4 ms·
Good, let's rely on random genetic mutation instead. Because we know that only produces healthy organisms that are safe to eat. (/sarcasm)
by bane 12y ago
Good, let's rely on random genetic mutation instead. Because we know that only produces healthy organisms that are safe to eat.
(/sarcasm)
- 13years 12y agoPeople don't think random mutations are good either. Ironically, though, we may get more of that due to push back against GMOs. http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-dot-mutant-crop-developers-in-global-seed-market http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-11-21/monsanto-vs-... Yet to be fair, GMOs still produce changes that aren't possible through mutagenesis. Also GMOs are not without their own random mutations since the process of transgene insertions often produce their own random set of side effect changes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559911/
- revelation 12y agoSelective breeding, the ancient form of GMO, which these people interestingly don't seem to object to, uses inbreeding and other techniques that are in fact known to produce unhealthy organisms.
- federico3 12y agoBecause breeding is thousands of times slower at producing mutations and it gives researchers (and society in general) enough time to assess the health effects of a crop. In 2015 we are still learning about crops that has been around for centuries.
- protomyth 12y agoThe right has Climate Change and the left has GMOs with the extremes of both having very different reasons to reject vaccines. Humans are not scientific animals.