Can't believe: No genetic corn thread?

[VetLegion]

Herbal remedies are marketed and sold as such and can be avoided.

The problem with GM foods is they are not sold as such, so you can't 'vote with your dollars' even if you want to.

Oh and please, tomato which produces pesticides for you to eat is not a normal tomato

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by uggabugga
that's a valid point, and one that the biotech industry will probably eventually have to cave in to (labeling of GM, that is). as for the whole allergy thing, that's not nearly the concern it once was, as the co's involved are now much more cognizant of the potential problems there. embarassingly enough for them, it appears that allergic reactions were not something they really even thought about in the beginning.

Well, of course those companies aren't really happy when it comes to allergetic reactions. After all they know that this will only strengthen opposition. Nonetheless, as you say, it's embarassing that they didn't even think about it in the first place. Considering the fact that nature is an extremely complex system, where allergies are only a neglectable sub-system, we can make the educated guess that there are lots of variables which have not been taken into account yet, lots of unpredictable effects which only become apparent when it's (well possibly too) late. Constant failures also of several Monsanto hybrids simply show how little we can tell the outcome of an agricultural program. And Genetic Engineering even bears much higher risks than hybrids!

as for bt toxin, i once drank 1 ml of purified bt toxin on a dare.

you could make precisely the same argument about any widely-planted hybrid crop.

Sure, all hybrid cultures, in fact, to a good extent all monocultures, are more vulnerable to parasites of any type and crop failure due to bad climatic conditions too. IMHO, that's the major problem in most drought and famine zones. Instead of making those agricultural societies depend on a few variety of crops, which can maybe produce more in one year, but have a 100% failure the next year, peasants should be encouraged to diversify.

Bt toxin (which is, by the way, a naturally occuring product produced by the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis)

Just because it's also being produced in nature that doesn't mean it' can't be dangerous. Furthermore I doubt that the bacillus in question produces it in such quantities.

ideally, the highest goal for biotech should be the complete elimination of the need for any pesticides/herbicides.

The thought of a plant resistant to every possible enemy - insect, fungus or bacteria - does not scare you? What would that mean for uncontrolled spreading? But maybe one could add a terminator gene to it.
One can't prevent the spreading of genetically altered DNA to the environment.

not certain, but it seems that they may be confusing the indian roundup-ready cotton story with the indian bt cotton story.

Not they did, I did.

bottom line is, if the farmers are happy with the performance of the product, they will probably buy it; if not, they won't, and monsanto will take its lumps just like the producer of any other product.

or they sue every farmer who accidently got Monsanto genetic seeds-TM brough ton his field by the wind, like in the story I posted above.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Oh and please, tomato which produces pesticides for you to eat is not a normal tomato

I know it's not a normal tomato; I never said it was. I said it was closer to a normal tomato than, for example, a peanut. Surely that is obvious even to you.

[Az]

The thought of a plant resistant to every possible enemy - insect, fungus or bacteria - does not scare you? What would that mean for uncontrolled spreading?

Oh no, The tomatoes are going to replace us! They're going to dominate the world.

[Kuciwalker]

Azazel - it actually is a valid complaint. As genes spread between different plant species quite easily, non-food plants could get the genes as well, making them very competitive and thus crowding out crop plants.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Spiffor, but how will the consumer be screwed? Is it better to live in ignorance..?

No, I was comparing the alternative between allowing stamped GMOs and forbidding GMOs altogether. Unstamped GMOs aren't even an option to me.

OneFootInTheGrave :
You'll find non GM food at higher prices (that is, if modified genes don't spread), and it is likely a significant chunk of European agriculture turns to these high-quality products. However, the price will be much, much higher than non-GM foods, because the whole cheap-food-industry will turn to GMOs. You'll have to eat something already belonging to luxury foods if you want to avoid GMOs.

Skywalker :
The fear of GMOs is about as irrational as the fear for tobacco before the 30's. To date, we do not know the long term consequences of the environment. I have no doubt the FDA forces extensive testing, but it is impossible for Monsanto's scientists to evaluate the long term consequences on a system as complex as the ecosystem. Because science in its current state is wholly unable to master ecosystems (Biosphere fiasco).
Like many people here, I am not opposed on principle to GMOs. I am opposed to letting them spread before we're able to assess the long term consequences.