Beverly Spicer

19 Responses to “Genetically modified foods”

1. 1 sornord Jul 1st, 2007 at 5:59 am

   Check out Penn & Teller’s Bullshit episode on the same subject for a more realistic take on genetically modified foods: Episode Number 11, Season 1, “Eat This!”

2. 2 Beverly Spicer Jul 1st, 2007 at 12:01 pm

   I tried to find the Penn & Teller episode cited by sornord, but it is no longer available on YouTube, although others are. Google Video doesn’t have it either, and I was unable to find a video copy of it on the Web. However, I understand that it can be found in a collected video that can be rented. I understand it is critical of the anti-GMO groups, using the argument that we have no right to tell starving people in other countries what they cannot eat. I do not know how this squares with disallowing them to own their own seeds and requiring them to buy them from Monsanto, but I think it is worth checking out. As always, it seems to me at the very least people should be able to know when they are or are not eating genetically manipulated foods.

3. 3 Deborah Byrd Jul 1st, 2007 at 6:32 pm

   I can recall being at a meeting with one of the scientists who did the original research required to create genetically modified foods. She commented that, as they were doing this research, the science team believed with all their hearts that they were doing something that could help the world, not harm it. They thought of feeding the hungry, etc. They didn’t expect it to become such a big issue for people.

   You just never know how people will react to things.

   But I do believe that the scientists who did this work early on had all good intentions and that, in today’s world, there is a place for GM crops. We just need to learn how to use this new tool.

   Of course, the labeling, the testing, the regulation would all be part of that …

   Deborah

4. 4 Sharon Jul 2nd, 2007 at 9:40 am

   Beyond the sublime greed of the GMO business plan and legal thuggery practiced to protect the patents on the seeds there are other issues concerning human health. GMO is a big experiment!!! Without giving a nod to anyone’s right to know nor even modest speculation about the potential impact to human physiology, we are lead forward as a nation blindfolded and eating what other countries shun. One of the primary properties sought after in genetic modification is shelf storage. This is gained by supressing the mechanism of enzymes naturally present in food. When you eat a food which cannot digest itself within the body, your system is called upon to divert your own population of enzymes (aka hormones etc) from other tasks vital to your well bing and to expend them just getting these Franenfoods to pass through the system.
   Give pause to the hope that even your expensive organic food is helping you..a GMO corn patch can spread its pollen on the wind over miles!!!!! YIKES!

5. 5 Sharon Jul 2nd, 2007 at 9:56 pm

   Ok I have more to say, and it’s making me restless–so I’ll go forward to give you more “food for thought”
   For the past few years I’ve been studying electrodermal screening, a
   way of looking at stress in the body’s energetic systems by
   measuring variations galvanic skin response in circuit to a computer
   data base of all sorts of substances. It can be a very precise way
   of viewing what stresses our energetic systems, to what extent and
   at what levels and also what supports them. It is a common for
   experienced practitioners in the classes I’ve taken to note that
   people are showing measurable, negative energetic stress responses
   to GMO food. As this energetic stress progresses many are so
   reactive that they can no longer consume foods they used to enjoy
   without problems–corn is a huge culprit here. And, of course GMO
   corn is in many processed foods and in this way contributing to
   diminished health.
   Further news from the front is a scary calculation that I cannot
   recall for citation or quite quote correctly. However, it seems
   that GMO Salmon is preferred for breeding among the wild
   populations–likely because they are larger. Someone did a little
   calculation in regards to the potential escape of farmed GMO Salmon
   that predicted the accidental release of X Salmon would lead to the
   total elimination of natural Salmon within Y generations because of
   this preference. I recall the numbers to be in the range of 80
   escapees and 20 generations. So, as with the corn and so much
   else–if this goes much further much of our natural food will be
   contaminated with scrambled genetics.
   Finally, at this point it has been demonstrated that the foreign
   genetics of GMO food are beginning to appear in the bacteria which
   populate our gut. These bacteria in their natural function are happy
   little chemical factories and they help digest our food. So, the
   trans species aspect of genetic pollution is especially disturbing
   since we rely on these internal bacterial populations for our well
   being.

6. 6 Beverly Spicer Jul 2nd, 2007 at 10:13 pm

   Very interesting additions to this thread! Thank you Sharon for some enlightening information that definitely gives us more food for thought, no pun intended. Every biologist I know — and I have been one myself — starts research with good intentions. Thanks to Deborah for pointing this out. The ethics of what is eventually done with developments in science has been a long-standing debate in science and in society in general. We always hope for the best in advances and the highest of standards. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Like pharmaceuticals, it could be that GMO foods are being released too soon into general use, that is, before we know the unintended side effects. Let’s hope that discussions such as these serve to make the public more aware, and in so doing, those who will seek legislation to release, restrict or regulate use will be well informed.

7. 7 beth Jul 3rd, 2007 at 11:33 am

   just to paint a picture for those who don’t live in austin (where earth and sky is based), wheatsville co-op is a cooprative supermarket in the heart of the city, right near the university of texas campus.

   though our dear town is extremely liberal and open-minded, wheatsville is — surprisingly — the only food co-op that i know of here. and maybe that’s a good thing because, despite the presence of multiple whole foods in the area, it’s still managed to hold its own (and earn profit).

   thank goodness, because amazing things happen when food and liberal thinkers and slightly outside-the-box economics meet; it’s no accident that a butt-kicking nun would be hanging around the parking lot.

   another incredible co-op that promotes local sustainable food growth and eschews GMO crops: http://foodcoop.com/

   only in new york.

8. 8 George Curtis Jul 4th, 2007 at 2:42 pm

   Is there a claim in these messages that GMO plant’s seeds will not propagate, and so must be bought from a dealer? Have you tried planting a few?

   GM’d papayas, done by UH and other ag people, have saved much of our papaya crop from a spreading virus, about 10 years ago. The “new” fruits are just fine. Have been eating them for years. Four for a dollar at the farmar’s markets on this island.

9. 9 Sharon Jul 5th, 2007 at 12:26 am

   No George,
   In fact they propagate all too well. But, GMO producers have patent rights to the seeds that make it illegal to hold seed over. Users must buy seed every year!
   GMO producers have been pushing cases to court to establish strong legal precedent for their patent coverage. The Bioneers–a radio show from New Dimensions featured the story of a Canadian farmer. This man had to battle his way through at least 3 levels of the legal system to get a judgement at absolved him of the patent infringement charges brought against him when a company’s GMO sorghum was found growing in one of his ditches. The sad part of this story is that it is likely the the GMO product has contaminated a seed line that his family has spent 5 generations developing. He has no rights in the court over the contaminaton!!!!

10. 10 Sister Jul 8th, 2007 at 2:00 pm

    Sharon, this statement is incorrect.

    “One of the primary properties sought after in genetic modification is shelf storage.”

    That was true of the FlavrSaver tomato (that was never commercialized) but is not true of current GMO crops. The main characteristics are 1) resistance to weed-killers (like Monsanto’s RoundupReady) or 2) Bt insecticide spliced into the plant genome or in the case of Hawaiian papayas, resistance to a pathogenic virus.

    Yes, these plants propagate only too well and contaminate related species. Sharon, the Canadian farmer you mentioned is Percy Schmeiser. You can watch the “Heartbreak in the Heartland” video that SNTG put together after his appearance in Austin in 2001 from the site (link is on the index page). You can also read the details of the final decision - just Google within the site. The final judgment did not exactly absolve Percy but I have never been able to fully grasp the legal subtleties.

11. 11 Sister Jul 8th, 2007 at 6:32 pm

    http://saynotogmos.org has much information on this subject

12. 12 sglasson Jul 10th, 2007 at 4:05 pm

    They really should be required to label these types of foods and continue to do research on this subject. This kind of makes me want to stay away from corn.

13. 13 Beverly Spicer Jul 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pm

    It would be interesting to take poll. I suspect 99%, maybe 100% consumers of all foods would like to know if/if not what they are going to eat has been genetically modified. Many would accept the modified foods, others would avoid it, but it is only fitting in regards to advice and consent and what we think of as our basic right to make informed choices.

14. 14 Beverly Spicer Jul 19th, 2007 at 1:02 am

    I ran into a book review today that is right on topic. Here is the review from Buzzflash:

    YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW: Genetic Engineering and the Secret Changes in Your Food (Paperback)
    by Andrew Kimbrell

    “More than half of America’s processed grocery products from cornflakes to granola bars to diet drinks contain genetically altered ingredients. They are unlabeled, untested …and we’re eating it. YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW is a complete, full color reference guide outlining how unmarked genetically modified foods get onto the family dining table and what consumers can do about it. Turning a bright light on the GE foods controversy, this definitive and accessible how to primer is for concerned parents and the buying public who want to know more about health risks, organic options, shopping choices, and the ways we can fight the corporate agroindustrial takeover of the food we eat.”

    This is an informative, colorful, large format consumer introduction to the widespread use of genetic engineering in the foods we eat. It also includes a guide to activism on the issue and a handy GE shopping guide.

    Many good genetically modified foods books are well-researched and argued explorations of the issue. “Your Right to Know” is an easily accesible and attractive overview of the issue that emphasizes what you need to know about genetically engineered foods as a consumer.

    Read The Full Review:
    http://www.buzzflash.com/store/reviews/700

    Andrew Kimbrell serves as the executive director of both the Center for Food Safety and the International Center for Technology Assessment and has been involved in public interest legal activity for nearly 20 years. His articles on technology and law issues have appeared in Harpers, Utne Reader, the Ecologist, the New York Times, and the Washington Post. Andrew lives in Washington, DC, with his wife and two children.

15. 15 Sharon E. Aug 16th, 2007 at 8:31 am

    Beverly - We need more informed discussions like this! A certain hysteria accompanies the NO GMO movement in Portland, Oregon, and facts are in short supply. The public is definitely more interested in knowing the origin of its food. Farmers’ markets are on the rise, as are community gardens, and seed banks. I believe the home orchard society has for years been saving and exchanging seeds from old fruit varieties, but isn’t it possible that uncontrolled GMOs may wipe everything off the map? Besides being concerned with food, I’m interested in native plant species (Oregon playing host to hundreds of them), and we have one of the original seed banks here in Oregon at The Berry Botanic Garden, which works collaboratively with agencies around the world to protect and reintroduce endangered plant species. is the same being done with food on a national or international scale?

16. 16 John Hall Oct 28th, 2007 at 2:56 pm

    The problem with Andrew kimbrell is that he’s just like that ex-boss of his,
    Jeremy Rifkin and [expletive deleted] Ronnie Cummins.They’re all full of it and
    they’re all hypocrites.For years,they’ve been condeming Genetically Engineered foods,saying they’re dangerous and unsafe.Then they turn around and try to convince people to eat organic foods.What they neglect to tell people is that organic foods are grown with animal manure that contain
    deadly e-coli bacteria.The truth is that these activists get money donations from these organic companies to push their products on the people.They think that since organic foods are “natural”,that there’s nothing wrong with them. And they don’t WANT to hear about people getting sick from organic foods. Rifkin asks who’s going to be liable if pollen from a GE-crop spreads to a non GE crop, but he’s not asking who’s going to be liable if someone gets sick from eating organic foods.

17. 17 Beverly Spicer Oct 28th, 2007 at 4:12 pm

    John’s comments underscore the controversies surrounding the issues of GMO and organically grown foods alike. As our food supply gets more complicated and genetic modification finds it way more and more into what ends up on our table, there are massive pros and cons, and much passionate sentiment to go along with them. Thank you, John, for pointing out the other side of the coin, that organic and natural foods can be dangerous as well, and we must not lose sight of the possible perils along with the potential benefits of both. As for me, I make a stand for full disclosure in all foods. I want to know where my food has been, whether the seeds from which the crops are produced are non-reproducing, whether there have been other genetic modifications and for what purpose, how the crop or animal was raised, if irradiation has been applied to kill bacterial, under what conditions the food was processed, what the additives are used, and specifically what is contained within vague labeling of categories like “natural flavors,” or “preservatives,” or “seasonings.” Transparency and full disclosure are the only things that will allow the consumer to make a conscious and well-considered choice. Likely, many would choose to accept modifications that other would not — as it seems to be in all things — and those choices we would hope would be efficient and self-regulating.

18. 18 Claude Fullinfaw Jan 15th, 2008 at 3:19 am

    The other day I heard something new on the radio. The commentator mentioned that our food supply is going to run out in the next 20 years if we don’t do something about it. The reason being is that humans are eating more and more than ever before.

19. 19 Beverly Spicer Jan 15th, 2008 at 3:59 am

    I guess it’s true that since we have more and more humans than ever before, that humans are eating more and more than ever before. But I don’t know the projections about the food supply being or not being adequate. I do know that Thomas Malthus had some theories that I’ve never heard disputed.

Leave a Reply