6 ms·

GM Wheat found in Oregon 10 years after abandoned by Monsanto

48 points by Qworg 13y ago

arjn 13y ago
"Life will find a way"
janlukacs 13y ago
this is why everyone needs to wake up and stop buying GMO foods.
StavrosK 13y ago
Does anyone notice there's a step missing between "GM wheat found" and "we need to be concerned about it", namely "GM wheat is a cause for concern because <X>"?
- contingencies 13y ago
  Because it destroys the natural heterogeny of the wild gene pool, depriving us of hardier crops and enslaving us to a corporation whose sole purpose for being is profit-taking, with a short term frame of reference and the minimum of environmental or social concern?
  - StavrosK 13y ago
    All this because they found a few plants in a field? Wow.
    - Ygg2 13y ago
      Keep in mind that genetically modified wheat is different from regular wheat for the DNA that was added to GM kind. When non-GM and GM wheat combine the results can differ. They can go from a fully functional cross breed wheat or more often (based on documentaries at least) a non-functional wheat plant (leaves growing from where the seed should be, etc), kinda like you breed horse and a donkey and get a mule (it can't reproduce or bear fruit). If it is cross bread with GM wheat it's probably patented by law. If it is non functional it is a direct loss to the farmer. It's really a lose-lose situation. NOTE: there is a chance that GM/non-GM hybrid won't contain any patented genes or be hampered in any way. However in large number of wheat plants you'll notice larger degree of mutants.
  - viraptor 13y ago
    "Because it destroys the natural heterogeny of the wild gene pool" I'm not sure I understand this. By adding a plant with different properties and specific trait you're interested in, you add to the heterogeny of the wild gene pool, not destroy it. It's not like majority of wheat was suddenly replaced with that one ideally cloned plant. If it survives to the next year, it will just mix even more.
  - jerf 13y ago
    That's not because of genetic modification, that's because of commercial farming practices, which really aren't related. We've done a fine job of homogenizing bananas without any genetic twiddling, for instance. I agree with you that it's a concern, though I'm more concerned by the fact entire crops and indeed potentially entire foods can be wiped out by one pathogen more than worrying about genetic diversity abstractly.
    - contingencies 13y ago
      > ... which really aren't related On the contrary, the GM industry is based upon industrial farming. They are the same environmentally irresponsible, energy-consuming, short-minded, hugely profitable beast.
- VLM 13y ago
  That GM wheat is someones intellectual property and there's extensive case law of farmers having their lives destroyed by being declared the equivalent of "software pirates". Its almost an exact analogy right down to small businesses being shaken down for protection money. This is not theoretical or sci fi but established case law and precedent. Right now there could be an Ag website with a bunch of wheat farmers trying to figure out why anyone cares about a bunch of SCO source code discovered to be contaminating the linux kernel source. The nightmare scenario isn't even one farmer having his life and livelihood destroyed, but everyone nearby especially downwind is probably shaking in their boots, or should be. Also using plague language, we have discovered the first patient, but we have not isolated patient zero yet. This may (or may not) be a much bigger contamination.
  - StavrosK 13y ago
    Surely, by discovering Monsanto wheat in the wild, their argument here weakens. Their original argument was that, since their wheat cannot reproduce, it must have been planted by the farmer. And, since the farmer was spraying it with RoundUp, which only Monsanto wheat is resistant to, it's probable that the farmer knew that he was infringing on Monsanto's IP (let's leave the discussion about how ridiculous patenting wheat is for another time). If a mutant Monsanto strain is discovered that can reproduce, everyone can claim they might unknowingly be using that, and Monsanto won't have a case.
    - darkarmani 13y ago
      Does it matter if you know that you have been infringing a patent? People get software patents enforced on them all of the time that didn't know the algorithm was patented.
      - StavrosK 13y ago
        Wikipedia lists a few cases: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#As_plaintiff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#As_plaintiff
- stonemetal 13y ago
  If you are a farmer the sue happy Monsanto, or the fact that foreign nations stopped wheat imports means the concerned step is filled in quite nicely. For the general populace GM fear maybe.
- Ygg2 13y ago
  Because they are patented property?
eksith 13y ago
Here's a classic case of Caution Before Proliferation. If the thing that you make can grow and multiply, whether it's engineered in DNA or C, a responsible creator has an obligation to ensure the end result can be rendered safe and inactive with reasonable care. When there are so many middle-men in the distribution, from truckers to the actual farmer involved, this reasonable care becomes harder and harder. Every link is a potential failure point in the chain of security.
- kiba 13y ago
  Evolution says that GM wheat in the wild will be weeded out in the process of natural selection, because GM wheat are made to grow big and resists certain pesticide, which is costly uses of its resources in a wild environment. Instead of growing big and juicy, maybe it needs to compete against other plants. In other words, GM wheats and plants varieties need humans to proliferate.
  - Ygg2 13y ago
    True, however selection pressures don't always prevent junk DNA from spreading (in terms of GM, the junk DNA could be the patented DNA spreading).
- StavrosK 13y ago
  But it's safe already! The only thing that's different is that you can spray it with RoundUp and it won't die. What's the problem?
  - eksith 13y ago
    But it's safe already! Extraordinary claims etc... etc... You make this assertion based on what data? Was it studied with the same scrutiny of the FDA? Because I can recall at least 4 medicines off the top of my head approved by the FDA that were recalled in the last few years for causing very serious unforeseen side-effects. Now those are drugs, things we (presumably) have an option of not taking. What about things that grow on their own and we don't have an option of saying no to? I.E. Food?
yoster 13y ago
A migrating bird could have eaten a few seeds and in the course of traveling long distances, pooped it out. This happens all the time with migrating birds.
polyfractal 13y ago
As a biologist, the furor over GM plants drives me crazy. Crazy! Why? We've been genetically modifying plants for hundreds of years. Mendel himself fucked around with plant genetics - crossing plants is nothing more than fiddling with genetics. People were messing with genetics hundreds - thousands - of years before Mendel and they just didn't realize it. Hell, people have been messing with the genetics of animals for thousands of years, selectively breeding dogs, horses, goats, cows. Just because we are able to modify genetics precisely doesn't mean it is any different. If anything, we should have fewer problems (e.g. how many german shepherds have hip dysplasia because of inbreeding?) Edit: Don't have time to respond to all the replies, but there are some good arguments there. I acknowledge that this post was over the top - but simply because all the press one sees about GM = evil. Things are never black and white.
- arbuge 13y ago
  Quite so. I highly doubt the people of Japan are better off thanks to their country suspending wheat shipments from Oregon...
  - VLM 13y ago
    If you assume that the whole world benefits if no one uses GM plants, which is almost universally true except for a handful of crooks who would gain, then if Japan is part of the world, they directly benefit from participating in a boycott. This is an example of the classic freeloader problem where people too lazy to participate in the boycott will be rewarded just as much as the more ethical people who do participate. More people would understand why GM plants are evil if they were more properly called patented copyrighted licensed intellectual property, which happens to be in the form of living plants. Kind of like the renaming games played around certain ethnic groups. Another classic example of using name games to influence opinion is "He's not anti-abortion, he's pro-life", that kind of garbage. You can also get a slavery vibe going. If you modify 0.001% of the wheat genome, the multinational mega corp literally owns that living thing. So if you genetically modified my grandma to cure her glaucoma using corporate intellectual property, then they'd own a human being, right? Maybe a more direct example would be a genetically engineered fertility treatment would clearly mean the baby would be the owned property slave of the corporation who invented the treatment, right? After all, thats the decision we've made with wheat...
toolslive 13y ago
why don't they ask the NSA how this happened?
quadrangle 13y ago
Horrible news. You know, M$ argues wrongly that the GPL is viral, but with GMO we have much more like viral, actually reproduces itself without anyone choosing to allow it — and it is PROPRIETARY. GMO as a technology is not the problem. The problem is that it is PROPRIETARY life. That is insane. And like proprietary software, it isn't inherently malicious, but it MIGHT be! We need to stop all GMO patenting. That's the first step.

48 points by Qworg 13y ago

arjn 13y ago

"Life will find a way"

janlukacs 13y ago

this is why everyone needs to wake up and stop buying GMO foods.

StavrosK 13y ago

Does anyone notice there's a step missing between "GM wheat found" and "we need to be concerned about it", namely "GM wheat is a cause for concern because <X>"?

contingencies 13y ago
Because it destroys the natural heterogeny of the wild gene pool, depriving us of hardier crops and enslaving us to a corporation whose sole purpose for being is profit-taking, with a short term frame of reference and the minimum of environmental or social concern?
- StavrosK 13y ago
  All this because they found a few plants in a field? Wow.
  - Ygg2 13y ago
    Keep in mind that genetically modified wheat is different from regular wheat for the DNA that was added to GM kind. When non-GM and GM wheat combine the results can differ. They can go from a fully functional cross breed wheat or more often (based on documentaries at least) a non-functional wheat plant (leaves growing from where the seed should be, etc), kinda like you breed horse and a donkey and get a mule (it can't reproduce or bear fruit). If it is cross bread with GM wheat it's probably patented by law. If it is non functional it is a direct loss to the farmer. It's really a lose-lose situation. NOTE: there is a chance that GM/non-GM hybrid won't contain any patented genes or be hampered in any way. However in large number of wheat plants you'll notice larger degree of mutants.
- viraptor 13y ago
  "Because it destroys the natural heterogeny of the wild gene pool" I'm not sure I understand this. By adding a plant with different properties and specific trait you're interested in, you add to the heterogeny of the wild gene pool, not destroy it. It's not like majority of wheat was suddenly replaced with that one ideally cloned plant. If it survives to the next year, it will just mix even more.
- jerf 13y ago
  That's not because of genetic modification, that's because of commercial farming practices, which really aren't related. We've done a fine job of homogenizing bananas without any genetic twiddling, for instance. I agree with you that it's a concern, though I'm more concerned by the fact entire crops and indeed potentially entire foods can be wiped out by one pathogen more than worrying about genetic diversity abstractly.
  - contingencies 13y ago
    > ... which really aren't related On the contrary, the GM industry is based upon industrial farming. They are the same environmentally irresponsible, energy-consuming, short-minded, hugely profitable beast.
VLM 13y ago
That GM wheat is someones intellectual property and there's extensive case law of farmers having their lives destroyed by being declared the equivalent of "software pirates". Its almost an exact analogy right down to small businesses being shaken down for protection money. This is not theoretical or sci fi but established case law and precedent. Right now there could be an Ag website with a bunch of wheat farmers trying to figure out why anyone cares about a bunch of SCO source code discovered to be contaminating the linux kernel source. The nightmare scenario isn't even one farmer having his life and livelihood destroyed, but everyone nearby especially downwind is probably shaking in their boots, or should be. Also using plague language, we have discovered the first patient, but we have not isolated patient zero yet. This may (or may not) be a much bigger contamination.
- StavrosK 13y ago
  Surely, by discovering Monsanto wheat in the wild, their argument here weakens. Their original argument was that, since their wheat cannot reproduce, it must have been planted by the farmer. And, since the farmer was spraying it with RoundUp, which only Monsanto wheat is resistant to, it's probable that the farmer knew that he was infringing on Monsanto's IP (let's leave the discussion about how ridiculous patenting wheat is for another time). If a mutant Monsanto strain is discovered that can reproduce, everyone can claim they might unknowingly be using that, and Monsanto won't have a case.
  - darkarmani 13y ago
    Does it matter if you know that you have been infringing a patent? People get software patents enforced on them all of the time that didn't know the algorithm was patented.
    - StavrosK 13y ago
      Wikipedia lists a few cases: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#As_plaintiff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#As_plaintiff
stonemetal 13y ago
If you are a farmer the sue happy Monsanto, or the fact that foreign nations stopped wheat imports means the concerned step is filled in quite nicely. For the general populace GM fear maybe.
Ygg2 13y ago
Because they are patented property?

eksith 13y ago

Here's a classic case of Caution Before Proliferation. If the thing that you make can grow and multiply, whether it's engineered in DNA or C, a responsible creator has an obligation to ensure the end result can be rendered safe and inactive with reasonable care. When there are so many middle-men in the distribution, from truckers to the actual farmer involved, this reasonable care becomes harder and harder. Every link is a potential failure point in the chain of security.

kiba 13y ago
Evolution says that GM wheat in the wild will be weeded out in the process of natural selection, because GM wheat are made to grow big and resists certain pesticide, which is costly uses of its resources in a wild environment. Instead of growing big and juicy, maybe it needs to compete against other plants. In other words, GM wheats and plants varieties need humans to proliferate.
- Ygg2 13y ago
  True, however selection pressures don't always prevent junk DNA from spreading (in terms of GM, the junk DNA could be the patented DNA spreading).
StavrosK 13y ago
But it's safe already! The only thing that's different is that you can spray it with RoundUp and it won't die. What's the problem?
- eksith 13y ago
  But it's safe already! Extraordinary claims etc... etc... You make this assertion based on what data? Was it studied with the same scrutiny of the FDA? Because I can recall at least 4 medicines off the top of my head approved by the FDA that were recalled in the last few years for causing very serious unforeseen side-effects. Now those are drugs, things we (presumably) have an option of not taking. What about things that grow on their own and we don't have an option of saying no to? I.E. Food?

yoster 13y ago

A migrating bird could have eaten a few seeds and in the course of traveling long distances, pooped it out. This happens all the time with migrating birds.

polyfractal 13y ago

As a biologist, the furor over GM plants drives me crazy. Crazy! Why? We've been genetically modifying plants for hundreds of years. Mendel himself fucked around with plant genetics - crossing plants is nothing more than fiddling with genetics. People were messing with genetics hundreds - thousands - of years before Mendel and they just didn't realize it. Hell, people have been messing with the genetics of animals for thousands of years, selectively breeding dogs, horses, goats, cows. Just because we are able to modify genetics precisely doesn't mean it is any different. If anything, we should have fewer problems (e.g. how many german shepherds have hip dysplasia because of inbreeding?) Edit: Don't have time to respond to all the replies, but there are some good arguments there. I acknowledge that this post was over the top - but simply because all the press one sees about GM = evil. Things are never black and white.

arbuge 13y ago
Quite so. I highly doubt the people of Japan are better off thanks to their country suspending wheat shipments from Oregon...
- VLM 13y ago
  If you assume that the whole world benefits if no one uses GM plants, which is almost universally true except for a handful of crooks who would gain, then if Japan is part of the world, they directly benefit from participating in a boycott. This is an example of the classic freeloader problem where people too lazy to participate in the boycott will be rewarded just as much as the more ethical people who do participate. More people would understand why GM plants are evil if they were more properly called patented copyrighted licensed intellectual property, which happens to be in the form of living plants. Kind of like the renaming games played around certain ethnic groups. Another classic example of using name games to influence opinion is "He's not anti-abortion, he's pro-life", that kind of garbage. You can also get a slavery vibe going. If you modify 0.001% of the wheat genome, the multinational mega corp literally owns that living thing. So if you genetically modified my grandma to cure her glaucoma using corporate intellectual property, then they'd own a human being, right? Maybe a more direct example would be a genetically engineered fertility treatment would clearly mean the baby would be the owned property slave of the corporation who invented the treatment, right? After all, thats the decision we've made with wheat...

toolslive 13y ago

why don't they ask the NSA how this happened?

quadrangle 13y ago

Horrible news. You know, M$ argues wrongly that the GPL is viral, but with GMO we have much more like viral, actually reproduces itself without anyone choosing to allow it — and it is PROPRIETARY. GMO as a technology is not the problem. The problem is that it is PROPRIETARY life. That is insane. And like proprietary software, it isn't inherently malicious, but it MIGHT be! We need to stop all GMO patenting. That's the first step.