Study on GMO corn effects in humans

silverseeds · #**101** 08/15/12, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

The genes of two fixed varieties of corn consist of two separate sequences of genes. They do not become a pool until combined. Combining them alters both of them when certain parts do not line up in the sequences. The next generation of seeds is permanently modified and will not return to either sequence. It is why there are thousands of corn varieties with each having their own specific sequence of genes.

Martin

You might want to study the topic again. no genes are modified in this instance. Not at all, simply lined up differently. Its so entirely different there isnt much i can even say to you.

All the genes from both are just as they were before the cross. You simply have some from each parent and potentially recessives coming to the forefront. nothing was altered in any way.

Paquebot · #**102** 08/15/12, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

~smiles~ Martin, Monsato may be known as the "King of Corn", but corn is not the ONLY product that they make that is Round-Up Ready. They make many other things also, such as soybeans and alfalfa, just to name a couple.

This is a corn thread so I only cited the corn acreage. Soybean acreage went from 72 million to 76 million in that period.

Quote:

CORN acreage in the U.S. HAS gone up, but overall acreage in use for agriculture has *decreased* slightly. I think the last count was a 2% decrease?

Regardless of end use, the same cultivation rules apply. The corn plant's requirements are the same no matter if used for feed, food, or fuel.

Martin

Paquebot · #**103** 08/15/12, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silverseeds

I didnt understand why you posted this until the other posters answer...

Maybe because it was my decision to post some additional facts not presented by Caliann? If they were not useful to you, it's your right to ignore them and pretend that the reply never existed.

Martin

CaliannG · #**104** 08/15/12, 04:06 PM

Also, the normal breeding of plants and animals are not at issue here. ALL corn has a certain, limited genepool. The *human* genepool is so limited that it isn't funny, that is why we cannot breed with close blood ties, for fear of having terrible recessives show up withing a generation or two. This is unlike goats and dogs, which can be inbred or line bred for several generations before you see significant problems.

All species have that *limited* genepool, and when they breed, they recombne a certain, predetermine number and type of genes. If you breed corn to corn, you get a combination of that limited set of genetics. The same thing if you breed horse to horse.

You CAN breed species that are not the same, but are closely related. That is how you get a mule out of a horse and a donkey. Both or of the equine family. Or hot tomatoes, from the Solanaceae family. They are related closely enough to allow crossbreeding naturally. Some offspring may be fertile, depending upon how the chromosomes line up. Most will not.

That is NOT the same as combining, say, water-lily genes into corn. That combination will NEVER happen naturally, ever. You are never going to be out by your pond, which you built your garden next to last year, and find an odd lily-corn hybrid, no matter HOW much solar radiation your farm gets.

Jelly-fish monkeys are RIGHT out. And yes, they did those.

Since GMO uses genetics from VASTLY different genetic *families*, it cannot be compared to the hybridization that occurs in nature.

DaleK · #**105** 08/15/12, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

~smiles~ Martin, Monsato may be known as the "King of Corn", but corn is not the ONLY product that they make that is Round-Up Ready. They make many other things also, such as soybeans and alfalfa, just to name a couple.

CORN acreage in the U.S. HAS gone up, but overall acreage in use for agriculture has *decreased* slightly. I think the last count was a 2% decrease?

At any rate, the rise in GMO corn doesn't have much to do with herbicide use numbers, as they are not tilling up previously un-farmed land to plant it; they are simply planting it where they used to have GMO cotton. (The farming of which has decreased significantly.)

Wrong again. Some pretty significant acres of untilled land are being brought into production, as well as a lot of ground where corn primarily replaced wheat, like the Dakotas. Mostly ended up replacing ground converted to sprawl

Paquebot · #**106** 08/15/12, 04:13 PM

[QUOTE=silverseeds;6081460]You might want to study the topic again. no genes are modified in this instance. Not at all, simply lined up differently. Its so entirely different there isnt much i can even say to you.[/QUOTE}

Different is just another word for altered. changed, modified, or any other words that one may come up with to designate something as no longer the original. English language is the official one for this forum and there's no way that HT is going to change the English dictionary in this or any other topic.

Martin

DaleK · #**107** 08/15/12, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazy J

I'd be with you Dale, but I was banned from the Poultry Forum last year for disagreeing with an OP rather vehmently.

Heck even I got a snarky warning over that thread, and I was almost perfectly agreeable in my disagreement;-)

CaliannG · #**108** 08/15/12, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

This is a corn thread so I only cited the corn acreage. Soybean acreage went from 72 million to 76 million in that period.

Regardless of end use, the same cultivation rules apply. The corn plant's requirements are the same no matter if used for feed, food, or fuel.

Martin

~sighs~ If I habitually use things that end in "-ides" on my garden, and I plant GMO corn, soybeans, cotton, pole beans, tomatoes and alfalfa in my garden, then spray a bunch of -ides on it, I am using X amount of -ides.

If, next year, I reduce the total area of my garden from 100'x100' to 90'x90', and decide to plant more corn and soybeans, but less cotton and tomatoes, all GMO, but I use the same amount of things that end in -ide, then my use of -ides has INCREASED, no matter what I am growing. I am now using Y amount of -ides.

I am now using over 10% more -ides, because I am using the same amount as I did before, but on a smaller area, regardless if that area is planted mostly in GMO corn, tomatoes, soybean, alfalfa, or monogrammed-glow-in-the-dark-left-nostril-inhaler plants.

silverseeds · #**109** 08/15/12, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

Different is just another word for altered. changed, modified, or any other words that one may come up with to designate something as no longer the original. English language is the official one for this forum and there's no way that HT is going to change the English dictionary in this or any other topic.

Martin

Sorry, any way you word it in any language no genes were altered. You simply have a different line up of them.

Paquebot · #**110** 08/15/12, 04:22 PM

Gailann, I'm not arguing for or against GMO! I would have just been an interested reader had not one member neglected the "O" part in his post. In light of previous posts by that member, I figured that it was best to point out his error. On this forum, such a tiny detail is often call for a viral thread which strays far from the topic. And, as is obvious, that is exactly the situation which has developed. There's now been enough readers, both registered members and guests, to either be satisfied with what has been presented or will undertake further Internet searches to see who is stating facts and who may just have an agenda which serves no useful purpose in advancement of their knowledge.

Martin

CaliannG · #**111** 08/15/12, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaleK

Wrong again. Some pretty significant acres of untilled land are being brought into production, as well as a lot of ground where corn primarily replaced wheat, like the Dakotas. Mostly ended up replacing ground converted to sprawl

http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/us...01-12-2012.pdf

Sorry, area under crop, total, decreased between 2010 and 2011. Those areas are significantly decreased from the numbers in 2005. To qualify as *untilled* land, rather than just reclaimed, the land has to remain untilled for 50 years. Very, very, VERY little land is being converted from truly untilled back into farmland....and even then, the overall numbers of land under cultivation nation wide has decreased.

Sorry, less land under cultivation + more of it planted in GMO *should*, if the promises were correct, = less use of herbicidal chemicals overall, and that has not been the case.

Myth busted.

silverseeds · #**112** 08/15/12, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

to see who is stating facts and who may just have an agenda which serves no useful purpose in advancement of their knowledge.

Martin

indeed

You added nothing reality based to the conversation.

Paquebot · #**113** 08/15/12, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silverseeds

Sorry, any way you word it in any language no genes were altered. You simply have a different line up of them.

At this point, read what you wrote since you're in hole. If the genes were not altered, they would not be different. They can not be the same sequence and yet be a different sequence.

Martin

silverseeds · #**114** 08/15/12, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

At this point, read what you wrote since you're in hole. If the genes were not altered, they would not be different. They can not be the same sequence and yet be a different sequence.

Martin

No one said they were in the same sequence. In fact I kept pointing out they were the same genes simply in a different sequence. The entire point is that they are not in the same sequence. No genes were altered though, you simply have genes from two varieties. No genes are different in any way. You simply have some of them from each parent. this seriously is as basic as it gets. Your wrong. spend a few minutes with an internet search.

CaliannG · #**115** 08/15/12, 04:45 PM

~sighs again~

If I make Beef Stroganoff with egg noodles, ground beef, sour cream, and spices, it is Beef Stroganoff, and food. (Yummy, I might add.) If I use 1 cup of sour cream, and 1 pound of ground beef, and a half bag of noodles, it is Beef Stroganoff. If I use a whole bag of noodles, 2 pounds of ground beef, and a 1/2 cup of sour cream, it is Beef Stroganoof. No matter how I recombine those ingredients, it is still Beef Stroganoff. If I use more beef and less sour creme, the recipe might be DIFFERENT.

If I decide to substitute the noodles for rice, and add jalepeno peppers, it is no longer Beef Stroganoff, it is Creme Asada. I have added or substituted OTHER ingredients and now the recipe is ALTERED.

The minute I decide to substitute, or add, diesel fuel, whether that is 1/8th of a cup of diesel fuel, or 1 quart of diesel fuel, it is NOT food, it is NOT yummy. It is REALLY ALTERED.

Everyone and everything has a certain, limited number of "ingredients" in the DNA and RNA. Combining and recombining those "ingredients" makes offspring that are DIFFERENT, but not ALTERED.

Adding in "ingredients" that do not naturally occur in that species makes the result ALTERED.

Thou shalt not be deliberately obtuse. Mommy spank.

Paquebot · #**116** 08/15/12, 04:49 PM

As stated, corn acreage planted can vary from year to year when something else is dropped and that is what accounts for much of the increase in the past decade. Around here, we're seeing less and less of the common grains while corn and beans comprise most of the acreage. Probably up to 25% of land gained in the past 50 years had been hay and pasture. Typical dairy farm used to have 25% of the land just for those purposes. 100 years ago, 25% of all tillable land was devoted just for hay for horses!

Martin

Cliff · #**117** 08/15/12, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

~sighs again~

If I make Beef Stroganoff with egg noodles, ground beef, sour cream, and spices, it is Beef Stroganoff, and food. (Yummy, I might add.) If I use 1 cup of sour cream, and 1 pound of ground beef, and a half bag of noodles, it is Beef Stroganoff. If I use a whole bag of noodles, 2 pounds of ground beef, and a 1/2 cup of sour cream, it is Beef Stroganoof. No matter how I recombine those ingredients, it is still Beef Stroganoff. If I use more beef and less sour creme, the recipe might be DIFFERENT.

If I decide to substitute the noodles for rice, and add jalepeno peppers, it is no longer Beef Stroganoff, it is Creme Asada. I have added or substituted OTHER ingredients and now the recipe is ALTERED.

The minute I decide to substitute, or add, diesel fuel, whether that is 1/8th of a cup of diesel fuel, or 1 quart of diesel fuel, it is NOT food, it is NOT yummy. It is REALLY ALTERED.

Everyone and everything has a certain, limited number of "ingredients" in the DNA and RNA. Combining and recombining those "ingredients" makes offspring that are DIFFERENT, but not ALTERED.

Adding in "ingredients" that do not naturally occur in that species makes the result ALTERED.

Thou shalt not be deliberately obtuse. Mommy spank.

I'm not so sure it's deliberate at this point... I've tried to say the same thing many times in several different ways but nobody seems to get it. Only one person from the gmo proponents on several different threads about this even acknowledged any concern about artificially introducing genes from different species into organisms.

Paquebot · #**118** 08/15/12, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff

I'm not so sure it's deliberate at this point... I've tried to say the same thing many times in several different ways but nobody seems to get it. Only one person from the gmo proponents on several different threads about this even acknowledged any concern about artificially introducing genes from different species into organisms.

Now that you've worded the question differently, calls for a different answer. It just may be that there are many who have stated that the sky is falling and civilization is doomed but nothing happens. Eventually the metal helmets and body armor are replaced with tin foil and a T-shirt and then discarded entirely. There's normally 10% of the population who can be fooled into believing anything. When it comes to this topic, you're not going to find many of those 10% on Homesteading Today.

Martin

tinknal · #**119** 08/15/12, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

Since math has come into play, look at some figures for comparison. In 2000, corn acreage was around 72 million acres in the US. In 2011, corn was 92 million. That would be an overall increase of 20 million in potential GMO corn acreage.

Martin

Not to mention the fact that now anyone can walk into the store and buy it for lawn, garden, landscaping, etc greatly increasing overall sales.

CaliannG · #**120** 08/15/12, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff

I'm not so sure it's deliberate at this point... I've tried to say the same thing many times in several different ways but nobody seems to get it. Only one person from the gmo proponents on several different threads about this even acknowledged any concern about artificially introducing genes from different species into organisms.

Rational blindness? I.e., the person does not wish to admit that the subject has ANY valid concerns about it, and therefore rationalizes their way to blindness? "I'm not worried about shrimp genes in my wheat, and therefore my bread, so you shouldn't be either, and I am just going to skip over this part."?

I am just fine with slow, deliberate, methodical experimentation in this, and with slow, deliberate, methodical testing of the results of such things. I *believe* in science, and appreciate the advancements science has made in our lives.

What worries me, and what bothers me, is that these things have been released, and transported rapidly and to far reaches, BEFORE we can even begin to appreciate their long term affects on both us and the world we live in.

If it is something highly negative, just HOW would we do worldwide recall and damage control? How do we "fix" it if something goes terribly wrong that, due to inadequate independent testing, we have NO CLUE of the negative possibilities? How do we prepare for that?

Because I promise you that, should something like that happen, Monsato will be no where around. They will sell out shortly before, with the major players taking the money and running, and the company will be left to declare bankruptcy and say, "Ooops, sorry, but we don't have the funds to do anything about it."

Leaving us, and all of these farmers currently singing their praises, holding the bag.

And I am seeing a lot of these "farmers" that are just as wasicu as the corporations. In the words of my ex-mother-in-law:

"What do I care about the world or the environment? I want cheap food and fuel NOW. I'll be dead once it gets bad and it will be someone else's problem."