The rice with human genes

[Spiderman]

Now is it just me or is this too much too soon.
The long term affect of Frankenstein foods has in no way been tested yet here are some companies who give the go ahead to mix these things into our planet.
What happens if in 5 or 10yrs we realise that these things are doing some irreperable damage to us or the planet. Once they are in the food chain you cant really take then out can you??

Clickety Click for the full Story (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23387779-details/The+rice+with+human+genes/article.do)

Should be interesting, so discuss :D

[amnesia]

Bits of Cow in Cow food + Cow = mad cow


Bits of human in rice + human = ?????


hmmmm

[Dan]

I personally don't have a problem with it. It's not like they're going to create a race of man-eating rice plants like the Triffids, is it?

And as for the mad cow disease argument (which I've seen several places today), it doesn't stand up in my mind.

It's not like the humans eating any of this rice are going to be chewing on a lump of old Mr Smith next door, or noshing away on Granny Hopkins from number 23. It's some genes, nothing more than tiny little building blocks.

I say go for it, if they can create a 'fillet cow' using gene therapy, it can only be good for worldwide steak prices.

[PsychoCannon]

I love how they are using the tried and tested (and failed):

"It will help poor sick children in the third world and anyone against our grain is against helping poor sick children and is evil" Straw man argument again.

Just the same way those super bug and drought resistant crops would "save the 3rd world"...oh by the way they don't produce seeds so the 3rd world farmers become dependant on buying seeds from us every year for new crops rather than self reliance on seeds from the previous lot...

Sorry but I'm naturally sceptical about these companies.

If they are given the rubber stamps in the states we WON'T be allowed or able to stop them being Imported so I hope they are clearly labelled.

I don't trust that this will be tested fully to make sure people aren't going to have strange immune responses to Human Protein in their food and how do we know it won't mutate in the wild.

I don't think it's necessary basically and given that despite all the promises and hype, the fact that every GM Crop so far has cross contaminated well outside of it's area, I think it's irresponsible.

I just don't get the addiction to messing with our food and introducing more and more drugs and additives to them to try to fight bugs that just get stronger because of it.

[DanAbnormal]

Yet againt the U.S. show there arrogance and ignorance. Oh yes, marvellous creation there Mr US, oh but you say we HAVE to buy it from you now?

[Warthog]

The reason they make them infertile is one of safety although it does have the side-effect of poor farmers having to continually buy the crop in to start with as psychocannon said. As a genetic engineer myself, I am actually slightly against this. The technology and enzymes and techniques are all easy and safe, its just the final unknown element that is unsettling: DNA transfer occurs everywhere in life; bacteria get new DNA using their pili, plants crossbreed etc, and once these new strains are out there, we can never be totally sure of what long-term occurences could happen. Everything I do with regards to genetic modifying is always reversible and has safety nets built into it, but this once it is in wide use seems less controlled. Proceed with extreme caution.

[wyrdness]

I personally don't have a problem with it. It's not like they're going to create a race of man-eating rice plants like the Triffids, is it?
...
I say go for it, if they can create a 'fillet cow' using gene therapy, it can only be good for worldwide steak prices.

Never underestimate the ability of us humans to completely f*ck things up.
I'm with Spidey - how can we be completely sure that there isn't some unexpected side effect that will hit us in years to come.

I'll bet you that the people who introduced cane toads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cane_Toad) and rabbits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbits_in_Australia) to Australia thought that they were doing a great job too.

[emcf]

hmmmm....this concerns me somewhat. from the article (para 5) implies that this product will have limited application (e.g. not to be used for eating with a chicken jalfrezi).

over the next few years we will see dozens of these types of products being developed for limited applications - subterfuge and spin by the proponents of these creations will push the boundaries and eventually most of our food will be enhanced by gene nonsense without due consideration of the risks - fully testing these products would cost time and, most saliently, money. the scientists who develop these foods may well be acting in an altruistic manner but the corrupting influence of capitalism will ensure that harm will surely follow.

we've been doing ok for the past couple of million years eating natural foods; albeit some have been enhanced by selective breeding - this is different to cutting and pasting an animal/plant together as if it were some powerpoint presentation. perhaps if there are issues to solve which these products are purported to address then we could consider alternative action first rather than jump head first into the unknown.


:rant:

[Fizzy Fish]

as a wise fish once said: just because we can, doesn't mean we should...

[CoolGirl]

My reaction is quite simple really. Don't mess with nature.

The less we consume chemicals or mucked-about-with food, the better. It doesn't take an idiot to work out that more people suffering from cancer and immune-system deficiencies because we are ingesting growth hormones and antibiotics through the food we eat. Also, higher incidences of infertility, multiple births, more women than men, and the oneset of early puberty are all to do with secondary consumption of hormones.

Anyone who's ever read 'My year of meat' will never eat non-organically reared meat again. I apply the same principle to as much of our food as I can. I'm realistic, in that we eat a mixed diet and cant' always be sure of the provenance of the meal when eating out, but we try and minimise the risk.

[Biker Biggles]

We have a long and unplesant history of screwing up the world we live in and I can't see any reason why this should be any different.I believe in "gut reaction"Mine says "That's all wrong"