I hope when you say "We" you don't include my family and me?
I select my foods from Trader Joe's and Whole Foods, sometimes we buy eggs from home grown chicken. I don't think European "pasture feed" butter and local kefir from whole goat milk are genetically modified. Hemp seed is not. Organic vegetables and whole wheat bread from that stores are not. Uncured pork from that stores is not. We do not use any pasteurized/homogenized milk, refined things like sugar and bread, God forbid from using margarine. I can't understand what 80% do you mean.
Knowing he understood a lot about such things .... I would even say it could have been an editorial error in understanding what he was try to say. I have had huge editorial mistakes myself and stuff cut out etc to fit a page with disasterous results. Esp with J.Valin doing the editing... who seems to know nothing technical. I'll give R.Greene a pass.
-RNM
Last edited:
We do see things rather differently then. I see him citing Stereophile A lists and reviews and sales success more than numbers. Of course, sales and rankings on Stereophile's list are rather numerical so its a matter of degree
Contrast JC's approach to say, Doug Self's - now there's a guy who really seems to love his numbers.
Up to 30% of food labeled "organic" is allowed to be GMO. Only if food labeled as "100% Organic" is it GMO free.
Any check on the internet will tell you we typical Americans consume 80% GMO foods.
But not allowed in Europe and Japan and other countries as unsafe/unhealthy.
Thx, RNM
Selective breeding generally involves mixing genes from the same or closely related species. It has been carried out relatively safely for thousands of years.
GM can involves firing in lumps of DNA from quite unrelated organisms and then seeing what happens. My suspicion is that they don't understand genetics and epigenetics anything like as well as they think they do - in fact epigenetics is a relatively new area of study so until recently they didn't even know there was something else they were ignorant of! However, it is nice of the Americans to provide long-term toxicity and gene mutation trials for us.
There are signs that 'Europe' is trying to soften up the European population for another try at making GM publicly acceptable. I hope they fail, for the reasons outlined above.
GM can involves firing in lumps of DNA from quite unrelated organisms and then seeing what happens. My suspicion is that they don't understand genetics and epigenetics anything like as well as they think they do - in fact epigenetics is a relatively new area of study so until recently they didn't even know there was something else they were ignorant of! However, it is nice of the Americans to provide long-term toxicity and gene mutation trials for us.
There are signs that 'Europe' is trying to soften up the European population for another try at making GM publicly acceptable. I hope they fail, for the reasons outlined above.
That happens naturally, as well. The modern process isn't even vaguely as random as you make it out to be, in fact, the technology to precisely manipulate DNA is astonishingly similar to current electronic technologies.
Even if DNA can be precisely manipulated, there is still the problem of what it actually codes for - which appears to be not as well understood as they think it is. Genetics as a technology may still be at about the state that electronics was in the 1920s - useful but not properly understood. Remember how X-rays and radium were abused at first, before it was realised just how dangerous is ionising radiation.
See this for an account of concerns about the way the EU approves GM-friendly pesticides. The article is written by senior scientists, not anti-science nutters like some anti-GM people.
See this for an account of concerns about the way the EU approves GM-friendly pesticides. The article is written by senior scientists, not anti-science nutters like some anti-GM people.
Dave, you have me scratching my head. The link is to a white paper on pesticides (specifically a common one, used in backyards across the world, so of interest for hazards research). Pesticides as a group have been of great concern since the 1960s; my stint at bioresearch included testing of some pesticides for endocrine-disrupting potential. an active research area. The paper does not actually deal with hazards from consumption of food produced by "GMO" (defined as "modification of organisms using techniques developed after the childhood of the debaters").
- Status
- Not open for further replies.