Gmo's In Our Food

[JDB]

Anyone want to start a dialoge about genetic modied foods?

[lucia]

Anyone want to start a dialoge about genetic modied foods?

Yes! How do we know what foods are genetically modified?

I'm reactive to corn. Someone suggested that maybe I'm only reacting to corn that has been genetically modified. That seems plausible (don't mess with mother nature ... grrrrr ...), but how do I know?

[Skylark]

I did some reading on GM food. I think we're part of a 300 million person experiment and I want to know where my informed consent form was and how I withdraw from the study.

Supposedly in the US food labeled "100% organic" is not GMO. I don't know if any testing is done to verify that but I've switched to organic corn chips and tempeh since I did my reading.

[psawyer]

I suppose that it depends on how you define genetically modified. Humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals for centuries (or maybe even longer). The cow you milk today bears limited resemblance to the source of dairy found in the Torah. The wheat we grow today is very different from what Jesus would have had at the Last Supper. Pets are also engineered through selective breeding. Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not?

[kareng]

I suppose that it depends on how you define genetically modified. Humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals for centuries (or maybe even longer). The cow you milk today bears limited resemblance to the source of dairy found in the Torah. The wheat we grow today is very different from what Jesus would have had at the Last Supper. Pets are also engineered through selective breeding. Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not?

I have been thinking this, too. Choosing to cross pollinate plants to get a better product has been done for centuries. The pink petunia(?) that we all learned about in grade school that was made by crossing a red and a white flower is an example. I know not all of these selective breeding have worked well. For example, Dalmatians are prone to deafness. My darling lab has hereditary eye problems. I guess it's a balance.

[jerseyangel]

I suppose that it depends on how you define genetically modified. Humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals for centuries (or maybe even longer). The cow you milk today bears limited resemblance to the source of dairy found in the Torah. The wheat we grow today is very different from what Jesus would have had at the Last Supper. Pets are also engineered through selective breeding. Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not?

I think you make a good point.

[GlutenFreeManna]

I suppose that it depends on how you define genetically modified. Humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals for centuries (or maybe even longer). The cow you milk today bears limited resemblance to the source of dairy found in the Torah. The wheat we grow today is very different from what Jesus would have had at the Last Supper. Pets are also engineered through selective breeding. Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not?

When I think of genetically modified food I think of foods that have been altered with a gene from another type of food altogether. Like inserting parts of fish genes into a tomato to create a type of tomato less susceptible to frost bite. That type of gene altering is a far cry from Mendel's experiments with hybrids. IMO that type of GMO is part of the reason for the increase in food allergies. Back in the 90's a company (I forget the name) inserted a Brazil Nut gene into Soybeans. They had to pull the product though because their research indicated if people were allergic to Brazil nuts they were also allergic to the GMO Soy. Many main crops like soy, cotton (used to make cottonseed oil), rapeseed (used to make canola), rice, corn and wheat are GM to withstand pests, some food even have "pesticide genes" (not sure if that's the right term, but you get the picture they produce a substance toxic to the pest) added to make them super crops. If the Soybeans with the Brazil nut genes affect people with food allergies, doesn't it make sense that the pesticides inside these GMF's would affect us in some way? Perhaps it's not as noticeable like an instant allergic reaction. Perhaps it manifests itself in the form of "food intolerances" or more serious illnesses later in life as the result of being slowly poisoned over years of consumption. This is of course all just my opinions and speculation. I personally try to avoid the obvious ones and buy organic when I can, but I don't stress out about it.

[munchkinette]

Back in the 90's a company (I forget the name) inserted a Brazil Nut gene into Soybeans. They had to pull the product though because their research indicated if people were allergic to Brazil nuts they were also allergic to the GMO Soy. Many main crops like soy, cotton (used to make cottonseed oil), rapeseed (used to make canola), rice, corn and wheat are GM to withstand pests, some food even have "pesticide genes" (not sure if that's the right term, but you get the picture they produce a substance toxic to the pest) added to make them super crops.

Monsanto. If something has been done to soy, it's Monsanto. (I think I would avoid soy on principle even if I didn't have a physical reaction.) They also did the Round-up resistant crops, and that Bollgard cotton. Bt cotton has a bacterial gene inserted into it that is toxic to some pests. The problem is that the larvae can become resistant within just a couple generations, so they have to keep making new versions of it.

Honestly, I"m not opposed to GMO in itself, because there are so many ways to artificially influence genes that don't involve working in a lab. It really just depends on what and how something is modified.

[mushroom]

To me, hybridization and genetic modification are two entirely different subjects, and n'ere the twain shall meet. Genetic modification generally involves genetic splicing, and I have come to find out that most often what they splice are lectins. Being as how lectins play havoc with my body, I am diammetrically opposed to this process. It means that there will be more and more foods that I cannot eat. I am starting to develop yellow feathers and sing (And you do NOT want to hear me sing!!)

[lizard00]

To me, hybridization and genetic modification are two entirely different subjects

I totally agree with that. Some degree of hybridization is going to occur naturally, as was alluded to with the punnet square illustration. That doesn't necessarily have to happen at the hands of man. BUT, GMO does require (IMO) man to do the altering. It's a bit of a toughie for me: on one hand, I think that man shouldn't tamper with our food supply. I am not totally convinced that it's not the cause of the rise of food allergies, intolerances, etc. On the other hand, making crops bacteria or fungi resistent does have it's value, considering that folks in this country are becoming more and more reliant on what seems to be the same couple of foods. Imagine if the potato famine happened over here (Or the same thing happened to wheat, soybeans, or corn...)

[mushroom]

Imagine if the potato famine happened over here (Or the same thing happened to wheat, soybeans, or corn...)

Well, I already can't eat any of those foods, amongst others....

[lizard00]

Well, I already can't eat any of those foods, amongst others....

I think you're ahead then, shroomie!

I also think that Americans generally need to branch out in their food choices.

[Skylark]

I suppose that it depends on how you define genetically modified. Humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals for centuries (or maybe even longer). The cow you milk today bears limited resemblance to the source of dairy found in the Torah. The wheat we grow today is very different from what Jesus would have had at the Last Supper. Pets are also engineered through selective breeding. Where do you draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not?

I'm with GlutenFreeManna. GMO is unacceptable when the gene comes from an entirely different organism and is introduced into the crop plant using plasmids. Hybridization and breeding works with a fairly limited palette of genes, even though the organisms can end up looking quite different. Pollen from the Last Supper wheat could probably pollenate modern grain. There is considerable control of the way the DNA is arranged in hybridization, and plants with a lot of DNA damage are generally not viable. Genes stay under their correct promoters and expression levels of the various proteins are stable and under proper control.

In contrast, the gene insertion in GMO crops is poorly controlled. The material goes into the genome randomly, disrupting or inappropriately promoting natural genes. Incomplete insertions can leave the GMO promoter in front of a natural gene. This means that GMO plants can have abnormal and poorly levels of proteins or small molecule products of proteins that may be carcinogenic or allergenic. It has also been shown in humans that fragments of the inserted genes can transfer to gut bacteria. (Nat Biotechnol. 2004 Feb;22(2):204-9)

There is also a much broader palette of genes, which is not necessarily a good thing. Some of the proteins being spliced into our food today have never been "food" before. Our understanding of how genetic modifications changes allergenicity of foods is rather poor. Foods where toxins are introduced is another concern. The assumption that BT-transgenic grain is perfectly safe based on BT spraying where the pesticide can be washed off has not been adequately substantiated.

[RiceGuy]

Many good points in this thread. And yes, GMO is far different from hybridization.

The BT and roundup-ready crops are downright frightening to say the least. A several-fold increase in allergic response to some GMO crops, such as soy and corn, is just for starters. Apparently, bacteria in our guts can assimilate the modified gene, and continue producing the toxin from BT crops. And the crops themselves produce far more of the toxin than what would otherwise be sprayed on them. Of course, since it's within the plant, it cannot be washed off.

Some informative (and scary) reading:

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Here's a shopping guide to help avoid GMOs:

Open Original Shared Link

[GlutenFreeManna]

Many good points in this thread. And yes, GMO is far different from hybridization.

The BT and roundup-ready crops are downright frightening to say the least. A several-fold increase in allergic response to some GMO crops, such as soy and corn, is just for starters. Apparently, bacteria in our guts can assimilate the modified gene, and continue producing the toxin from BT crops. And the crops themselves produce far more of the toxin than what would otherwise be sprayed on them. Of course, since it's within the plant, it cannot be washed off.

Some informative (and scary) reading:

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Here's a shopping guide to help avoid GMOs:

Open Original Shared Link

Thanks RiceGuy. That shopping guide link is an excellent resource for those not familiar with GMO's. I already avoid canola and cottonseed oil for the reason that they are often GMO's. I have to avoid soy because I get fatigue, joint pain and migraines from it. Soy flour is the worst offender for me symptom-wise, followed by soy lectin and soybean oil. I have often wondered if I were to try organic, Non-GMO soy flour if I would still react. But I'm not willing to spend the extra money (and risk illness) just to test it out.

[Skylark]

Many good points in this thread. And yes, GMO is far different from hybridization.

The BT and roundup-ready crops are downright frightening to say the least. A several-fold increase in allergic response to some GMO crops, such as soy and corn, is just for starters. Apparently, bacteria in our guts can assimilate the modified gene, and continue producing the toxin from BT crops. And the crops themselves produce far more of the toxin than what would otherwise be sprayed on them. Of course, since it's within the plant, it cannot be washed off.

Actually, the authors of Seeds of Deception have played fast and loose with the science. Bacteria in human guts have NOT been demonstrated to express the bits of transgene they assmilate and do NOT grow on Roundup agar as these people assert. I read the entire 2004 Nature Biotechnology article where they claim they got the information and it says no such thing. The researchers found fragments of the transgene in a tiny fraction of bacteria by sequencing and PCR.

Bacteria like to pick up bits of environmental DNA and "try it on for size" so to speak. They are probably grabbing genes from food organisms and even our own intestines. Thing is, that's been going on for the length of our evolution. Intestinal bacteria have not been grabbing bits and pieces of engineered plasmids and transgenes.

I do find the data we have disturbing, even without the exaggeration from Seeds of Deception.

[mushroom]

I am reminded of a family dinner with my parents long after I had left NZ, and before I was totally aware - had just bought my first organic gardening tome and was digesting it. We were eating brusssels sprouts out of the garden for dinner and I asked my dad how he could grow them without aphid infestations, which is what happened to mine. I told him how I sprayed them with soapy water, etc., but it didn't deter them, and he said, "Oh, that's simple, you just use a systemic." The brussels sprout on the way to my open mouth returned to the plate but my mouth stayed open in shock. And the rest of the sprouts stayed on my plate. Dad was an old-time farmer from way back in the DDT and black-leaf 40 days. My older sister is intolerant of all chemical sprays, just the faintest whiff on the wind does her in.... The idea of eating round-up-ready and BT-spliced veggies does not appeal.

[RiceGuy]

Actually, the authors of Seeds of Deception have played fast and loose with the science. Bacteria in human guts have NOT been demonstrated to express the bits of transgene they assmilate and do NOT grow on Roundup agar as these people assert. I read the entire 2004 Nature Biotechnology article where they claim they got the information and it says no such thing. The researchers found fragments of the transgene in a tiny fraction of bacteria by sequencing and PCR.

Ah, thanks. I guess that explains why the author, Jeffrey Smith, didn't state it the same way in a recent interview I heard. I'll have to listen to it again to be reminded of exactly what he did say though.

[munchkinette]

Bacteria like to pick up bits of environmental DNA and "try it on for size" so to speak. They are probably grabbing genes from food organisms and even our own intestines. Thing is, that's been going on for the length of our evolution. Intestinal bacteria have not been grabbing bits and pieces of engineered plasmids and transgenes.

I think this is a good point. It's not just bacteria either. Plants do assimilate outside DNA. Chloroplasts were originally endosymbionts. Plants can also have polyploidy in a way that a lot of animals can't. Plus, there is some evidence that humans can also assimilate outside viral DNA into their genome. Here's an example, and I'd heard some other examples with viral DNA from my genetics professor before this article came out.

Open Original Shared Link

My point is that "genetic engineering" happens in nature too. It's just more targeted in a lab. I think you could theoretically get the same results in nature that you could with engineered genes. There's just a much lower probability of that any specific combination coming up naturally.

That said, I still think anything Monsanto does is evil.

[T.H.]

More fun to add to the pot...

In many of his patients, my GI doc was seeing abnormal growth in the stomach linings that he couldn't explain, but then discovered that rats who are fed GMO's develop similar stomach abnormalities. He's been advising his patients to go organic ever since.

I was just trying to see if I could find a link to the particular study he was referring to, but I'm not certain the one I've found is the one he's referring to. This was the closest to what he's described, I think:

Open Original Shared Link

[Bennie]

I did some reading on GM food. I think we're part of a 300 million person experiment and I want to know where my informed consent form was and how I withdraw from the study.

Supposedly in the US food labeled "100% organic" is not GMO. I don't know if any testing is done to verify that but I've switched to organic corn chips and tempeh since I did my reading.

I didn't read all posts, so someone may have already said this... But I seriously question how non GMO can be proven... if a bird finds a seed in a GMO field, flys over an organic field and drops the seed then it is already contaminated..

If you ever see 100% organic on honey it is completely false advertising... bees fly a long distance.. and we have no control over where they fly and what plants they pollinate.