BiodiversityGMOsSoil Erosion & ContaminationWater Contaminaton & Loss
Q & A on GM Wheat Trial Action
Why is Greenpeace opposing research – isn’t research necessary to test the impact of GM?
Why is Greenpeace opposing research – isn’t research necessary to test the impact of GM?
There is nothing intrinsically wrong or dangerous with genetic engineering of plants. The naturalistic fallacy here is hilarious since all non-GM crops today have been heavily selected for, and thus genetically modified, by generations of human farmers. Corn, wheat, bananas etc. did not exist in their current form 100,000 years ago.
Besides, what empirical evidence is there that genetically engineered crops are dangerous to human or animal health? The Greenpeace article says it has not been proven safe, yet it cites no evidence proving that is in fact unsafe.
This fear mongering is doing nothing good.
GM companies are nothing but evils!!!
I would never imagine that the first human GM wheat trial could ever be allowed to take place in Australia! What is going on in Canberra?! Is the government simply sleeping at the wheel!? What on earth is wrong with our natural wheat?!
GM foods will NEVER be safe – end of story. If GM foods were as safe as the promoters claimed they were, why did they not offer themselves and their families for trial?!
@Alex Sutton
How do you know they will never be safe when they are trying to conduct experiments to test if they are safe?
You are a propagandized fool and a luddite. Genetic engineering is the frontier of medical and biological science. Yet you are too scared to let the science and evidence arise to prove which new strains are good for human consumption.
It is the GMO propogators who are introducing something wholely unnatural into the wild. Natural processes cannot create these GMO varieties. The burden of proof is therefor on them to prove they are safe.
But not only have they not done that, there are several animal studies that lead honest observers to believe that GMO are probably not safe, or at the very least, may not be safe and should be shown safe before release.
This is serious business. There is a growing problem of crop disease and animal sterility in the US associated with GMO crops. It could very well be human sterility is an affect as well. The use of GMO crops could very well put the survival of our species (or a significant subset thereof) at risk.
We have natural species that have been proved safe for human consumption for thousands of years!
You GM companies are blood-sucking beasts under the disguise of science with total disregard of people’s lives and the environment!
No amount of tests and experiments will prove it safe if the technology is fundamentally flawed and intrinsically unsafe!
It will not surprise me if the GM companies continue to use their financial might to propagandize and fool people for utterly self-serving motives.
What surprises me, sadly, is that the Australian Government has been foolish and irresponsible enough to ever allow such things to happen in this great land of ours!
Wake up NOW Australia! It would be such a dreadful scene if one day people of Australia wake up finding GM bread on their tables!
Multiple organizations from across the world have concluded genetic engineering is no more dangerous to human health than artificial selection of crops. Your fear of technology and progress of more effective and efficient food sources is holding back the human race.
For example:
The European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2010 report on GMOs noted that “The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies.”
Source: https://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf
A 2008 review published by the Royal Society of Medicine noted that GM foods have been eaten by millions of people worldwide for over 15 years, with no reports of ill effects.
Source: https://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/cgi/content/full/101/6/290
Similarly a 2004 report from the US National Academies of Sciences stated: “To date, no adverse health effects attributed to genetic engineering have been documented in the human population.”
Source: https://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10977#toc
Permaculture and organic farming are good for independence and sustainability sake. However they are not intrinsically better than food we can design ourselves. In fact, this technology will allow us to develop new and healthier strains that do not exist in the wild.
Vince
This is just plain wrong and a stupid comparison. There’s a huge difference between natural plant breeding techniques within species as opposed to taking genes from entirely unrelated species and bypassing a plant or animal’s natural defences and firing them into its cells. In nature you could never cross a fish with tomato or a spider with a goat. This kind of action results in unexpected and potentially dangerous proteins being generated by the modified organism.
There is plenty of evidence that GMOs are dangerous. See our GMO category. Amongst the posts you’ll find health risks, and also see documented evidence that GMOs cause a significant increase in the usage of chemicals.
Additionally, GMOs are based on forcing natural functions – i.e. getting nature to do what it doesn’t want to do. That being, GMOs are based on trying to make monocultures work. This means destroyed soils and watersheds, and major inputs in energy and chemicals.
And, we won’t have the energy for monocultures and GMOs in a post-peak oil world.
GMOs do not increase yields, and natural breeding of localised strains has been proven to bring better, faster and far, far cheaper results than having GMO plants created in a solitary lab. You cannot expect such GMO plants, ‘designed’ at the cost of millions of dollars over many years to then function well in every soil and climate type. This is what Big Biotech attempts to do – making a single strain of corn, for example, which they try to sell worldwide. Instead, natural breeding techniques enables people everywhere to develop strains actually suited to their location, and to do it at little to no cost, and to do it much faster — and without any concerns about health problems and horizontal gene transfer.
The only things GMOs do is bring billions to Big Biotech, and making all people everywhere lose their food sovereignty.
The comparison of GM tech with natural breeding was just one of the examples how GM companies have been trying to deceive and brainwash the public. Data from their so-called tests and experiments can NEVER be trusted. The evil act, manoeuvrings and brutality of GM companies, led by Monsanto, in forcing their way into people’s lives and gagging oppositions have been nothing short of appalling.
What have been more appalling, however, have been the string of governments, started from USA, that have bowed to GM companies and put the interest of Monsanto, and the like, way above the people they were meant to serve.
Is it the Australian Government’s turn?!
SAY NO NOW you pollies in Canberra, and each and every Australian, before it is too late !!!
Humans have about 98% the same genome as the chimpanzee. We share a lot of genes with earthworms. Shifting a gene from one species to another is no big deal. Our genes are being randomly modified every time we procreate. That is nature.
All you anti GM people are missing the point. Engineering the genes is not the problem. Humans have been doing this for thousands of years.
The critical issue is will the modified organisms have an unwanted and unexpected effect on the environment. Trials are needed to determine this.
Hey Michael. Let’s strap you down and fire some chimpanzee genes into your cells with a gene gun.
While you’re waiting to see what happens as a result, how about reading a little more:
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2011/05/31/dangerous-toxins-from-genetically-modified-plants-found-in-women-and-fetuses/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2011/05/20/is-monsanto-poisoning-babies-a-new-report-begs-the-question/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2011/04/10/gmos-linked-to-organ-disruption-in-19-studies/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2011/01/26/monsantos-roundup-triggers-over-40-plant-diseases-and-endangers-human-and-animal-health/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2010/08/18/gm-crops-pesticides-and-the-poor/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2010/05/04/genetically-modified-soy-linked-to-sterility-infant-mortality-in-hamsters/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2010/09/09/monsanto-has-us-walking-the-gangplank-and-wants-to-give-that-final-push/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2011/07/01/greenpeace-takes-on-monsanto-over-pesticides-arms-race/
etc. etc.
Hi Craig,
I dont need any more chimp genes, I am already full of them. Dont have the patience to read all this stuff either. It is all one side of the story like climate change skepticism.
All human progress inevitably results in some mistakes. The more you apply scientific trials and research to new developments, the less likely there are to be mistakes. So why destroy the trials?
Do we not try anything new because we dont know exactly what will happen?
As for Monsanto, it is sad that there is so little competition in this market. A bit like Apple and Microsoft. Perhaps if there was a bit less paranoia about science then more people would take it up and give Monsanto some competition.
C’mon Michael – there’s nothing to worry about. Take a seat, and we’ll get some chimp genes in in a flash. Don’t back out now mate. You can make a test to settle the argument for us. Do it for the good of humanity.
OK Craig,
First you use emotive words like zap, gun, strap you down. Then you make a lame attempt at humour. No reasonable arguments. A bunch of URLs for one side of the argument only.
One question. Are your attitudes official permaculture doctrine?
Well Michael – you refuse to read material, and refuse to respond to legitimate comments like this one.
You suggest ‘trials’, but ignore the fact that there’s no such thing as a secure trial:
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2009/12/15/bayer-admits-it-is-unable-to-control-spread-of-gmos/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2009/04/17/the-global-spread-of-gmo-crops-2/
We don’t need GMOs. We need more farmers. GMOs are about monocultures, and monocultures don’t work – GMO or not.
I can only recommend you attempt to look at the whole picture, and not just the PR-feed of Big Biotech.
Craig,
I am a farmer. I am very interested in sustainable farming and try to practice it. I was also a CSIRO scientist once. I read a lot about genetics, mostly textbooks as I am heavily into animal breeding. I suggest you consider where the food you eat comes from. Do you make your own bread from wheat you grow and grind yourself or does the wheat come from a monoculture?
As for the red corn, this is caused by a single harmless mutation in the corn genome. Quite possibly the reappearance of the yellow is a reversion to type or a random crossing with normal corn from anywhere. From the article it would seem that the DNA of the corn was tested and found to be GM which could have resulted from the wind or bees.
This farmer’s problem comes from the fact that he lost his organic certification because of attitudes to GMOs. Now if the farmer’s corn was contaminated with corn that had been modified by selective breeding there would be no problem. But who would know if the selectively bred corn could have caused tumours in his chickens or his customers unless it was bred and tried. As far as I am aware there is no proof that any selectively bred food has caused a problem. In fact cross-pollination from selectively bred corn has probably been occurring for thousands of years. Some contamination is probably inevitable but the lawyers have managed to avoid this possibility.
Here we have a case of lawyers taking control of the science. Your argument should be with Monsanto and not GMOs. When you chuck out the science, the multinationals and their lawyers have it all over you.
In the good old days the government paid organisations like CSIRO and universities to develop new varieties and pass them on free to the farmers in the national interest. In recent times lazy politicians have devolved these governmental responsibilities to the big companies which are in business to make money first and not worry about the social impact. CSIRO and universities have been forced to seek external funding which means the research results become private intellectual property which must be protected in the courts. This is the real problem. Note how in this country the climate change debate is driven by politicians personal ambitions and not by truth or concern for human welfare.
Smashing up the CSIRO trials does not help anyone. Making pariahs of the scientists means less scientists and less progress. Our budding scientists will become more lawyers and politicians.
Hi Michael
I hear you re the stupidity of government leaving everything to private interests. An article I wrote some years ago about such trends with the CSIRO:
https://www.celsias.com/article/public-resources-for-private-profit/
I don’t have time to get into a big back and forth with you right now (perhaps another day, as GMOs are something I feel strongly about, and due to quite a bit of research), but if you read nothing else, please read this:
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2008/08/12/which-came-first-pests-or-pesticides/
I think if you’re truly interested in sustainable farming, the thoughts I share there will gel with you, and you might start to see what a pointless exercise GMOs are – that they are in fact merely a bid to persevere in a ‘system’ that will never work. We don’t have headaches because of a lack of aspirin in our systems, just like we don’t have soil, water, food problems because of a lack of GMOs in the world.
And should you get to the end of the above article and find it interesting, perhaps a couple more:
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2008/08/07/soil-our-financial-institution/
https://www.permaculturenews.org/2010/06/17/the-story-of-soil/
@Michael Anderson
Whatever percentage of chimpanzee genes you might have in your body, even up to 99.99%, you were born with it. You inherited it from your natural parents (you do have natural parents, don’t you?) and Mother Nature. Despite your claim “Shifting a gene from one species to another is no big deal”, you have chosen not to accept any more FOREIGN chimpanzee genes into your body and I think that was a very wise decision.
Well, the GM crops were given no choice. Foreign genes were simply forced upon them!
Worse yet, those GM crops were then forced upon people’s lives without their knowledge and consent!
The so-called “trials and research” are nothing but a farce. The conclusions have been drawn long before the “trials and research” are completed! We all know what Monsanto has in its mind!
When a new technology brings benefit to no one except for ONE commercial entity, particularly one that has a long track record of malpractice, plus perhaps a handful of its accomplices, do you call that “human progress”?
Not only does the technology bring no benefit, quite the opposite, it has already brought a number of known and potentially a huge number of unknown adverse effects to people, animals and the environment!
Now what kind of “human progress” is THAT??!!
Who are you trying to fool??!!
We don’t want, and we don’t need GM technology and GMOs have no place on the face of the earth!!
It is as simple as that!
Genetic engineering has no place in a permaculture system. Appropriate technology? I think not.