72 replies to this topic

[HrVanker]

Honestly I'm on the fence believing any of it. And honestly PE genetics are trashed. They don't perform like they did 15 or so years ago. ( give or take a few years). PE6 was a hybrid, attempting to improve the genetics.
I like albinos, but really I haven't seen a true albino yet. If it produced a spore print, it isn't albino. Its Luecistic. And that's just a color change.
I won't grow PE either. I might grow PE6.
I'm assuming anyone who thinks progating this is perfectly fine, also has no issue with GMOs or lab grown meat.

My issue with GMOs has much less to do with consumption, and much more to do with the business/legal side of things.

I'm not entirely sure what the anti-GMO people are afraid of... except for the actual change within the chromosome, the only other difference in the fruit/veggie is visual, and nutritional.

We don't absorb genes and incorporate them into ours, so that's not an issue. And as long as the genetic change doesn't produce arsenic or something, we're good. If a GMO apple has too much sugar, don't eat it.

If the issue is the effect on soil, water table, etc. Then that's a discussion of farming practices, regulations, and even population.

Lab grown meat, not for me...

Do you have an opinion on the use of CRISPR to cure blindness, cancer/tumors, HIV, etc.?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[August West]

I'm not going to lay arguments for or against anything here but, there's a lot going on between what you quoted and what you posted that denote a jumbled context. From my understanding, the quote you posted is talking about hybridization - a natural process (which humans have put their fingerprints on) that occurs within species. Transgenic modification or what is commonly referred to as, "GMOs" is splicing genes together across species. Opponents of transgenic modification aren't concerned with too much sugar in apples or arsenic. They're concerned with what they claim science tells them about the novel proteins that are created when you gene splice.

 

I said I wouldn't lay any arguments but I will say that it seems a bit flippant to dismiss the effects on soil and/or water pollution (I'm guessing that's what you're talking about when you say "water tables") as a separate discussion. To me it's a little too reductionist to separate which crops are grown from how those crops are grown.

 

As an aside, I believe CRISPR has also been linked to being a cause of cancer.

[HrVanker]

I started this thread so as not to hijack another person's thread with the GMO thing. I brought the quote over to provide context.

I'm also not intending to dismiss any secondary or tertiary effects of genetic modification in a general sense. But this discussion was started by relating what is likely a mutated mushroom culture to GMO foods. So I wanted to keep the discussion relevant to the core topic: modified/mutated genes.

I'm doing some reading into the novel proteins and gene splicing. So I'll have to come back to it.

I'm not surprised that CRISPR has been implicated in causing cancer. How do you think we got to this point in medical history? Some people lived, others died and we learned how to do it better. Human treatment is still fairly limited. I myself believe that it is our best bet in curing some things and mitigating others.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[makinbones69]

 

Honestly I'm on the fence believing any of it. And honestly PE genetics are trashed. They don't perform like they did 15 or so years ago. ( give or take a few years). PE6 was a hybrid, attempting to improve the genetics.
I like albinos, but really I haven't seen a true albino yet. If it produced a spore print, it isn't albino. Its Luecistic. And that's just a color change.
I won't grow PE either. I might grow PE6.
I'm assuming anyone who thinks progating this is perfectly fine, also has no issue with GMOs or lab grown meat.

My issue with GMOs has much less to do with consumption, and much more to do with the business/legal side of things.

I'm not entirely sure what the anti-GMO people are afraid of... except for the actual change within the chromosome, the only other difference in the fruit/veggie is visual, and nutritional.

We don't absorb genes and incorporate them into ours, so that's not an issue. And as long as the genetic change doesn't produce arsenic or something, we're good. If a GMO apple has too much sugar, don't eat it.

If the issue is the effect on soil, water table, etc. Then that's a discussion of farming practices, regulations, and even population.

Lab grown meat, not for me...

Do you have an opinion on the use of CRISPR to cure blindness, cancer/tumors, HIV, etc.?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I really agree on this man. Well placed.

[August West]

I started this thread so as not to hijack another person's thread with the GMO thing. I brought the quote over to provide context.

I'm also not intending to dismiss any secondary or tertiary effects of genetic modification in a general sense. But this discussion was started by relating what is likely a mutated mushroom culture to GMO foods. So I wanted to keep the discussion relevant to the core topic: modified/mutated genes.

I'm doing some reading into the novel proteins and gene splicing. So I'll have to come back to it.

I'm not surprised that CRISPR has been implicated in causing cancer. How do you think we got to this point in medical history? Some people lived, others died and we learned how to do it better. Human treatment is still fairly limited. I myself believe that it is our best bet in curing some things and mitigating others.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

I didn't realize it was from another thread.

 

I mostly chimed in because it seems important (to me at least) to distinguish between hybridization (natural or "encouraged") and transgenic modification. They're completely different but, more often than not, conflated.

[Coopdog]

To my line of thought, hybridization is fine, it is the genetic modification that makes corn and wheat and soy "Roundup Ready" and makes them produce neonicitonoids that might just be responsible for the decline of the bee population and god knows what other problems it is causing in humans and livestock. That is what I think of when I see the term GMO. From what I understand it is mostly being done with just Corn, Wheat and Soy as of now. I used to love Doritos, but I now mostly avoid corn products and if I eat bread I spring for the good organic sort, and Soy is not fit for human consumption in my opinion :) Oh and no lab grown meat for me please...

[HrVanker]

To my line of thought, hybridization is fine, it is the genetic modification that makes corn and wheat and soy "Roundup Ready" and makes them produce neonicitonoids that might just be responsible for the decline of the bee population and god knows what other problems it is causing in humans and livestock. That is what I think of when I see the term GMO. From what I understand it is mostly being done with just Corn, Wheat and Soy as of now. I used to love Doritos, but I now mostly avoid corn products and if I eat bread I spring for the good organic sort, and Soy is not fit for human consumption in my opinion :) Oh and no lab grown meat for me please...

I believe that is one of the novel protein modifications that August mentioned. I'm not a huge fan of pesticides for the obvious reasons. And especiallu if my food is to produce them!

My point in this discussion was to say that blanket statements about GMOs (as with most things) aren't reasonable. If they want modify corn with the "grape bunch gene" from a grapevine to produce more ears/plant, great!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Juthro]

Just a few things I want to nit pick. 

 

Corn has already been modified to not produce more ears per stalk, for the ease of the mechanical harvester.   And Roundup is not a pesticide, it is a herbicide whose active ingredient has been proven to cause cancer.  The GMOs have been modified to be resistant to glyphosate so they can spray crops and kill competter  plants growing in the fields.   This is from the same company that brought us PCB, and agent orange.  Both of which they argued in court were safe before they got banned.  Why should we believe they are being honest this time?

 

That means not only is there the problem of weather or not GMO's are harmful on their own , but you also are getting a dose of glyphosate with them, and I'll say again,  that has been proven to cause cancer.  Do you really want a dose of that with your morning cereal?  I don't.

 

Crops are not being modified to make more nutritious foods, they are being modified to create a successful business model for corporations. 

 

Hybridisation is fine, I support it, and I'm completely fine with eating it.  I do not feel the same way about GMO's

[crazy1]

Hybridization brings us higher quantity and sometimes more nutritious foods.That is all good.

 

But GMO's are much different as was said. These added genes are sometimes from such unknown sources that we really have no idea what is in the food we eat. And there is some very nasty stuff. Just set your mind to try and wrap itself around what kind of gene was used to make corn, for example, Round Up ready and now the new Liberty herbicide. Got to have a new one you know, the weeds are not affected by Round Up anymore. Not to mention, the invasive weeds that have arrived. What new Frankenstien chemical/plant combo will be next ?

 

For those that can, grow heirloom plants and enjoy the true flavors of the amazing foods we have.

[Alder Logs]

 

You must decide at the outset, what it is you wish to do, make money, or make sense, because the two are mutually exclusive.

~R. Buckminster Fuller

 

Corporate powers, manipulating the codes of plant and animal life for a business model, in open air/water/soil laboratory experiments, using all life as subjects without any informed consent (as if they were even capable of informing anyone as to the long term outcomes); what could possibly go wrong?

[Heirloom]

some threads/topics have a high mortality rate.

selling this bunch on gmo's isn't as easy as selling roundup back when the salesmen would mix some up and drink it to make a sale. farmers bought it believing it was harmless.

when cigarettes first came out they were harmless.

[HrVanker]

some threads/topics have a high mortality rate.

selling this bunch on gmo's isn't as easy as selling roundup back when the salesmen would mix some up and drink it to make a sale. farmers bought it believing it was harmless.

when cigarettes first came out they were harmless.

I'm not really trying to sell anybody on anything. My views on GMOs were brought up in a bait-and-switch tactic, so I made a new thread about it.

I'm happy to share my views, and respond to others, but please don't think I want anyone to live life any differently. You do you!



Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Heirloom]

ok i recall this thread got started due to strong opinions about gmo, mutations and hybrids , 3 topics and concerning shrooms was it PE.

i'm not a big fan of gmo,

mutation breeding has a place in my opinion , though i have never engaged in mutation breeding

hybrids can be an improvement but not always. breeding for hybrid crops is not really that old. open pollinated crops were the norm until modern times. most hybrids are dead ends

I believe gmo's are more about money than anything else.
I don't believe people should own genes.

I'm to old and lazy to grow all my own food if I could afford the land and taxes.

the love of money is ruining this world... i could be wrong after all i've been heard talking to myself saying "humans are domesticated animals" i just never said who domesticated them

Edited by Heirloom , 05 June 2019 - 01:54 AM.

[Heirloom]

this topic made me think of this clip, might sum up  peoples worst fears of GMO, Mutations and Hybridization in a non offensive way

[Direct Link]

Edited by Heirloom , 05 June 2019 - 02:52 AM.

[Heirloom]

I need to clarify my position, I am against GMO food.

I would love to have a gmo yeast with genes spliced in to make thc. could be grown in 5 gallon buckets or swimming pools. just skim the honey oil off the top.

funny I could condemn a person for gmo tomatoes with moth genes and call another guy a hero if he made a gmo yeast that produced thc or another of my favorite drugs.

[HrVanker]

I need to clarify my position, I am against GMO food.

I would love to have a gmo yeast with genes spliced in to make thc. could be grown in 5 gallon buckets or swimming pools. just skim the honey oil off the top.

funny I could condemn a person for gmo tomatoes with moth genes and call another guy a hero if he made a gmo yeast that produced thc or another of my favorite drugs.

Funny how life is... We all have our price. Lol

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[jkdeth]

I missed this thread somehow. I agree that the corporate/legal control factors are just as bad the twisting of plant genetics.

I was in this, on the farm, when it started. I saw the blatant lies Monsanto told.

Also as a species humans are famous for the "Oops! Factor" we create wonderful things then some years down the line, we realize we fucked up. Being a 6 toed thalimide baby, I have first hand (or foot) experience with that. But I was one of the lucky ones.

Hybridization I'm okay with, selective breeding better. Hybrids may be a dead end, but they don't create unknown dangers.

Not really a new process, maybe new to us, but selective breeding has been going on for thousands. 9000? 12000, I forget. There's even evidence that hybrids were cultivated prior to written knowledge.

More when I'm awake.

[jkdeth]

Occurs to me if the argument is just what's inherently evil, then neither is glyphosate. There's as much evidence that it kills cancer cells as there is that it causes cancer.

[RickG]

I could write s book on this subject, but I’m not going to bore anyone. I am one of those ant-GMO people. People like me aren’t against modifying stuff like cross-breading shroom species etc. people like me are against modifying plants to be resistant to bugs, disease etc. Most plants already secrete a natural defense called lectins, that already cause havoc to your body I.e. digestive issues etc.

Big Agro and big pharma are lovers. Do some deep research on GMOs and it will scare the shit out of you. If most people just cut something as simple as wheat out of their diets, their Heath would improve 10 fold. Damn I said I going to get long winded and I did any ways. Sorry. This is something I’m really passionate about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[HrVanker]

Occurs to me if the argument is just what's inherently evil, then neither is glyphosate. There's as much evidence that it kills cancer cells as there is that it causes cancer.

That's basically the point I was trying to get at. Add in the people who hate GMOs only because WholeFoods doesn't sell them, the ones who only use all natural toothpastes because of "chemicals..." and I'm primed to blow a fuse. Lol

So I guess at the heart of what bothers me is that companies promote health using the same marketing tactics as Monsanto, Walmart, Etc. Blindly following a group whose sole purpose is to make money (whether it's WhoFo, natural supplement or crystal peddlers...) won't help the situation if people don't know the facts.

Also, along the lines of thalidomide: You're totally right, we do rush things to market to make a buck. In my mind, it's part of our specie's knack creating a more stressful environment for ourselves. Be it poorly regulated drugs, wealth gaps, the dedication we're expected to give to give to our careers (at the sacrifice of relationships and personal lives), etc.

I personally think that many social issues are due to such environmental stresses sending people over the edge. If we were observing an animal population, and noticed certain members of the population were just mass murdering others, we would think that there is a serious environmental issue. But what do we do? Fight over laws to protect our own, and ignore the bigger issues. It's like mass denial or something.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk