South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

December 09, 2019, 19:41:43 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Please read the forum rules before posting.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

GMO

 (Read 8251 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
GMO
« on: April 29, 2013, 15:58:43 PM »

A facebook friend posted this. Am I right in calling BS? The caption is "Even squirrels don't GM corn".
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2013, 16:45:50 PM »

Well, it's a picture posted on the web. Let us know when the peer-reviewed study has been published.  Grin

Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2013, 18:36:35 PM »

It’s corny pop-aganda.  The much larger size of the “organic” cob is a dead give away.

The implication is that animals can distinguish the GMO maize from the “organic” maize.  I’m not aware of any credible study having ever shown them to have this ability, and there are dozens of ways this picture could have come about, the least likely being through what it suggests.

'Luthon64
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2467


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2013, 22:02:18 PM »

I attended last year's rose show near Kirkwood en tow. While waiting for the rest of the troop to wrap up their floribundal olfactions, I sat in the shade of the lecturing gazebo listening to a few of the speakers. Sure as rain, one of the presenters had a go at GM crops. As far as I could make out, he said that, due to the adverse effects of genetically modified plants (improved pest resistance etc. etc.) there are now so few insects available as pollen vectors that many farmers must rely on mobile apiaries to get their plants knocked up. Reportedly, a few entrepreneurial beekeepers have branched their honey farming businesses into servicing desperate plantations. At night, the honey farmer loads some of his hives onto a bakkie and buzzes off to one of his bug-starved customers. Come morning, the bees do their thing, the flowers are pollinated, and the beekeeper leaves with a fat cheque in the cubby-hole of his Isuzu.

Stupidly, I forgot to ask if special GM bees are required for this feat.

Rigil
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2013, 04:25:42 AM »

To the best of my knowledge, bee keepers have been providing pollination services for ages, since long before GM crops.

These people are all barking up the wrong tree. The problems isn't GM crops, but the business practices of companies like Monsanto, and those are easily fixed because you don't need to make new legislation, you need but to repeal some of the existing legislation. :-)

Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2467


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2013, 07:36:13 AM »

To the best of my knowledge, bee keepers have been providing pollination services for ages, since long before GM crops.

Very likely, Brian. I guess conspiracy theory will suck in anything to make two plus two seem like five.

Considering the insipid grass-like flowers and their location on the plant body, I suspect that maize rely on wind pollination, and not so much insects? Not sure that any bee worth her salt will give those long floppy stamens a second look.

Rigil
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2013, 10:08:06 AM »

She (my Facebook friend) referred me to this: http://www.ijbs.com/v05p0706.htm Is this a reputable paper? How do I answer her?
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2013, 12:04:50 PM »

What the photos of the mealies suggest and what the research paper concludes are worlds apart.  A simplistic distinction between GM and “organic” foods, lumping them all into two vague groups, is exactly what the research paper opposes: “Patho-physiological profiles are unique for each GM crop/food, underlining the necessity for a case-by-case evaluation of their safety, as is largely admitted and agreed by regulators. It is not possible to make comments concerning any general, similar subchronic toxic effect for all GM foods.”

Crop yields can be significantly increased through genetic modification with obvious benefit for food production.  It may result in saving water and the reduced use of pesticides.  It would therefore be unwise the reject all GM foods out of hand.

There are legitimate concerns regarding the safety and long terms effects of certain GM foods, both on consumers and on biodiversity, that require further research.
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2013, 12:22:35 PM »

Thanks Hermes. I used your above (hope it is OK) replay as an answer. She's an old skydiving friend that became a real tree-hugger.
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2013, 12:41:21 PM »

You're welcome.
Warn her that combining skydiving and tree-hugging might result in some organic modifications.
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2013, 14:09:07 PM »

Considering the insipid grass-like flowers and their location on the plant body, I suspect that maize rely on wind pollination, and not so much insects?

Yes, indeed. Though bees do feed pollen to their larvae, and wind pollinated plants produce a lot of pollen. I am not sure whether bees collect such pollen. Never thought about it before, and it is, to my mind, a more interesting question than all the panic about GMOs. :-)

Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2013, 14:30:47 PM »

Whoa there... I thought it's been long held that the decline in bee populations was to blame, which itself has been blamed on the introduction of African bees in Europe and the America's, and pesticides.

Heck, just this week the EU is moving to ban certain pesticides in an attempt and bring back the bees.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3757


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2013, 14:42:01 PM »

Further to the IJBS GM corn study, there is also the small matter of the authors stating clearly that the hepatorenal and other physiological toxicities they noted could not be ruled out as arising from pesticides (glyphosate, AMPA, and modified Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb1 proteins) that were used during cultivation of the maize.  (Pesticides are still applied to many GM crops.)  Moreover, the authors conclude that their study needs to be replicated with sharper focus and longer trials across more animal species.

The contention that GM foods are harmful is supported neither convincingly nor generically by this study.

'Luthon64
Logged
Lurkie
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +3/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


« Reply #13 on: May 05, 2013, 21:30:59 PM »

Interesting discussion. I only have a naive appreciation of GM foods and my main concern was that the seeds produced are either sterile or subject to all sorts of contracts with the suppliers of the seeds, which makes farmers dependent on the suppliers.

That paper is interesting too. Didn't realise that GM plants are engineered to kill insects and other plants systemically - thought the GM part was to make the mealie pips bigger.

And even more interesting. The study mentions that the crops are still being sprayed with insecticides/herbicides despite the plants being modified to deal with such invasions... Hmmm. These GM guys need to do a proper job because they obviously ain't working. And the authors of that paper need to find a better source of pure GM, unsprayed food to use for their study.
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2015, 10:09:35 AM »

Rebutr's got no rebut on this yet http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/02/06/roundup-ready-gm-crops-leave-monarch-butterflies-close-extinction/#.VQkxGo6Ucpp. Anybody here got anything on it? I got into a "debate" again with my tree hugging friend. Tongue
Logged
Hermes
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +18/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2015, 16:32:37 PM »

The impact of GM crops on the monarch butterfly has drawn attention since a 1999 paper in Nature on the topic.  It is not related to herbicide-resistance as claimed in your article, but rather to insecticide-resistance.  By killing the caterpillars that attack the plant, you would reduce the resulting butterfly population.  The extent to which these butterflies are threatened in consequence, is in dispute.  It may be argued that human agriculture caused an increase in these populations in the first place.

http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/03/25/monsanto-v-monarch-butterflies/    
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2015, 16:38:20 PM »

May we take a side step for a moment and gawk at the human-ness of all of this.

We engineered INSECTicides, and GMO plants protect themselves against INSECTS, and now people are upset that the result is a reduction in INSECTS, the very thing we were trying to reduce in the first place.
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 18, 2015, 16:47:38 PM »

The impact of GM crops on the monarch butterfly has drawn attention since a 1999 paper in Nature on the topic.  It is not related to herbicide-resistance as claimed in your article, but rather to insecticide-resistance.  By killing the caterpillars that attack the plant, you would reduce the resulting butterfly population.  The extent to which these butterflies are threatened in consequence, is in dispute.  It may be argued that human agriculture caused an increase in these populations in the first place.

http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/03/25/monsanto-v-monarch-butterflies/    

Thanks
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 18, 2015, 17:01:50 PM »

You can't win against the tree huggers. Roundup is not so bad for the environment. Without it (in my farming days) you had to spray a grass herbicide, followed a few weeks later by a broad-leaved poison. Sometimes we had to follow that with 2,4-D. Agent Orange, the Vietnam poison, was based on this I believe. In my travels, I can even smell it nowadays sometimes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange It is not a nice chemical.
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 18, 2015, 17:19:36 PM »

Ivo Vegter's got a thought-provoking article in Daily Maverick http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-03-17-when-environmentalism-becomes-a-crime-against-humanity/#.VQmW5o6Ucpo
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2016, 11:43:00 AM »

Are the anti-GMO crowd going to jump on this as well? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/business/new-weapon-to-fight-zika-the-mosquito.html?_r=0
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2016, 05:45:34 AM »



I would classify mosquitoes under the heading of "little things that irk us so." I wonder what, if any, the environmental impact would be if we wiped them out completely.
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2016, 09:10:06 AM »

Humans will sleep better, meaning they'll wake up refreshed and not have to rush to work because they're late. This will result in a drop in CO₂. Why yes a mosquito did keep me up until 2 am, why do you ask?
Logged
Tweefo
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1551



WWW
« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2016, 11:12:37 AM »



I would classify mosquitoes under the heading of "little things that irk us so." I wonder what, if any, the environmental impact would be if we wiped them out completely.

There is nothing that I am aware of that only eat these pesky things. I am also not aware of anything, apart from a few viruses that we can do without, that rely on them to survive. Like with polio, we can do without them.
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2016, 11:31:51 AM »

*Ahem*, well... actually.... at a previous place of employ there used to be frequent trips by all of us all around Africa. We soon came to use "mosquito" as an in-term to not only refer to the invertebrates that descend upon you when you exit any building and can usually kill you with some disease or another, but we'd also use it for the "professional company" that would descend upon you, cluster around, and follow you wherever possible/legal, once again infected with who knows what, making irritating noises, there to try to suck your wallet dry, and no matter how many you dispatch there always seem to be more.

Killing them all off may be a going a tad far. Smiley

(Everything I say is maybe not PC, but it's frikkin true)
Logged
brianvds
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +13/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1866



WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2016, 12:29:23 PM »

Humans will sleep better, meaning they'll wake up refreshed and not have to rush to work because they're late. This will result in a drop in CO₂. Why yes a mosquito did keep me up until 2 am, why do you ask?

My cat did the same to me. I recently moved house, so now she has to stay indoors for a week or three. Which means she yowls absolutely non-stop, from around 11 pm to around 3 pm, and her staff gets no sleep. But I wouldn't suggest we wipe out cats. :-)

As far as I know, mosquitoes form part of the diet of bats. But they're so small one has to wonder whether bats really need them.
Logged
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 2467


Three men make a tiger.


« Reply #26 on: February 03, 2016, 12:45:01 PM »

There is nothing that I am aware of that only eat these pesky things.
In its larval form, the mosquito is an important staple of many small fishes (the unusual plural has the biological implication of denoting more than one species of fish). The mosquitofish is an excellent but disappointingly obvious example. The single obese goldfish that I've recovered from a virtually enclosed rainwater tank is a more surprising but less typical example.

Rigil
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3128



« Reply #27 on: February 03, 2016, 13:12:47 PM »

This just means we need to GM some syrup-sucking mosquitos.

EDIT: That have a natural fear of humans.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 1.962 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page June 02, 2019, 10:21:21 AM
Privacy Policy