Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
How should the government or the indusdtry monitor and control this?
|
There's no reason to monitor DNA, since DNA is not a toxin. However, the products of DNA (enzymes and whatever products result from the catalyzed reactions) might be toxins and therefore in need of environmental monitoriong. Any government control should be on a case by case basis depending on what the genes are producing.
Quote:
|
Should GMOs be allowed at all?
|
Yes they should, because GMOs are no more of a threat to anybody than traditionally bred organisms.
Quote:
|
Should the press be covering this more actively?
|
Not any more than they should be covering stories about traditional controlled breeding.
Quote:
|
Better safe than sorry (should we stop eating it)?
|
No, because GMOs are no more dangerous than any other food, all else equal.
Quote:
|
Should food with insecticide in each cell be sold without being labled as such (BT corn and cotton seeds are labaled as an insecticide, not a food, but the food that it grows into is labaled as food)?
|
The protein in Bt corn was determined safe to humans by the EPA (after 20 years of research), so it should be treated the same way as any other harmless substance in the corn. It is a protein that is produced by
Bacillus thuringiensis that is specifically toxic to the corn borer, has to interact with the insect's digestive enzymes in its stomach before it is active, after which it binds to specific receptors that are only in the stomach lining cells of certain insects.
I don't see any problem with GMOs in general; the only potential problem is the substances produced by the inserted genes, and these can be managed on a case by case basis, regardless of the method that was used to insert them, whether traditional or engineered.
Just my opinions
