Here, here!! Markovic. It's simply RECKLESS.

Can you imagine if you're a mother and suffer the consequence of this colossal Frankensteinian experiment?! 

Big No from my side too

Look: it's one thing to know you cannot control for all factors, especially, in a biological experiment; but, to KNOW that the genetic trigger is upset by tetracycline and not check to see what  prevalence this drug has in the area...well, pure stupidity!

I now  better,absolute NO

no,no,no

Many members of the public are asking questions about GM foods and they are also raising concerns about the effects these foods may have on their health or the environment. There are different advantages and disadvantages of GM foods, although to what extent they can help or harm humans and the environment is a debatable aspect of this technology.

Benefits Of GM Foods

A proposed benefit of GM foods is that they can potentially produce higher crop yields, which could help by feeding more people in developing countries. They are also cited as more economical, despite the initial higher cost of the seeds. The rationale is that they reduce the need for pesticides and herbicides as well as reducing the manpower needed to successfully grow the crops, which should translate into improved financial gains.

Improved food quality is another benefit associated with GM foods. A tomato, for instance, can be engineered to stay fresher for longer, thereby extending its shelf life in the supermarket.

Yet another benefit that is believed to occur from GM technology is that crops can be engineered to withstand weather fluctuations and extremes. This means that they can provide sufficient yields and quality despite a severe, poor weather season.

Issues With GM Foods

A worrisome issue in GM foods is the ability of a food to trigger an allergy in humans.

Another potential downside to GM technology is that other organisms in the ecosystem could be harmed, which would lead to a lower level of biodiversity.

Given that some GM foods are modified using bacteria and viruses, there is a fear that we will see the emergence of new diseases. The threat to human health is a worrisome aspect of GM technology and one that has received a great deal of debate.

Another benefit is that GM foods can be engineered to have a high content of a specific nutrient that is lacking in the diet of a local population group. The vitamin A rich 'golden rice' is one example of a GM food that has been engineered to have high levels of a nutrient.

http://www.geneticallymodifiedfoods.co.uk/fact-sheet-pros-vs-cons.html

www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-Wire/GMO-foods.../06/.../649812/

http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/truth-about-gmos?page=1

Dear Luisiana,

Dear All,

Thanks for sharing this information. The cited report shows the very weak points of – all – genetically modified organisms used also in agriculture. Practically in each case when GMOs were used, the economic and not environmental, health or efficiency objectives was mattered.  Unfortunately, the lack of extensive and intensive environmental studies characterise these research areas which the highest financial support as well as the uppermost scientific merit has got. These kinds of research and use support mainly the profit production and not the human welfare. Classical scientific achievements are underestimated and there are no or very few financial support for them.

It would be useful to get some original articles on the subject.

I suggest you to look at this thread

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_you_aware_of_what_is_going_on_for_GMs_PCBs_and_dioxins_in_agriculture

It would be advantageous if experts of this subject participated in the discussion, even to open a professional discussion. 

No, I do not support genetically modified organisms. It is forbidden in my country. I agree with argumentation brought by dear friend @Andras. No human welfare, but profit production! Yes, I agree!

The game of genetically modified organisms (i.e. plants that are injected with DNA from other plant species or even animals) is banned in Japan, Australia and several European countries. However, there are those who like this game because it can make crops that grow bigger & faster and may withstand weeds & insects which results in huge profits.

Without proper studies, large agricultural companies in the U.S started modifying seeds in the 1990s and these species have already penetrated the American food system in a big way. About 90 % of America's soybean, sugar beet, and corn crops are now GMO. 80% of processed food in the U.S. contains GMO ingredients.

Those, who are making huge sums of money from this game, have sold this story to ill-informed public: The GMO seeds have helped to keep the cost of raw ingredients & food prices low and since there are currently no quality studies that definitely link GMO to health issues, then they are safe for human consumption. This argument is easy to refute, of course, by good scientists.

In my humble opinion, interfering with plant DNA is a game of  playing with fire. It may look safe to start with, but it may turn out to be highly risky & unmanageable. Why not spend 10 more years to prove "beyond doubt" that GMO are fine if they are so ? Human health ought not be subjected to gambling.

I do not support

C. Lewis Kausel

A rational response, but death of the human animal is not only natural, it is necessary--is it not? If we combine this issue of food security with Climate Change, the worry over population explosion and a host of other problems, we begin to see the true source of our angst--attempting to 'right' the perceived 'wrongs' of our world.

In the case of Fossil Fuels, the widespread use of fossil fuel based fertilizer enabled the explosion of the human population, which now threatens the world with a seemingly unsolvable problem. How is it a solution to double down and introduce GMO technology to further increase the human population?

What is worse is the ''path to hell is paved with good intentions.'' Given the past history and man's earlier attempts to 'create' a perfect world, how are we not to believe GMOs are going to be anything but 'more of the same'.

This is the Law of Unintended Consequences. The world could be described as a complex system of uncountably infinite confounding factors. With that said, pray tell, how do you propose scientist introduce GMOs and guarantee there would be no unintended consequences? Such a claim is impossible, especially, with GMOs, for this technology modifies the very building blocks of life itself, worse, over time, these artificial changes will lead to further unexpected changes, hence, the problem will only grow and grow and grow. 

If the history of science teaches us anything, it is that humans may gain some limited control over a very restricted portion of nature, but nature will forever rebel against any and all attempts at boxing her in and restraining her. Time and the world of confounding factors will conspire against us again and again, eventually, we lose.

Now, many might say: ''We should make attempts at bettering life.'' No argument there, but we best be careful what technology we decide to implement and how hastily we employ these seemingly 'perfect' solutions.

Food aid has been shown by many to cause more harm than good.

C. Lewis Kausel et. al.

It is encouraging to hear similar opinions. Of course, opinion matters little in a world of conflicting wills, especially, when so-called 'reactive' wills never seem to prevail.

This problem of GMO and others still are moving into the Zeitgeist and being expressed in a multitude of ways. Take a look at the attached article and give the trailer 'Utopia' a look over...it's important to contemplate the 'worst case scenario', even if this case is unrealistic. In other words, the Devil is that being that represents concisely all our fears rolled up into one.

The irony is this: science has promised a better world, but each iteration of scientific advances leads us further into misery. Notwithstanding a few 'successes' here and there, moreover, you will most certainly sing the praise of science if it is you that benefits from some pill or antibiotic, etc; nevertheless, the issue is not YOU and your survival, but it is a matter of the world and its BEING. Man has taken it upon himself to enforce his will to seek something, something yet known, but a vague idea of Utopia or perfection, etc; but, this world is a world of BECOMING and no such perfection can be attained.

I posit the following proposition: the solution is that which is simple.

https://www.rt.com/news/330728-gmo-mosquitoes-zika-virus/

no no NO!

I do wish man does not play GOD.

Best regards

Actually we do not have enough knowledge about the genetically modified organism consequence to the environment… For this desired to make this research in intensified security condition…

The modified organism place is only in lab with strongly intensified security condition.. And have to exist the immediately method of their destroying if they have escaped from the lab…  

Research labs, in the case of genetic modification and propagation, can better be compared to an artillery commanding tanks and shells but aimed at the artillery unit itself. When we are so much uncertain about almost every aspect of a lab-led genetic modification, we are aiming at ourselves as the targeted enemy.

Regards

Dear Louisiana,

GMO have failed even in the lower level of tomatoes, since all new and hybrid tomatoes have not even a small part of the taste that they had in past.

So, should we trust a project that cannot even conserve the taste of a .. tomato?

But, the story that you are writting is very close to the common crime...

Dear All,

I am so happy: the down-voter on duty has arrived.

Andras, elaborate...

It is scary and part of it is naturally unavoidable. Animals adapt (not necessarily evolve) and more often than not nature in all species has to play catch up. Granted, we do involve ourselves more than we should but the biggest problem does lie in what you had mentioned already, that the thought process wasn't clear when it was developed. Humans do not adapt easily. We don't like change. We like convenience and ease. That is where the fault may truly lie. Debatable but an argument.

For me, the issue is more the responsibility that should be taken with regard to such technology. I find such behavior reckless.

Now, to be fair, the reports are only speculative and nothing has been ''proved'' as of yet; but, if this is true and negligence can be shown, then this would be an interesting twist to many of the global/international trade deals presently being forced down the throat of many a so-called Democratic society. Consider the TTP, TISA and the like trade deals, these agreements supposedly give multi-national corporations the 'right' to sue sovereign governments for loss of profits, due to some local law or another. Now, what if this Zika outbreak could be attributed to a company, proven to be in gross negligence...do the citizens and government have a 'right' to sue for damages?

Generally speaking, I interpret these International trade deals as a one way street, where the multi-national company is granted incredible rights and citizens, no matter the nationality, are deprived of their rights. This is ''democracy'' in the 21st century.

So, with recent wrangling over GMO crops, the European Union, along with Russia and other countries as well, have refused the use of these crops; banning them. In the case of India, from what I have read, there is an alarming rate of suicides among bare-subsistence farmers, who are unable to survive season to season with an ever mounting debt.

I see the topic in this question posed spanning just about all aspects of human endeavors and concerns, from sovereignty, democracy, human rights, human health & safety,..., ethics, scientific due diligence, integrity, &c.

Yes, Kausel, people are pushing further and further into regions normally never seen by the vast majority of people. Consider Africa, where the ebola virus usually killed the infected before they could ever think of leaving the area, plus, these remote areas, people never actually left them. With modern roads, transportation and communication, the likelihood of a hitherto unknown disease making its way out of obscurity into the mainstream is ever increasing. But, with the addition of GMOs and scientist attempting to 'manage' or 'abate' certain factors deemed deleterious, well, the likelihood of an ever greater disaster ever increases.

Just for restricted positive and scientific purpose only

Ido not trust it  lets look for its long term effects

I agree with Dr. Yassin .. we need to be vigilant about the late effects

It has some side effects. I am also against such experimentations.

Here's the bottom-line: every attempt made by man to ''improve'' the world has only increase the misery and woe. That is the thesis of Climate Change. Therefore, why in hell would we expect genetic modification to turn out any better? In fact, shouldn't this portend the worse possible outcome? To tinker around with the fragile, precariously balanced world of life by modifying genetic code to our perception of perfection can only cause immense imbalance and disaster.

Dear Luisiana:

Although some applications may be beneficial --especially for the treatment of diseases--, I think that the risks involving GMOs should be subject to strict regulation. I must say I am a little skeptical about this on the short term due to the economic impact of this type of research. Hopefully we will not need a catastrophe for stronger action.

Absolutely NO NO ,inform you're self how's it going to where ?

@Barbara

What do you suggest?

Well, the story is heating up. The mass media is calling any connection of Zika with GMO mosquitoes a hoax; but, then there is another charge being leveled against the recent up-tick in microcephaly cases: chemicals. See link.

http://www.naturalnews.com/052943_Zika_virus_hoax_larvacide_chemical_GM_mosquitoes.html#

there is no good answer to this question.  Do we let millions of people starve or do we feed them?  I wish it were that simple.  The big companies that control all the GMO's are in the business of making lots of money and not of feeding the world.  They only will feed the world if the world pays for the food.  So never let some big company tell you that there have honorable intentions.  

The big issue is safety.  There are many different different amino acids that are natural and recognized by our bodies.  Some of them are not great for use and cause inflammation and other issues 20 to 23 of them are needed for life.  The GMO's that are out there create several that are not recognized by our bodies and they can and do trigger an immune response in some people if not all people.  This needs lots of study before we allow these artificial products to be wholesaled to a public that has no idea what the long term affects are going to be.   

If someone that only has profit as their motive gives you something and tells you it is good for you wouldn't you first check to see if it is true???  What we have done is allow these big companies to convince us that they can feed the world with their products that they have no intention of giving away and as a matter of fact they can legally keep people from using it if they do not pay for it.

This is a case of the fox guarding the hen house. 

@George,

  Thanks for weighting in on this question and sharing your thoughts...

The profit incentive is always there and muddies everything we know and love; but, the GMO issue goes much further  than that--as you have stated--whereby, the risk to human health & safety is very real and present.

Studies have been done in Russia and France, also, elsewhere; but, these studies have been buried, wrongfully and viscously discredited, lastly, the pressure to normalize GMO food has already won most of the world's markets and these products are already in our food.

The fight may have already been lost...

Luisiana,

I hope for my four children's future that you are wrong.  I am working on products that may help in this effort.  Our all natural non-toxic products have been shown to increase production of food by very large amounts in the studies we have done.  There are some other good side affects of these products as well but that is for a different time.  

I have helped develop a product line that can in some cases increase production in plants by as much as 200 to 300% and it has some protein manipulator qualities that may help fight against GMO's.  This is all academic at this point but there are some great products in the works.  

Our base is an all natural phosphated ester blend that will keep bugs off the plants and fix nitrogen from the air and soil for the plants to use.  The product in the ground also makes the micro-nutrients in the soil more available for the plants to uptake.

This product may mess with the GMO and its artificial DNA.  The product is a surfactant  and has all the properties of just a soap including killing bacteria, viruses, fungus's and mold.  The great thing is that it targets the non salt based proteins of things like insects but not the human based proteins.

That is why it is safe to use and better for plants.

@George,

That is nice to hear...there are many 'natural' products to combat insects and the like; but, the issue is more to do with the sheer volume of agricultural production, which requires millions of metric tonnes of fertilizer, insecticide and everything else.

Not to be disheartened: I think there is a real need for products, such as yours, to be developed and implemented--it may very well help humanity in the distant future.

I hope so the focus must be on health and safety of the food supply.  But the only focus that I see is on profit.

True enough, George, and, by far, the worst of it is the TTIP push and other trade initiatives, which are attempting to undermine the safety of every Nation across the globe.

http://sputniknews.com/europe/20151020/1028811017/ttip-gmo-chemicals-eu.html

I was afraid that this kind of thing would happen.  The big money is all over the GMO thing as it insures profitability but not safety. 

I don't think that "homo sapiens" is more clever than the "NATURE"