Open Left

How quickly can we adapt? (4.00 / 2)

You talk about evolutionary changes in food that have taken place over hundreds, thousands of years. Humans, over the past 50,000 years have adapted when the changes weren't too abrupt. The main problem with genetic engineering of food is that it may create problems later we don't understand now. I guess you'd say that evolution's always been a crap shoot so why care now; evolution is meant to be a crap shoot and we can't change that, so why try?

Natasha's post already answers the question better than I can but when it comes to how important food is to survival, at the very least it'd be good to know why there's so little data on the possible consequences of long term mass consumption of these foods. Doing the research, on its own, can't be that controversial. It would be common sense for the FDA to do it. Why haven't they?

---

by: NealB2 @ Fri Jun 05, 2009 at 23:47:19 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Well (4.00 / 1)

I didn't say to not do the research into the health effects of GMO consumption.  All I said is that, on the face of it, it seems unlikely to me to result in anything.  

A lot of people on the left seem to react in a, well, reactionary way to the very concept of GMO, and I don't see why.  Directly manipulating the instructions that determine the yields, resistances, nutritional value and so on of a plant, and even of animals, is a field that obviously has such enormous potential for humanity, that it demands to be explored aggressively.

So by all means, do the research on various manifestations of current GMO crops, but until there is evidence to the contrary, I can think of no scientific reason that genetic modification ought to be any different than the slightly slower process of selective breeding.

---

by: salmontarre @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 16:41:20 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]