How did the debate against genetically modified crops begin?
I know that this guy took out a gene from a poisonous plant and inserted it into some food and fed it to rats, but I can't find anything about it on the internet!
..anyone got any information on it? Thanks !
- GeniusLv 41 decade agoFavorite Answer
Some widely publicised experiments on rats were amongst the earliest shots in the war over GM foods. This happened in the mid 1990s. Most of these were quickly discredited. The experiment you heard about is probably the one reported by Hungarian Árpád Pusztai, who inserted a natural insecticide into GM potatoes and fed these to rats. He ultimately lost his job over this and was heavily criticised for any number of experimental failings, not least confusion whether the inserted gene had come from Snowdrops (safe for consumption) or Jackbeans (poisonous).
I would suggest that the question of GM foods and human health is largely settled, with the only detectable risk so far being an increase in obesity levels due to high food production levels ;) Millions of people around the world have been eating GM food for 15 years or more and so far not even a correlation has been established to any medical problem. Any health issues could be either very slow to develop or very subtle, but most of the scare stories about organ damage and birth problems have turned out to be just scare stories.
If you want to keep up with the program, most environmental pressure groups are now focussing on threats to the environment as their main weapon against GM crops. These potential threats include loss of biodiversity, release of GM genes into wild plants, and the idea of "Frankenstein" organisms. This is a fertile field for propaganda given current worries over a whole range of issues from climate change to declines in bee numbers.
- Anonymous4 years ago
guy and woman were genetically enhancing organisms because the starting up of agriculture. even as the farmer chooses the seed of one plant over yet another the farmer is practising genetic modification. present day kit and techniques have allowed technology to boost up the technique. With a international inhabitants of more effective than 6 billion, the farming concepts that some condemn are mandatory with a view to feed the 1000's. even as likely some thing is obtainable, refusing to apply what technology makes available because of what might want to take position isn't contained in the perfect pastime of the international. flora that were changed to advance yield must be a positive income to the farmer who's attempting to feed his kinfolk and make a living providing nutrition for others. Getting hysterical about what might want to or might want to no longer take position even as the product is ate up serves no genuine objective. therefore far, i have seen no sound technology to reveal that GMOs are a threat to mankind. lots of the obtainable uncomfortable area outcomes added up via the warring parties of GMOs have not been studied nicely sufficient to absolutely say the GMO is the project. we've seen an enhance contained in the kind of nutrition allergies, yet we haven't been waiting to assert with any degree of reality what's the basis reason contained in the perceived enhance.
- TychaBraheLv 71 decade ago
It wasn't a poisonous plant, it was a bacteria that had developed a resistance to a pesticide. They put the gene that caused this resistance into soybeans, and bred a soybean that you could spray with pesticides without killing the plant.