SH Comments
Reged: Feb 16 2004
Posts: 1056
|
|
This thread is for comments about Genetically Modified Crops: Will They Help or Hurt?, by Dawn Burnell.
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Dawn, thanks for your piece on GM crops. I think you summarized the varied technical, social, economic and intellectual property issues really well.
I've worked in patent law now since 1995 and read a lot about several GM cases; my main concerns, which you touched on, are the spread of inserted genes from the GM crops to surrounding plants (of the same species or otherwise), and also the possible decrease biodiversity. Monsanto, for example, has no incentive to genetically modify more than one kind of corn, and if everybody used that, it would leave the whole corn crop susceptible to disease. So thanks for touching on those issues.
I did also want to offer a slight correction. You mentioned that Fred Sanger and his team were the first to fully sequence the genome of an organism, a bacterium, in 1977. That's not exactly right. Sanger et al. 1977 Nature 265:687-95 described the sequence for not a bacterium, but a bacteriophage, phiX174, which is a small virus that infects bacteria such as E. coli. The first complete genome for coli wasn't until 1997 with Blattner et al. Science 277: 1453-74. The bacteriophage sequence - at 5.4 thousand nucleotides - was a significant achievement, but the coli sequence - at 4.6 million - was monumental.
In any case, thanks for the GM crop article. Very even-handed (which is hard to find on this subject!) and informative.
Frank Wu
|
Dawn B
Regular reader
Reged: Mar 31 2004
Posts: 32
Loc: Bay Area, California
|
|
Frank,
Thanks for the correction. I should have checked my sources more closely and will make sure that any future time this appears I make that correction.
And I heartily appreciate the kudos. Especially from you, but then I'm a fangirl.
Dawn
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
thanks for the great article, dawn. i read and write about these issues in my day job, so i can vouch for your treatment of the material. if anyone out there is looking for a sane, balanced report on the issue of GM foods, this is a good one.
the one and only thing i would quibble over is your treatment of the Roundup issue. glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is a bit more problematic than you portray it here. while glyphosate may not leech into the soil, Roundup's other inert ingredients do, however, and consequently Monsanto got slapped with a fine in NY for claiming Roundup was biodegradable. worse, exposure to glyphosate has been linked to non-hodgkins lymphoma by a peer-reviewed study out of sweden, (Journal of American Cancer Society, late nineties, i think). when Roundup Ready seeds of commodity mono-crops like soybeans are deemed "safe" by the FDA or EPA, these agencies aren't taking into account the corrollary of industrial-level use, human handling, and mishandling of glyphosate. with increased incidences of cancer in rural farming communities, that's a problem.
just my two cents from the organic fringe,
barth anderson
|
Dawn B
Regular reader
Reged: Mar 31 2004
Posts: 32
Loc: Bay Area, California
|
|
Barth,
Thank you very much for the additional information. It did not come out in my research and I appreciate all insights and corrections to my work. Helps me learn. And I'm always willing to learn. Glad you liked the article.
Dawn
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
like i said, it's a quibbling comment on a very good article.
-b.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
