Skip to main content

View Diary: Voracious rootworms evolve, overcoming genetically engineered corn when farmers defied scientists (417 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  it's not in the corn you eat (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cocinero, worldlotus, tarkangi

    the bt genes express in the roots of the corn, where the rootworm lives. the corn is the same genetically modified creature humans have been manipulating, shaping and sculpting for hundreds generations.

    •  curious-how do they switch off the gene expression (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      worldlotus

      in other cells outside the roots . . . . . .

      I think you are mistaken. I think the gene is expressed in all of the plant's cells, because we don't have that level of control yet over gene-switching. And may never.

      In medicine, we can place genes into particular cells and express them only in one specific area.  But we do that by actually placing the genes there AFTER the cells have differentiated.

      In GMOs, the genes are all in just one cell--the fertile seed. And every cell in the plant is a copy of that one seed cell.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 02:49:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  While I believe that I have read this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT, worldlotus

      the part about Bt gene being expressed only in the roots, a quickie web search did not turn up anything either way.

      In the interests of not fooling myself into believing something because I think it would be awesome if it were true, I am moving this idea into the "undecided" category in my head.

      On the happy side, I did run into this quick review from Nature.

      For those not in the know, Nature - the flagship journal of British Association for the Advancement of Science - is one of the premier journals in the science world, along with its American counterpart, Science.

      If you read something scientificky in either of these journals, it's probably going to be reliable.

      o caminho d'ouro, uma pinga de mel: Parati

      by tarkangi on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 08:44:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  unless, of course, they are part of the Monsanto (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tarkangi

        conspiracy too . . . .

        (snicker)

        In the end, reality always wins.

        by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 08:49:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  People are not mind readers (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, worldlotus

          What I am really trying to say here is that Nature has the mojo to crush Monsanto like a ripe mango, should the Editors chose to summon up the righteous anger of Every Scientist on Earth.

          o caminho d'ouro, uma pinga de mel: Parati

          by tarkangi on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 08:54:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  the whole idea that scienctists can conspire to (0+ / 0-)

            hide data or evidence, is simply silly. Anyone, anywhere, at any time, can replicate a study and measure data for himself, and publish the results to the whole world, and no power on earth can stop him.

            Even the tobacco companies that the CTers like to wave their arms about, could not prevent medical researchers all over the world from doing their own research, publishing their own data, and proving that cigarettes cause cancer.

            It's nuclear-level tinfoil-hat kookery.

            In the end, reality always wins.

            by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 09:30:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are wrong, there is a power that can stop (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              protectspice

              scientists from doing their own studies on Monsanto's GMO crops.  Specifically, patent licenses and non-disclosure/non-research agreements built into those patent licenses.  No scientist wants to be sued into oblivion which is what would happen if they tried to do such a study without Monsanto's approval.  In fact, had software style "shrinkwrap licenses" been commonplace back then those cigarette studies never would have happened.

              You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

              by Throw The Bums Out on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 10:41:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Get approval (0+ / 0-)

                True that if you knock on the castle gate and demand seeds so you can prove that Monsanto is evil and is trying to kill us all, you probably won't get very far.

                If you write a proposal for seed samples, based on legitimate concerns, you might actually get somewhere.  The Seralini study was hammered, not because it criticizes Monsanto but because it was poorly designed and shoddily reported.

                If you are truly convinced that GMO seeds are doing something horrible you can, in the worst case, make your own GMO seeds.  The methodologies have been around for more than thirty years (.pdf).  It won't be easy, and you will have to learn a lot, and it will take some money and a whole lot of work but a dedicated outside team can show that GMO is intrinsically dangerous - if that is in fact the case.  The promise of Science is not that the process is easy but that it does work, and the truth will come out in the end.

                o caminho d'ouro, uma pinga de mel: Parati

                by tarkangi on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 11:08:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  you don't even need to do all that (0+ / 0-)

                  If GMOs are killing cows or pigs or whatever, then there should be a lot of fucking dead cows and pigs to point to--and Monsanto can't stop anyone from going to farms and counting dead pigs.

                  If eating GMOs cause cancer or make you grow two heads, then any medical researcher anywhere in the world can look at the data and see those deaths, and propose a biochemical method for those genes to do whatever the heck it is you'all think they do, and Monsanto simply can't do a damn thing to stop them.

                  The reason such studies aren't happening is because there are no subjects to study.  There are no piles of dead cows from GMOs.  There are no pigs with two heads from GMOs.  There are no waves of cancer patients from eating GMO.  It's all arm-waving and wishful thinking. There's no "there" there.

                  If you disagree, then let's see it.  Show me.  Point to the dead cows and the cancer patients for us, so we can study them (and Monsanto can't do a damn thing to stop anyone from studying them).

                  But you won't.  You can't.  There aren't any.  

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 11:40:40 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  That won't work as they can require that they (0+ / 0-)

                  approve the contents of any study before it can be published and have the right to edit anything they want before publication.

                  You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

                  by Throw The Bums Out on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 12:21:28 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'd like to see any court in the US enforce that (0+ / 0-)

                    contract. Companies on Amazon can't even get unfavorable reviews taken down, and you think any court in the US is gonna let Monsanto have control over a scientific journal it doesn't own, as part of its fucking sales contract?  You are seriously deluded.

                    Monsanto will have to argue one of two things to the court.  Either

                    1. their GMOs really did it and they just don't want that published---which will get laughed right out of the courtroom

                    or

                    2. their GMOs didn't do a damn thing. In which case it's hard to see what they're bitching about.

                    Either of them would provide immense entertainment, kill Monsanto's credibility, make them look like the biggest ass in the world, and lose their court case anyway.

                    Monsanto simply does not have the godlike powers you seem to think they have. They have no legal right to control what non-employees write about them. No matter what their idiotic contract says.

                    In the end, reality always wins.

                    by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 01:07:44 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  then who the hell did all those studies that you (0+ / 0-)

                folks claim proves GMOs to be unsafe and bad?  The pig study, for instance?

                Which is it?  Are there no studies showing GMO to be unsafe because Monsanto stops you from doing them boo hoo hoo, OR, are there lots and lots of studies showing GMOs to be unsafe and everyone is just too close-minded to accept them.

                Make up your goddamn mind.

                Geez.

                In the end, reality always wins.

                by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 11:31:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  How many decades did it take though? (0+ / 0-)
              •  who cares? (0+ / 0-)

                Is there as time limit or something?

                No one has ever successfully prevented scientists from examining any goddamn data they want to examine.  Nobody.  Ever. Nor CAN they. The very idea is idiotic.

                In the end, reality always wins.

                by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 21, 2014 at 11:33:43 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site