3 ms·

Wow, in-species nitrogen fixation. Shame of the recent EU ruling on CRISPR (considering it GMO). Now we can't grow this in Europe.

• tempestn 8y ago
  Seems fairly clear that a CRISPR-modified plant would indeed be a GMO. What's a real shame is blanket banning GMO crops. I admit a great deal of ignorance in this realm, but from what I understand, a ban on over-use of pesticides (which appear to be the cause of most/all harm attributed to GMOs) would make more sense than a ban on GMOs, which can be for plenty of things besides pesticide tolerance (like nitrogen fixation!)
  • bobcostas55 8y ago
    GMOs and pesticides are complicated. Some GMOs increase the use of pesticides, some decrease it. Overall the effect appears to be negative. http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/8/e1600850 http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/8/e1600850 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21645698.2016.1192754 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21645698.2016.1...
• strainer 8y ago
  Can we have confidence in our ability to protect biological systems from unforeseen and less accounted for effects of increasingly powerful technologies? From the state of things in 2018 - surely this is not a paranoid concern. I am all for research into GMO and controlled applications in medicine and secure problem cases, but find the history of industry and mass agriculture can not yet be trusted with it.