Bees & genetically modified crops

[Ian]

>>Hybridization and genetic modification are two totalling different actions

they expose the plants to levels of radiation, and search for mutation in the plant which are favourable. its not the nice and rosy breeding programs we think of.

[jim lyon]

......and to the best of my knowledge the Percy Schmeiser case is the only case where Monsanto has ever taken a farmer to court over planting seed allegedly contaminated by wind blown pollen. Schmeiser is a political activist who used a somewhat incredible story to publicly goad Monsanto into a fight. 3 different courts ruled against him.

[Ian]

Yes, Schmeiser got alot of press, and for what? He was a farmer, and he was fighting big chemical.
He did not mention that the field that was under investigation, was planted in rows, and sprayed in such a manner to take all advantage of the round up resistance it held. Who would spray their crop with round up if they had no idea the roundup tolerant trait was in it

[Ian]

oh boy, Im going to un subscribe from this thread, looks like its 12 year old.
This argument has run its course lol!!

[seyc]

Genetic Engineering - To modify the genetics of something to get what you want out of it. That includes everything from selective breeding to gene splicing.

Genetic Modification - To modify the genetics of something using Molecular techniques. Gene splicing (addition/removal).

[JRG13]

Tabby, I can understand the concerns there. You have to look at the regulation costs and tests done before approval though. Any novel proteins made in the target species are screened against all known allergens and toxins. Any similarities and the product will not be approved. Not sure of the soybean splicing, haven't heard anything about that. Again, you would have to look at what they're trying to move, whether it's for plant health or consumer benefit (i.e. moving plant resistance genes vs improving nutrition/yield/composition of end product for consumer).

[cerezha]

and this thread that has been dug up from the deep past demonstrates one thing- we have been using GMOs for over 10 years and despite all the fear, there has not been one problem that has been realized. ...

It is just indication how big corporations including Monsanto controls our government. Europe already made decision on GMOs. FDA will do something after 100 deaths, which brings politician's attention to the subject. Decision again will be made not on the facts, but of political will. Working on pollution from aircraft, I discovered that health standards established by FDA sometime 10-100 times worst than in Europe or Japan. It is very disturbing that NOTHING changed in US GMOs policies for 10 years!

[sqkcrk]

Who will be the Rosa Parks of the modern age who will draw attention to this problem? Who will be the Medger Evers willing to take a bullet for this cause? Who will be the Martin Luther King, speaking out against the social injustice of GMOs and the case study we are all living in, laying down their life for the betterment of all?

Untill there is a critical mass of the masses and people like these willing to do what needs doing and willing to go all the way to martyrdom this is only so much "blowin' in the wind".

[cerezha]

Who will be the Rosa Parks .... to go all the way to martyrdom this is only so much "blowin' in the wind".

Well, outside the beekeepers community many people think differently. There is a hope since Obama is claimed to be "greener" than others... I think, this issue will be resolved as soon as enough statistics will be collected on allergy and other effects from GMOs. It took them 50 (?) years to prove that smoking increases the lung cancer and even after that - many smokers claimed that they are healthy. The thing about this is that alive people could claim that they are healthy (even 2 days before cancer diagnosis), but dead people - could not vote against smoking since they are dead already... sort of too late... sorry for cynicism - as a pathology-histologist I saw many blackened lungs with horrible cancers...

[sqkcrk]

Where is our Rachel Carson? Or our Bill McKibben? Or our Al Gore?

[psfred]

Eventually the economics and severe lack of genetic diversity will kill off the GMO crops. They are VERY expensive, require lots of chemicals, and are ruining standard agriculture due to weed infestations from sloppy farming practices.

The real problem here is monopolies in the production of food -- a few companies control all the markets, with the result that they control prices, meaning independent farmers are getting squeezed out in favor of massive agribusiness.

Shouldn't be a surprise, it's been official USDA policy since 1954.

Peter

[JRG13]

Peter, the lines are bred into elite varieties, always changing to meet yield demands and agronomic traits. Why would you say they require lots of chemicals?? They're grown just like any other conventional crop. A lot of the resistances are because of sloppy farming practices, I agree there and more should've been done to monitor farm practices and make sure proper refuge etc... was being done. We all know growing the same traits and applying the same herbicides year after year lead to resistances, nothing new there.

[psfred]

The genes are put into ANYTHING that Monsanto and other big companies (mostly Monsanto, I chose NOT to work there in the 90s) want. Elite lines, perhaps.

Are you saying the huge tankers of Roundup aren't chemicals? BT corn doesn't require chemicals to control stalk borers or rootworm, but neither were a problem until monoculture corn came along in the late 60's and early 70's -- proper crop rotation, including at least one year with cover crops and cows, control rootworm just fine, thank you. That's why it wasn't a problem until people started planting corn every year in the same field and leaving stubble up instead of plowing.

RoundUp ready crops have raised us up a huge crop of RoundUp resistant weeds, so everyone is using both RoundUp and older herbicides.

Extremely expensive, non-diverse crops are not the answer, never have been, but they make Monsanto tons of money in concert with "plant patent" laws (which I hold in the same reguard as "software patent" laws -- to whit, nonsense).

And this completely neglects the impact on beekeeping -- all that RoundUp has pretty much eliminated wildflowers anywhere near fields -- the overspray kills them off much more readily that the resistant weeds in the fields. The crappy farming practices result in huge soil loss -- the field across the road from my window is at least three feet lower than it was thirty years ago -- and the soil structure is going to hell as a result of that and the use of stunning amounts of chemical fertilizers.

It's a long and complicated story, but GMO crops aren't going to save us.

Peter

[Ian]

Eventually the economics and severe lack of genetic diversity will kill off the GMO crops. They are VERY expensive, require lots of chemicals, and are ruining standard agriculture due to weed infestations from sloppy farming practices.


Peter

comes from someone who does not know anything about farming. . . . .

[jim lyon]

Yeah I hear a lot about "super weeds" that are resistent to glyphosate. Yes they are showing up here and there but they really dont have much of an impact as the few I am aware of are pretty easily controlled by prudent farming practices. Crop rotation is the norm in our area and the only weeds that can have an economic impact on your crop are late emerging weeds that hide under crop canopies. Not so many years ago the norm in midwest crop farming was disc, plow, disc, plant, a possible trip through with a rotary hoe, then cultivate, and cultivate again and there were usually still lots of areas of problem weeds that would worsen partly because the ground would wash so badly from all the trips through the field. Lots of fuel was used and lots of erosion resulted. Not exactly the good old days.

[cerezha]

Peter, the lines are bred into elite varieties, always changing to meet yield demands and agronomic traits. ...

GMOs are entirely different story - it is not bred. Particular, sometime artificial or foreign genes "implanted" into genome to perform unusual to the host function, for instance to be resistant to the Roundup. In case of Roundup, I believe, they introduced entirely foreign gene into corm. Gene produces a protein, enzyme in this case, which never was in the corn. Consuming GMO corn, you consume this foreign artificially implanted protein. Nobody really know what this protein could do to animals and humans. Simplest thing - allergy. Now, Monsanto is applying the same approach to the bees, so they would not be sensitive to the Roundup. I could not believe that normally conservative and careful beekeepers are so open to GMOs...

From another hand, there are very interesting approaches in GMOs. For instance, scientists introduced genes to enrich goat milk with specific antibodies - this way antibodies may be isolated from the milk cheaply. Antibodies are most universal and powerful anti-bacterial AND anti-viral agent. I am fine with such approach as long as it is under control and final product is identical to natural antibodies - nobody is going to force beekeepers to drink that milk!

[Ian]

>>consume this foreign artificially implanted protein. Nobody really know what this protein could do to animals and humans.

the same way we handle all other proteins of this manner, right?

[cerezha]

>>consume this foreign artificially implanted protein. Nobody really know what this protein could do to animals and humans.

the same way we handle all other proteins of this manner, right?

Not exactly. Are you familiar with prions? It is not "just protein". It is the whole system. If one changed one thing, other thing will change also... In science, we do gene-engineering all the time. But it is under very strict control to ensure that new strains will not escape and alternate the nature. Monsanto really DO alternate the Mother Nature... it is very serious. In fact, "Monsanto genes" already contaminated corn genome in both Americas.

[Ian]

So your suggesting prions are involved with GMOs

[irwin harlton]

FROM "GMO testimony"
Submitted by Joe Rowland
to the N.Y. Assembly standing committees on agriculture, consumer affairs
and the assembly task force on food, farm, and nutrition policy
October 3, 2000

http://www.biotech-info.net/JR_testimony.html