Hybridization is FAR more dangerous then a single genetic addition, and for some reason, is allowed without virtually any safety concerns.
What is Terminator Technology?
Terminator Technology IS NOT a bio-weapon. Terminator technology is NOT a method of stifling nearby farmers, or making a farmer dependent on a technology. Terminator technology IS NOT used in food crops (to date) because farmers like to store seeds from one generation to the next, and WOULDN'T buy such a thing.
Terminator technology is a method of CONTROLLING contamination. Terminator technology ususaly makes the plants (IE, pollen) male-sterile. this is quite easy to do with a diploid organism (aka: contains two copies of genes). This could be useful for growing pharmaceuticals in plants. Vaccines, plantibodies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantibody or molecular enzymes designed to breakdown toxins as a dosed injection in hospitals would be designed to not enter the food supply.
Regardless, It is impossible to have terminator technology "escape" and ruin some other adjacent farm. The said crop would not produce viable pollen, and could not breed with a wild-type nearby. Arguing otherwise it akin to stating the world is flat.
What about Schmeiser and Monsanto? The typical David and Goliath opera, right?
What really happened:
Schimeiser, a Canola farmer in Canada since the 70's. He usually lays out about 1/4-1/2 of his land with Canola, the rest with other crops. Around the early 2000s, he sprays a couple acres of non-arable land near some telephone poles with Roundup. Almost all vegetation is killed, but a few Canola plant grow. KNOWING his neighbor is growing roundup-resistant Canola, he collects this seed and plants about 1 acre of Canola apart from his usual crops. This Canola is not