Why is ,it, G M O - Genetically Modified Organism scientists are so sure about

1. 73

   someonewhoknowsposted 10 years ago

   Why is ,it, G M O - Genetically Modified Organism  scientists are so sure about the safety of G M OS

   replyreport
2. 80

   phriotposted 10 years ago

   It depends on the definition of "safe" that you use.  A popular type of genetic modification in GMOs is the expression of Bt toxin, a bacterial protein that acts as an insecticide.  Scientists know that this protein is not harmful to humans, and thus "safe."  Even if plants were to pick up a mutation in this added gene, the result isn't likely to be harmful to mammals.  That said, there are other potential problems, such as horizontal gene transfer (the added gene being transferred to other plants), spread of a single cultivar, etc.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      someonewhoknowsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      https://action.sumofus.org/a/monsanto-c … wd&t=3
      
      Let's make sure we keep Monsanto out of India.
      
      India's food crops are currently GMO-free -- but that wil

      replyreport
3. 60

   Vortrek Grafixposted 10 years ago

   "Safe" is relative to what standard? Assuming all genetic modification accomplishes is speeding up genetic inheritance of a trait which could have come about naturally, albeit more slowly, then, relative to existing genetic evolution, speeding up the process is "safe". Can we trust researchers motivated by grant funding, career prospects, the promise of fame and fortune, etc.? Again relative. The less these are compromised for the researcher, the more likely they are to be transparent about their activities and results.
   
   Should we worry about frontier biotech technology like genetic engineering, stem cell therapy, cloning, etc. Yeah maybe, you never know whom might get the upper hand on technology which might morph the direction of human evolution for the better or worse  permanently.  Can banning such technology ever by successful long term? No. Individuals vary widely, but humanity as a species will continue to be unyieldingly curious. Given time, every conquerable puzzle offering conceivable leverage towards the benefit of humanity will eventually be conquered. better to be receptive towards change and anticipate responsible methods for managing and regulating it, then to trust a ban will squelch it into the quagmire.
   
   History shows time and again, no amount of suppression will permanently discourage pursuit of solutions to viable scientific puzzles.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      someonewhoknowsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Why comment on something you know nothing about?

      replyreport