B
Baccarat
Excepting life for what it is, to me is true freedom
Just came across this on my twitter feed:
Scientists to begin revolutionary CRISPR trial on humans
https://pionic.org/scientists-to-begin-revolutionary-crispr-trial-on-humans
From the horse's mouth:
http://www.monsanto.com/products/pages/monsanto-agricultural-seeds.aspx
http://www.monsanto.com/products/pages/roundup-ready-xtend-crop-system.aspx
This is basically recognizes the fact that increased use of herbicides has caused a surge of resistant weeds, which "require further tools", i.e. more manipulation. Gee, what a surprise, a predictably unpredictable response from nature, which one is almost always guaranteed to get!
Clearly the two issues are directly related whether, or not, non-GMO farmers use herbicides. The introduction of GMO technology has altered the behavior around already existing herbicide-use, for the worse in my humble opinion.
Then, on the insecticide side, you have Bt:
From the GMO Myths and Truths Report
http://earthopensource.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/GMO-Myths-and-Truths-edition2.pdf
Once again, GMO technology is very much related to the concomitant, herbicides, insecticides, etc, where some of the GMO-technology is actually designed around and with these other products in mind, as well as altering behavior on past use, and introducing these products into new areas they have never been in before.
Alan Watts, on, well, not really GMOs, but the complexity of nature and attitudes towards it:
Maybe my new attitude towards GMOs is .... 'Maybe'.
Thanks for this quote and your open mind....we have to be able to dialogue about this stuff and consider a much bigger picture since the tech is rapidly advancing on so many fronts and the "translation" of the science to the consumer isn't very good. For example, take a look at the 480 "events" in the pipeline right now for GE crops:
http://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/eventslist/default.asp
I mean, when most folks think of GE crops, they think "Monsanto" and "Roundup Ready corn, soy, cotton" and rightfully so since RR crops now dominate the acreage these crops are grown on and the products of those crops are everywhere in our food supply...but those crops are just the tip of the iceberg - this tech isn't slowing down. As new tech in being explored through RNAi or CRISPR, it may be that we don't need to heavily rely on transgenics which is what I find most concerning to people I talk to. Then again, I can see a time where transgenics could lead to a situation where there are no more chemical herbicides but instead bio based ones that work through GE bacteria sprayed on soil surfaces!
Last week, a federal judge in California released internal emails from Monsanto that indicated some research on the safety of glyphosate had been written by company employees. A company executive suggested in an email that Monsanto could pay academics to put their names on papers to lower costs and referred to an earlier time when that was done.
Kennedy said those tactics created dubious research that regulators relied on.
"These studies were not done by scientists at all but were ghostwritten in order to fool the public and also the regulatory agency," Kennedy said.
I think you're posting in the wrong thread ;)
I think you're posting in the wrong thread ;)
Picture bacteria and viruses locked in an arms race. For many bacteria, one line of defense against viral infection is a sophisticated RNA-guided "immune system" called CRISPR-Cas. At the center of this system is a surveillance complex that recognizes viral DNA and triggers its destruction. However, viruses can strike back and disable this surveillance complex using "anti-CRISPR" proteins, though no one has figured out exactly how these anti-CRISPRs work—until now.
For the first time, researchers have solved the structure of viral anti-CRISPR proteins attached to a bacterial CRISPR surveillance complex, revealing precisely how viruses incapacitate the bacterial defense system. The research team, co-led by biologist Gabriel C. Lander of The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI), discovered that anti-CRISPR proteins work by locking down CRISPR's ability to identify and attack the viral genome. One anti-CRISPR protein even "mimics" DNA to throw the CRISPR-guided detection machine off its trail.
"It's amazing what these systems do to one-up each other," said Lander. "It all comes back to this evolutionary arms race."
..........
These anti-CRISPR proteins keep the bacteria from recognizing the viral DNA," Lander explained. He called these anti-CRISPR proteins "exceptionally clever" because they appear to have evolved to target a crucial piece of the CRISPR machinery. If bacteria were to mutate this machinery to avoid viral attacks, the CRISPR system would cease to function. "CRISPR systems cannot escape from these anti-CRISPR proteins without completely changing the mechanism they use to recognize DNA," he said.
Probably you could cross post this under critiques of science as currently practiced.
The accusations are backed by a batch of emails, used in court as evidence, which were written by some Monsanto executives, instructing the staff to “ghost-write” articles and then have some “independent scientists” just sign their names under the “study” in order to reduce costs.
We could do with another thread: Critiques of Capitalism and Corporate Greed as Currently Practised.Probably you could cross post this under critiques of science as currently practiced.
From the article
Totally!We could do with another thread: Critiques of Capitalism and Corporate Greed as Currently Practised.
We could do with another thread: Critiques of Capitalism and Corporate Greed as Currently Practised.
Btw, I haven't read Baccarat's link but I'm guessing there's nothing about the actual safety of GMOs in it.
Totally!
Took the words out of my mouth!Seconded.Brian_the_bard said:Totally!