Anathema Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Inspired by Navs test tube thread I thought it was time we'd have another discussion about genetic manipulation.There's no denying that GM does a lot of good and could do more. An example of todays GM is the modification of certain bacteria so they can produce insulin, a hormone of wich diabetes patients have dire need of. No GM means no insulin treatments to diabetes patients and cuts back on their stamina, quality of life and the duration of it.Then there's GM crops. These could be used to solve the worlds food problem (to bad that western society isn't very interested in doing so).Also, it is possible that in the future we could use certain animals (pig being the most likely candidate) to grow organs that are compatible with the human body- these organs would be far superior to any artificial organs we have created so far. Cruel to animals? Is it any more cruel then stuffing them in tight shacks and eat them when they've grown up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 I agree with you that Western society is not interested in using GM crops to solve the world's hunger problems. At this point, corporations like Monsanto are forcing, through aid agreements, GM seed on struggling 3rd world countries. They are also a threat to contaminate the worlds crops with these GM plants that we don't know are safe for consumption yet. The common line that these crops perform better has also yet to be proven.It IS possible that this technology could be used for good but when is the last time such a technology was used carefully and responsibly, and not just for profit. Such recklessness is especially dangerous with GM's because they can live and spread on their own if not contained. Infortunately, these kinds of decisions are made mostly by trade organizations instead of democratic institutions but that is a different topic, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 Allergic reactions and other possible health risksGM food will not ease hunger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted June 2, 2003 Author Share Posted June 2, 2003 Good links Birdfolly. Recently there was a paper article about Bush telling the EU to open their markets for GM crops. I'll try to find an online article now.editFound one. It also covers some of the stuff in Birdfollys articles.http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/05/28/gmcrops/index.html The report comes a week after U.S. President George W. Bush accused Europe of impeding American efforts to combat famine and poverty in Africa and beyond by blocking the use of GM crops.Bush said GM crops could "dramatically'' boost productivity."Our partners in Europe are impeding this effort. They have blocked all new bio-crops because of unfounded, unscientific fears,'' said Bush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 2, 2003 Share Posted June 2, 2003 We did GM in class for a few months. Personally I'm in favour, so long as it's grown where it can't contaminate natural species (i.e. indoors). Not because they're bad or anything, but because that would be like allowing an extinction and extinctions muct never happen if at all possible.Since I know we'll get onto this eventually. Why talk about GM wheat? Why not GM babies? Who else thinks scientific progress is a wonder? Now all we need is to adopt China's law of one kid per home! Overpopulation bye bye! And best of all, no killing babies for being the 'wrong' sex! Uninhibited by religious ties, I see Genetic Modification as a great oppertunity; but one that needs to be guarded and maintained carefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted June 4, 2003 Author Share Posted June 4, 2003 No opposition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemafakei Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 "Now all we need is to adopt China's law of one kid per home! Overpopulation bye bye!"Here, here!To be precise, 0.5 children per person to start off with. That way, we don't have problems with people who have more than one 'home' and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 I don't know about that. . . I know some people with more than one home...In any case, this is offtopic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navaros Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 Franken-Foods should be ILLEGAL. End of story. When people start growing extra arm and leg stumps out of their butts and all sorts of other weird stuff, only then will the public revolt and put an end to Franken-Foods. But the time to act is not after we've all already been buggered-up by Franken-Foods as is happening as we speak. The time to act is NOW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 4, 2003 Share Posted June 4, 2003 Evidence/reasons/justifications please? Even excuse will do. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Sadukar Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 Evidence/reasons/justifications please? Even excuse will do. :)Remember Dust, it's Nan we are talking about, do you really think that you'll see any of those thing from him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 Personally I'm in favour, so long as it's grown where it can't contaminate natural species (i.e. indoors).Why not GM babies? Who else thinks scientific progress is a wonder? Now all we need is to adopt China's law of one kid per home! Overpopulation bye byeI agree that GM plants need to be isolated, but with the field tests going on right next to farmers fields, that's not likely. Companies like Monsanto even sue farmers for stealing their strand of corn after THEY contaminate the farmer's crop. Obviously we are not where we need to be and this needs to change.I know you are a self proclaimed technocrat so I won't argue GM babies on a moral level. I just think that if you start manipulating the gene pool like that, it would lead to less gene diversity, more sterility, more mutations, and could threaten the species. I mean if we can botch things up and use advanced technology too soon we will. I think history shows us that.As far as one child per family, I'd say that we could at least start with free contraception and lots of education about reproductive responsibility, maybe even a tax break. I don't know about anywhere else, but here in the states people are encouraged in many ways to reproduce as much as possible. Population growth is one of the positive signs of a city, for example. It comes down to money, as always. I don't want to get side tracked any more than I already have. okbye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemafakei Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 Hehehe... remember that we do not absorb DNA of GM foods; anything we abbsorb and use in our own bodies must be broken into small molecules (sugars, fatty acids, amino acids) And no matter how much we GM our foods, the amino acids and so on will stay the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 5, 2003 Share Posted June 5, 2003 And no matter how much we GM our foods, the amino acids and so on will stay the same.Ya, but the point is if you splice a pig gene into corn it's not corn any more. Not all plants are good for you, let alone a plant that has its genes spliced with a pig. This is new territory and there is very limited research at this point though we are all guinea pigs(and we didn't even have to splice their genes with ours, heh). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema Posted June 5, 2003 Author Share Posted June 5, 2003 Pretty much the same Nema said applies to pigs as well, so no problems there. The danger of GM crops is that the manipulated genes might mingle with the natural gene pool and cause some other plants to dwindle or go instict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 I agree with your comment on contamination of species but I don't know if you guys are getting my point. The corn with the pig gene spliced in doesn't necessarily digest like corn or a pig. Its something else. That something else should be studied more before we are subjected to eating it without even knowing we are eating it, which is the way it is in the states. There are only a limited number of living things that are healthy for people to eat, even if they are made up of similar basic building blocks. These foods may be safe but we just don't know. We don't fully understand the GM technology that we are messing with, at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 It isn't someting else. It's different corn. There isn't any pig in it, there just happens to be a bit of corn in there that came from a pig. It's a gene, which means it's a chemical. There is no pig in that corn (just as an example). So we don't understand it? Therefore when something dreadfully terrible happens you can say "I told you so." And we'll all hang our heads in shame. IF it happens. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 9, 2003 Share Posted June 9, 2003 It looks like corn and tastes like corn when the developers find a result that "works". Corn that came from a pig??? What are you talking about?You're right, it is just a big IF. I'm not going around saying GM corn is going to kill you or make you sprout a third arm. I'm just saying that we should do proper research before releasing let alone forcing this seed onto the farms all over the planet. Corn cross pollinates over many miles breeding will all corn it reaches. Is it just me or is it just responsible to take precautions on something this important? Corporations will just do whatever they can do to make money so it is up to us regular people to educate ourselves and keep them in check. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted June 9, 2003 Share Posted June 9, 2003 Of course we should take precautions. That doesn't mean it's inherantly evil though. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Agreed ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 I was thinking about this case. And really: what is bad on it? Cloning as we think about it is a nonsense, natural way will be always more popular... Making embryos for research is did because of lack of funds, so scientists couldn't find a morale way of creating a DNA carrier. When we turn out of humans, then I see no problem. God gave us Earth not only to possess, but also to improve and care for it. Agriculture is thousand years full of manipulations, so when scientists found a source of those mutations, we will be able to make even more advanced food. Fields are already too different ecosystem for nature, maybe new genetical engineering will repair what we've messed up last centuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Anyways, I don't think we will enter the "Bio Revolution" for another 100 years, because many people don't have anything to profit in it. I think more robotic things will apear, like a cleaner-bot for example. Small, recharge, and it will run around collecting dust all day. You don't have to insure it, incase it "dies", you don't have to pay it (well, except paying FOR it when you buy it) etc. Think about it. The company that makes it earns a lot, the persons and companies who buys it profits too, they don't have to "waste" money on cleaning :) . Genetically, no one profits. Not in this world. Sure, we can discover our origins, which will anyways end up in the Big Bang, and we can manipulate pigs and feed the world. For now, at least. But no one is interested in such things. At least not those who will use it to make money. Damn, I sound greedy... ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caid Ivik Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Why do you think the "bio revolution" is a word of future? Not from today we can upgrade or even create whole new species! Not of mammals, of course, but plants, bacteria and such stuff are now more or less easily modifiable. One thing is to discover, we've already decoded the DNA. Now it's time to use our knowledge for common good. Isn't whole science for it, anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdfolly Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Genetically, no one profits. Not in this world. Sure, we can discover our origins, which will anyways end up in the Big Bang, and we can manipulate pigs and feed the world. For now, at least. But no one is interested in such things. At least not those who will use it to make money. Obviously you've never heard of Monsanto, the IMF, the World Bank, etc. I've opened my mouth enough on this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Okay, maybe so. But I don't think the near future will be somekind of "6th day"-kind of world, so to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.