Chipotle Has Jumped the Shark

[norseamd]

I don't get freaked out by GMO crops but your statement is incorrect. If the only manipulation was restricted to genes within the same species I doubt there would be nearly as much of an outcry. Where the anti-GMO crowd gets freaked out is the insertion of genetic material from other species into a target.

Actually I care more about how it is done and the resulting specific genetic code than if it came from another species or the pure idea of GMO.

 

[zinfamous]

I'll take that as a no. If it is so obvious surely it's easy to explain it.

monoculture. dutch elm disease.

It's the most classic example there is. It was easily explained.

You refused to accept it.

again: what the fuck more do you want, or do you just refuse to understand?

 

[zinfamous]

Farmer cross breeds plants.

Wonderful!

Scientist cross breeds plants.

Burn the witch!

not at all the same technology, but please play on if you wish.

 

[zinfamous]

1/2 Barbacoa 1/2 Chicken is where its at.

Carnitas is gross! Blehhh! I ain't eatin no pork.

fucking commies!

 

[xBiffx]

Thankyou for your unwavering faith to never thinking outside your ideology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrobacterium_tumefaciens

LOL. You probably never looked any further than wiki, obviously. Agro that is used in a lab is not able to form tumors in plant material. The tumor forming genes are removed. And Agro isn't just used on plants/cells. It is also used with human cells. So I fail to see why its use here would be an issue.

Also, this isn't the only means for inserting DNA. Try looking up "gene gun" and educate yourself. There are plenty of GMOs that exist without the use of Agro.

So again, your previous post was laughable and completely incorrect.

 

[xBiffx]

monoculture. dutch elm disease.

It's the most classic example there is. It was easily explained.

You refused to accept it.

again: what the fuck more do you want, or do you just refuse to understand?

I fail to see how a disease that affects an entire plant species somehow says anything about GMOs and their susceptibility to disease vs. the non GMO.

 

[BUTCH1]

You are missing one vital statistic for your opinion. The masses are idiots. Factor that in and get back to us

Are they?, with the occurrence of food allergies steadily rising can you be sure that GMO product is really safe?. Do you trust a company like Monsanto who once told us agent orange and DDT were safe?. Can you trust the "studies" that are funded by the makers of GMO's themselves as a reliable source?. Just label a GMO as a GMO and let the public decide for themselves weather they are OK with eating them. Oh wait, we can't do that in the US (although it's done everywhere else around the world). Fuck Monsanto and Fuck Bayer, I have NO desire to be their "lab rat", if it suits you, chow down bro.

 

[norseamd]

Also, this isn't the only means for inserting DNA. Try looking up "gene gun" and educate yourself. There are plenty of GMOs that exist without the use of Agro.

I saw that and am not inherently against it but I am wondering about any post-insertion genetical changes and epigenetical changes in response to the physical impacts and destruction? Even something like running changes the genetics and genetical expressions of any human or animal.

 

[Brainonska511]

Are they?, with the occurrence of food allergies steadily rising can you be sure that GMO product is really safe?. Do you trust a company like Monsanto who once told us agent orange and DDT were safe?. Can you trust the "studies" that are funded by the makers of GMO's themselves as a reliable source?. Just label a GMO as a GMO and let the public decide for themselves weather they are OK with eating them. Oh wait, we can't do that in the US (although it's done everywhere else around the world). Fuck Monsanto and Fuck Bayer, I have NO desire to be their "lab rat", if it suits you, chow down bro.

A useless label that imparts no usable information to the consumer, and when asked unprompted, generally isn't high on the list of things consumers want on their foods. The public also wants food with DNA labeled. Shows how well informed they are on these issues.

And long term studies have been done, independently. Saying they haven't doesn't make it so. Check out the GENERA database if you want to see more of the studies done: http://genera.biofortified.org/

 

[zinfamous]

I fail to see how a disease that affects an entire plant species somehow says anything about GMOs and their susceptibility to disease vs. the non GMO.

Huh? Here is the question you asked, and how I responded:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37360168&postcount=105

How could lack of genetic diversity be a negative when trying to protect or worry about protecting a crop from disease? People really need to think about that one.

seriously?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_elm_disease

"Those who refuse to learn from history..."

Count me in the "Not concerned about GMO crops when it comes to health; but very much concerned when we start talking about monoculture."

On top of that, there is every possible reason to not trust a company like Monsanto with this. I have no problem with GMO crops and their potential benefits to humanity--I have very real and very substantiated concerns when we sit back and allow a single entity to establish proprietary control over what could very well be the world's majority supply of nutrition in the near future. This is a non-partisan issue that should concern everyone. For all the bitching anyone here does regarding something as trivial as the two largest cable companies potentially merging and inevitably squeezing out competition; imagine what happens when we allow that to happen with our fucking food.

...this coming from a guy that regularly creates genetically-modified critters as part of his work.

You asked why protecting genetic diversity was important. I was addressing the importance of genetic diversity using the most classic, straightforward, irrefutable example that we have when it comes to the problems with monoculture. This is outright basic stuff in Biology.

Later in this thread, like, today, you tried to argue that farmers crossbreding plants (oh hey! the Dutch Elm!) is no different than GMOs (not true in any way, but...), in support of how safe GMOs are.

Two very wrong comparisons from you. Obviously, cross-breeding isn't always safe, because we know for a fact that this can be very bad, if done stupidly.

Anyway, I largely support GMOs, as I have said repeatedly in this thread. Do try to keep up with your own comments; however I'm honestly not sure what you believe here, or if you even understand any of this issue. You certainly have problems with the science.

fail to trust me all you want. What do I know, right? I only design transgenes, clone them, and insert them into living organisms, screen for germline transmission, and cross them into background as just one of my tasks. Seriously, what the fuck do I know about this stuff?

 

[Darwin333]

I fail to see how a disease that affects an entire plant species somehow says anything about GMOs and their susceptibility to disease vs. the non GMO.

Assume all the crops in the US (or worldwide or whatever) are from the exact same GMO crop, there is no genetic diversity at all. Genetics have a lot to do with how resistant we are to certain disease and how susceptible we are to others. It's why the plague didn't kill everyone and those that survived passed on their plague-resistant genes to their offspring.

It's not anything we need to be all doomsday about right now and I as I said earlier, we already have "backup plans" in place but genetic diversity is a good thing. That's the entire reason why you aren't supposed to fuck your sister.

 

[norseamd]

I fail to see how a disease that affects an entire plant species somehow says anything about GMOs and their susceptibility to disease vs. the non GMO.

So you are telling us GMOs are not actually biological life? This is not about "GMO" being susceptible to conditions and diseases.

 

[norseamd]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiatic_lion

https://www.cbs.umn.edu/research/labs/lionresearch/research/genetics

 

[xBiffx]

Huh? Here is the question you asked, and how I responded:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37360168&postcount=105




You asked why protecting genetic diversity was important. I was addressing the importance of genetic diversity using the most classic, straightforward, irrefutable example that we have when it comes to the problems with monoculture. This is outright basic stuff in Biology.

Later in this thread, like, today, you tried to argue that farmers crossbreding plants (oh hey! the Dutch Elm!) is no different than GMOs (not true in any way, but...), in support of how safe GMOs are.

Two very wrong comparisons from you. Obviously, cross-breeding isn't always safe, because we know for a fact that this can be very bad, if done stupidly.

Anyway, I largely support GMOs, as I have said repeatedly in this thread. Do try to keep up with your own comments; however I'm honestly not sure what you believe here, or if you even understand any of this issue. You certainly have problems with the science.

Now you are ranting and raving. The discussion started by someone saying lack of genetic diversity, again this isn't even the case with GMO's anyways (aside from the gene of interest, nothing is kept the same), somehow increases their susceptibility to disease. That is absolutely false. I don't know how bringing up Dutch Elm isn't showing you that. That disease effects an entire species. Or are you trying to argue that the species has no genetic diversity. Are all elm trees clones now?

If a disease effects and entire species, it doesn't matter if they are clones or not.

 

[xBiffx]

So you are telling us GMOs are not actually biological life? This is not about "GMO" being susceptible to conditions and diseases.

Then why was it brought up?

 

[xBiffx]

Assume all the crops in the US (or worldwide or whatever) are from the exact same GMO crop, there is no genetic diversity at all. Genetics have a lot to do with how resistant we are to certain disease and how susceptible we are to others. It's why the plague didn't kill everyone and those that survived passed on their plague-resistant genes to their offspring.

It's not anything we need to be all doomsday about right now and I as I said earlier, we already have "backup plans" in place but genetic diversity is a good thing. That's the entire reason why you aren't supposed to fuck your sister.

Um, no, the plague didn't kill everyone because not everyone was exposed to it. Even if they had immunity, that's a reason to control genetics, specifically for disease control. Funny, that's exactly what GMO's do.

 

[norseamd]

Then why was it brought up?

The subject was low genetic diversity and moncultures not "GMO" organisms. The fact that many "GMO" organisms might have low genetic diversity or be monocultures is the problem that is being considered right now.

 

[norseamd]

Um, no, the plague didn't kill everyone because not everyone was exposed to it. Even if they had immunity, that's a reason to control genetics, specifically for disease control. Funny, that's exactly what GMO's do.

Actually some did survive. If you need proof of genetic diversity and diseases interacting then go look up blood types as it is the cause of them even existing at all. And not just in humanity but all great apes for millions of years in history.

 

[BUTCH1]

Farmer cross breeds plants.

Wonderful!

Scientist cross breeds plants.

Burn the witch!

No, you don't even understand the methods used, when a farmer creates a "hybrid" it is the result of many years of cross pollination with the same plant for desired traits, with GMO a gene from a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ORGANISM is "spliced" into the plant's seeds for the desired trait. We've been eating "hybrids" for many thousands of years, GMO's for about 15.

 

[norseamd]

No, you don't even understand the methods used, when a farmer creates a "hybrid" it is the result of many years of cross pollination with the same plant for desired traits, with GMO a gene from a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ORGANISM is "spliced" into the plant's seeds for the desired trait. We've been eating "hybrids" for many thousands of years, GMO's for about 15.

Hence the concerns about the genetics overall resulting from editing organisms. The specific genetic code inserted into any organisms does not exist in a vacuum but in interacting with all the rest of the organism genetics. How genetics express themselves and the resulting phenotypes or results is based off how all the genetic code plus all nongenetic influences like epigenetics interact with all the rest of the genetics and nongenetics of the particular organism and even the biological and nonbiological constructs and dynamics of the environment.

 

[BUTCH1]

A useless label that imparts no usable information to the consumer, and when asked unprompted, generally isn't high on the list of things consumers want on their foods. The public also wants food with DNA labeled. Shows how well informed they are on these issues.

And long term studies have been done, independently. Saying they haven't doesn't make it so. Check out the GENERA database if you want to see more of the studies done: http://genera.biofortified.org/

Dude that is YOUR OPINION and let everyone come to their own conclusions about GMO safety, they are not "well informed" because there is no labeling laws in place to let the consumer decide. From previous experiences big pharma, big banking, big oil have collectively fucked us in the ass so many times our corn-holes are the size of sewer-pipes. If you trust Monsanto, chow down bro, I DON'T....

 

[Brainonska511]

No, you don't even understand the methods used, when a farmer creates a "hybrid" it is the result of many years of cross pollination with the same plant for desired traits, with GMO a gene from a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ORGANISM is "spliced" into the plant's seeds for the desired trait. We've been eating "hybrids" for many thousands of years, GMO's for about 15.

Better stop eating sweet potatoes. They contain trans-genes from bacteria in a process that occurred naturally.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/14/1419685112.abstract

 

[BUTCH1]

Hence the concerns about the genetics overall resulting from editing organisms. The specific genetic code inserted into any organisms does not exist in a vacuum but in interacting with all the rest of the organism genetics. How genetics express themselves and the resulting phenotypes or results is based off how all the genetic code plus all nongenetic influences like epigenetics interact with all the rest of the genetics and nongenetics of the particular organism and even the biological and nonbiological constructs and dynamics of the environment.

Thank you, very well said. I just see it as a can of worms that didn't need to be opened and now that it is all we can do is pray for what the future holds.

 

[BUTCH1]

Better stop eating sweet potatoes. They contain trans-genes from bacteria in a process that occurred naturally.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/14/1419685112.abstract

fair enough, but that is ONE species and since we have been eating them for a very, very long time, our bodies have adapted to handling this mutation without issue, but does that mean tossing dozens of other modified species into the mix in a short amount of time will be a good thing??.

 

[MongGrel]

I'd always thought a lot of things have been Genetically modified over time in one way or another.

Isn't that how Cauliflower came about at one time.

I guess that would be organically, but kind of a similar early example.