genetic engineering done right, wrong, and ugly

2.20: web.health/gmo/seeds of deception:

. a local radio station just interviewed the author of
[seeds of deception].book;
he recommended a site responsibletechnology.org .

. googling for more info, I found a video of the author
detailing how his book needed to be written
because (at least at the time)
random genetic insertions were being carelessly used;
ie, done without being tested by anyone with
the consumer's interest genuinely in mind .

. the video champions The Campaign To Label Genetically Engineered Foods,
"(the principal organizer passed away July 3, 2009
after a long bout against cancer .
. The fight for a sane genetically engineered foods policy
continues at such excellent organizations as the
Institute for Responsible Technology.)
. the youtube entry has this intro:
This lecture was created by combining the 6 pieces
posted on YouTube by The Kick Them All Out Project.
This project shows you how we can take back control of Congress
from the special interests that control it now
and put an end to things like GMO foods.
This lecture by Jeffrey Smith, author of Seeds of Deception,
summarizes the contents of his book .

. according to that video,
the reason of being cautious about gmo's
is that gov't is assuming gmo's are safe until proven guilty;
but, the nature of gmo`tech had been
(if it isn't still currently the case)
involving unpredictable changes in a plant's biochemistry
that warrant treating it like a complete alien
in need of quaranteen until multi-generational studies have been done .

. gmo's and biotech do offer the world a lot of potential
(like engineering high-intelligence organisms
that won't poison the planet with over-population);
but, we need labeling that assures testing:
(eg, what strains a food is coming from,
and links to proof of 3rd-party testing for that strain .)
--(. again, that's assuming genetic engineering is still done by
random gene insertions .)

. the problem with the monsanto method
of genetic modification
-- the method (at least at the time?)
that touches the majority of our foods
through the inclusion of the these crops:
soy, corn, sugar beets, and certain veg'oils (cottonseed, canola) --
is that it results in gene shifting,
which can potentially change the meaning or scheduling
of all the genes that got shifted by the insertion .
. it is this random widespread changing
that can result in creation or increased dosages of
allergens, anti-nutrients, carcinogens, and toxins .
. another side-affect of the commercial gmo process
is antibiotic resistant organisms;
because, the economical way to tell
when a gene insertion has taken place,
is to include with the insertion
an antibiotic resistance gene,
so then after applying the gene and then antibiotics,
only the gmo's are left .

fda knew genetic modified bacteria poisoned tryptophan:
. the most shocking assertion by the video
is that fda claimed the tryptophan poisoning
couldn't be due to gmo's
because the responsible manufacturer
was not using gmo's at that point,
but some leaked documents showed that
fda did have a receipt of legal documents
showing earlier use of gmo's by that manufacturer .
. the fda tried to blame it on
the manufacturer using cheaper toxin-catching filters;
but if the fda had admitted to
knowing about gmo's being in use,
the question they would have then been held to is
how are gmo's creating these toxins in need of filtering?
. see the video . see some brief text .

. while fda knew the gmo process had poisoned tryptophan,
they insisted it was due to "(health fraud schemes)
and relegated all tryptophan to prescription only .

. if the tryptophan poisoning hadn't created such bizarre symptoms,
they never would have been attributed to food,
and thereby fallen into the labeling wastebasket
of "(succumbing to the modern high-stress lifestyle) .
. between 1994 and 2001,
when many new gmo products were introduced,
the number of food-relatable illness doubled .

seedsofdeception @ amazon
. one critic of the book suggests a more "(even-handed) alt':
as it
"(deftly swats aside several of the well-known studies
that purport to show risks associated with genetically modified crops
(such as Dr. Pusztai's rat
and John Losey's Monarch butterfly studies)) .
. my response to his critics
is that the authors case is not based
primarily on Dr. Pusztai's rat study
but on simple facts about the effects of
random gene insertions causing unpredictable changes
by shifting nearby genes:
shifting a gene can change its function .
. none of his critics address that concern .

responsibletechnology.org @ facebook

cfs @ facebook
cfs @ twitter
. signed up for newsletters from Center for Food Safety
Cool Foods
Together we will make our voices heard and stand up for True Food!

first gm crop europe liked: Calgene Flavr Savr tomato
United States, Canada, and Argentina together grow 80 percent of all biotech crops

. why did tech nation radio (2010-02-02)
recently razz a solar energy advocate, Rifkin,
about the Flavr Savr tomato? minute 33:
. the context was that "vintage Rifkin" was known for dark predictions,
so it was curious that his newest book is The Empathic civilization .
. and it's not just a matter of empathy,
but the fear of economic failure moving toward green too fast .
. Rifkin said the problem is the older generation
keeping alive the classic American Dream of cowboys
not empathizing globally (eg, natives)
the European Dream envisioned by esp'ly some West Coast Americans
is biosphere conscious
rather, they resist investing in a move from oil to solar .
. she laughed that someone referred to Rifkin as
"(isn't he that guy with the gmo tomato?)
. he gives context to that:
he took on monsanto for using gmo's based on gene splicing
[@] recombinant DNA tech
-- at the time he thought a much better approach to gmo
was marker-assisted selection,
which is just now replacing gene splicing .
. it's not engineering across species lines,
but cross-breeding within a family
. that's a good example for what he's talking about
when cheering on solar over oil:
just because it's the first tech doesn't mean it's the best .

. then he started getting into something that seem confused:
. the 3rd industrial revolution has a good chance
but conservatives will say empathy is collectivism,
liberals will say, individualism is selfishness .
but wouldn't that be a confusion with definitions?
I think he's stretching to not frame it as
a conservative vs liberal thing,
but the "(individualism) that empathy requires
refers to breaking out of the
group identification that is typically fueling religious wars;
eg, when Americans can see their self as
an individual rather than a christian,
that's a prerequisite to seeing the {arab, semite}
as an individual rather than a {muslim, jew} .
. I'm quite sure that real liberals
are all for moving to the solar economy
because, even without global warming being a real danger,
pollution with coal and oil is selfishly living
high at the expense of future generations .
. furthermore, the sooner we invest in it,
the sooner it becomes self-generating:
by using some of today's solar energy
to convert ever more land to solar energy collection,
we can soon have the energy to completely
wipe out water shortages,
and cover the globe with free internet
that empowers the 3rd world countries to
rethink their population growth policies .
. upon the convergence of free energy and robust robotics,
the world will soon have worldwide free robotics
with robots producing robots with free solar energy
-- it's all free .
. but it all depends on free solar energy
-- energy controlled by every home owner,
not aloof oil cartels .

. on the other hand, if global warming is indeed a real threat,
not acting soon will make it more difficult
to use the globe for solar:
tornadoes and hurricanes will often blow away expensive equipment .

. the current green tech is based on cereals fertilized by oil;
whereas, the world would be much more health eating legumes,
and using legumes as fertilizer .
. with huge amounts of free energy to de-salt water,
and to properly cook legumes,
there will be good health, strong teeth, and free food .
. furthermore, cows fed all legumes are healthier source of meat
than those finished with grains .
. they would have less saturated fat
and more omega-3 oils, like fish .
. it's too expensive now only because
cooking beans for livestock
is too energy-intensive until energy is free .]

. he wrote a book condemning gmo's in 1999:
The Biotech Century by Jeremy Rifkin (Paperback - April 5, 1999)

. that book is related to that tomato by
Featured History of FOET Biotech Initiatives: Pure Food Campaign
In 1992, the Pure Food Campaign (PFC) was established,
a coalition of organic farmers and restaurateurs,
consumer and environmental groups, and animal welfare organizations
opposed to the use of genetic engineering in food.
The PFC organized protests and litigation under the banner of
“An International Boycott of Genetically Engineered Foods”,
opposing the use of an engineered form of a bovine growth hormone (rBST) in dairy cows,
and the market entry of the genetically engineered “Flavr-Savr” tomato.
As well, the group demanded mandatory labeling of all genetically modified food products.

types of genetic engineering
. a history of biotech .