Yaahooo

[William Gaatjes]

It is starting. The end of keeping enormous amounts of livestock in a brutal way is coming to an end. The only thing they need to do is to give the muscle cells small electric shocks. Meat tastes best if it is an animal that has been able to run around, growing bigger muscles because of exercises. What needs to be done is while growing these muscle tissues, is let these muscle tissues "work out" . The best way would be to build some rudimentary nerve system that can be used to make the muscle twitch and relax. This does mean that two muscle structures must be build that are antagonist in movement. Like for example the muscles in the legs. The reason muscles become soft is because they are not used. Can you imagine eating a healthy piece of meat everyday without killing whole animals ?
Nowadays we use every part, like the skin. It will not be long until we can replicate perfect leather from artificially grown skin. We can even enhance the skin to give the leather certain abilities. And the best part is that we do not have to kill animals for food or for the skin. Which is a good thing. We do it because we have to. If the need to eat or clothe can be solved another way, that's good for humanity. and i am not even talking about a very high efficiency. No longer grow an entire animal, just the part we eat. And healthier food means a healthier life...

while they admit they haven't gotten the texture quite right (the lab-grown meat has the consistency and feel of scallop), they say the technology promises to have widespread implications for our food supply.

"If we took the stem cells from one pig and multiplied it by a factor of a million, we would need one million fewer pigs to get the same amount of meat," said Mark Post, a biologist at Maastricht University involved in the In-vitro Meat Consortium, a network of publicly funded Dutch research institutions that is carrying out the experiments.

Several other groups in the U.S., Scandinavia and Japan are also researching ways to make meat in the laboratory, but the Dutch project is the most advanced, said Jason Matheny, who has studied alternatives to conventional meat at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore and is not involved in the Dutch research.

In the U.S., similar research was funded by NASA, which hoped astronauts would be able to grow their own meat in space. But after growing disappointingly thin sheets of tissue, NASA gave up and decided it would be better for its astronauts to simply eat vegetarian.

To make pork in the lab, Post and colleagues isolate stem cells from pigs' muscle cells. They then put those cells into a nutrient-based soup that helps the cells replicate to the desired number.

So far the scientists have only succeeded in creating strips of meat about 1 centimeter (a half inch) long; to make a small pork chop, Post estimates it would take about 30 days of cell replication in the lab.

There are tantalizing health possibilities in the technology.

Fish stem cells could be used to produce healthy omega 3 fatty acids, which could be mixed with the lab-produced pork instead of the usual artery-clogging fats found in livestock meat.

The whole story with arguments , opponents and proponents can be found here :

http://www.physorg.com/news182779099.html

 

[bobsmith1492]

"The end of keeping enormous amounts of livestock in a brutal way is coming to an end."

Good that the end is ending but I'm not sure how appetizing a quivering petri dish full of muscle cells sounds to me...

 

[PM650]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-december-2-2009/we-did-it----artificial-meat

 

[William Gaatjes]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-december-2-2009/we-did-it----artificial-meat

A, a show for people who want nothing to do...

It strikes me as being similair as the o'reilly factor....

I am sorry, it does not humor me at all...

Robin Williams could for sure do a better job...

This show host should visit a slaughterhouse and see how real meat looks like. It looks nothing like what you buy in the supermarket...

 

[William Gaatjes]

"The end of keeping enormous amounts of livestock in a brutal way is coming to an end."

Good that the end is ending but I'm not sure how appetizing a quivering petri dish full of muscle cells sounds to me...

I know texture and all is very important. It is just the first step. That's why i wrote about the nervous system and muscle work out. To give it the texture and bite good meat has. And afcourse this is not just limited to pork. Lamb, cow, horse, kangaroo, ostrich steaks all are yummie. I prefer horse stake because it has a lot of healthy protein. It is expensive tho... Although the ostrich steak was wonderful too...

 

[boardsportsrule]

disgusting. we were made to eat animals, and i will continue to do so until the day I die. We evolved this way, and I see no reason to change it. Sustainability yadi-yada, figure out how to create more energy using the enviornment, get us out of obesity, then i'll consider "making" meat a viable thing to do. Who ever decided to waste time on this project shouldn't be in the scientific community.

 

[William Gaatjes]

disgusting. we were made to eat animals, and i will continue to do so until the day I die. We evolved this way, and I see no reason to change it. Sustainability yadi-yada, figure out how to create more energy using the enviornment, get us out of obesity, then i'll consider "making" meat a viable thing to do. Who ever decided to waste time on this project shouldn't be in the scientific community.

Well, everybody is entitled to an opinion. However, i do feel the need to give a few arguments as to why i am very supportive of this research.
Here i go :

we were made to eat animals, and i will continue to do so until the day I die. We evolved this way, and I see no reason to change it

You are also made to serve as food for other lifeforms. Yet i can safely assume you do not want to get sick or have an unhealthy life because of constantly been attacked by micro organisms who find you one tasty piece of flesh. You are just part of an ecosystem where you are constantly fighting. Does that mean you also do not use antibiotics because that's not the way ?

Although i do agree about the meat eating part, if i am not mistaken our very early ancestor must have been a pure meat eater when their was an abundance of fleshie food. It seems 90 percent of the proteins and minerals can be digested by use of the stomach and the small intestine. We primarily seem to use the large intestine to digest difficult material like fibers and sugars by using bacteria. This makes sure we can eat plant like material. This comes in handy in times when there is not much meat to eat. Afcourse over time the large intestine has gotten a very important job.

Sustainability yadi-yada, figure out how to create more energy using the enviornment,

To give you an example :
To be able to make artifical food, is to eliminate or at least decrease hunger. When we can make food directly we do not have to feed animals and later on slaughter them. All the invested energy goes directly into the meat we consume and not in byproducts such as to much menure or methane that we do not want.

When you only build a few tissues, it is easier to spot diseases or potential dangers. Think of for example the prion. Who would have known you can get Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease because of eating meat. When you only make a few tissues needed for example for a good steak, it is easier to perform various checks on bacteria, viruses, prions. How about tiny little worms, if you do not cook or bake your meat well, you just might wake up one day with blurry vision. Cause you have these little worms swimming in your eyeball. All of this can more easily be controlled in a factory. You cannot deny that.

Why should we figure out how to create more energy if the first step should be how to consume more efficiently. There is enormous amount of energy wasted every day. The only problem is most people only see oil and electricity as energy...

Who ever decided to waste time on this project shouldn't be in the scientific community.

I sense you earn a living in the food industry.
If that is not the case, i hope you just don't care about what you consume...
It is proven that we age mostly because of what we eat. We are what we eat. Remember that... Everything the human body cannot digested or remove ,gets accumulated inside the body.

This is not just good research to be able to help people who live almost without food in harsh environments. This can also help to keep people healthier and still have tasty food. This can also help to create a natural environment when humanity ever wants to go into space.
Most of the food you buy is processed anyway.

I am honest about it, i am a hypocrite.
If i would have to slaughter the chicken itself before i can eat it's meat, i would be eating eggs for the rest of my life while watching the big bang theory together with the chicken on the couch. ()

 

[Cogman]

The real test is if it can be produced cheaper/more efficiently. If it can, I'm sold. I have no issues eating meat that has been grown in a dish, sitting next to a nuclear waste dump. Just so long as it has be reasonably tested for safety, I would eat it.

The real key, though, is if it is produced cheaper then regular meat. That would be the determining factor, for me at least, for consumption.

People need to get off the "Natural" food kick. I saw a commercial that said, no joke, "All of our products are completely natural, we only use what comes from the ground." Lol, Hello people, There isn't a single substance on the face of the earth that didn't come from the ground (excluding meteorites ect).

 

[Cogman]

On a completely unrelated note, I hereby trademark the name "Wall-O-Meat"

 

[boardsportsrule]

You are also made to serve as food for other lifeforms. Yet i can safely assume you do not want to get sick or have an unhealthy life because of constantly been attacked by micro organisms who find you one tasty piece of flesh. You are just part of an ecosystem where you are constantly fighting. Does that mean you also do not use antibiotics because that's not the way ?

I generally do not consume antibiotics, i have not taken anti-biotics in the past 7 years. I have taken vitamin-c, and that sort, but not on the same level. I also surf all the time, allowing my self to be in danger of being a sharks dinner. I am part of my eco-system in a pretty big way, and I do not want that to change.

Although i do agree about the meat eating part, if i am not mistaken our very early ancestor must have been a pure meat eater when their was an abundance of fleshie food. It seems 90 percent of the proteins and minerals can be digested by use of the stomach and the small intestine. We primarily seem to use the large intestine to digest difficult material like fibers and sugars by using bacteria. This makes sure we can eat plant like material. This comes in handy in times when there is not much meat to eat. Afcourse over time the large intestine has gotten a very important job.

I do not know a ton about digestive systems, but I do know that I like to eat 'real' food.

To give you an example :
To be able to make artifical food, is to eliminate or at least decrease hunger. When we can make food directly we do not have to feed animals and later on slaughter them. All the invested energy goes directly into the meat we consume and not in byproducts such as to much menure or methane that we do not want.

I agree that artificial food IS a step towards sustainability, but there are much bigger steps to be made. We should really prioritize what we need to do, and this should be LOW on the list, in my opinion. Like you said we all are entitled to opinions .

When you only build a few tissues, it is easier to spot diseases or potential dangers. Think of for example the prion. Who would have known you can get Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease because of eating meat. When you only make a few tissues needed for example for a good steak, it is easier to perform various checks on bacteria, viruses, prions. How about tiny little worms, if you do not cook or bake your meat well, you just might wake up one day with blurry vision. Cause you have these little worms swimming in your eyeball. All of this can more easily be controlled in a factory. You cannot deny that.

I agree. so what? We could also have safer high-ways if we elminated all drivers and had computer controlled cars. If that ever becomes a reality I will likely take my 1984 bmw to the country and never look back. I enjoy the "risks" of life.

Why should we figure out how to create more energy if the first step should be how to consume more efficiently. There is enormous amount of energy wasted every day. The only problem is most people only see oil and electricity as energy...

Electricity will be a big power source for a while now. I do think there will be changes, but electricity is a big thing right now. Maybe we should take the research man-hours and put them towards electricity alternatives, rather than food alternatives...

I sense you earn a living in the food industry.
If that is not the case, i hope you just don't care about what you consume...
It is proven that we age mostly because of what we eat. We are what we eat. Remember that... Everything the human body cannot digested or remove ,gets accumulated inside the body.

I do not earn $ in the food industry, I am just very aware of what I put into my body, and dont enjoy putting "fake" things into it.

This is not just good research to be able to help people who live almost without food in harsh environments. This can also help to keep people healthier and still have tasty food. This can also help to create a natural environment when humanity ever wants to go into space.
Most of the food you buy is processed anyway.

I am honest about it, i am a hypocrite.
If i would have to slaughter the chicken itself before i can eat it's meat, i would be eating eggs for the rest of my life while watching the big bang theory together with the chicken on the couch. ()

false on the first one, sounds fun on the second

 

[Cogman]

Electricity will be a big power source for a while now. I do think there will be changes, but electricity is a big thing right now. Maybe we should take the research man-hours and put them towards electricity alternatives, rather than food alternatives...

Electricity is not a power source, at all. There are no electricity farms. Electricity is a mechanism for power transfer, and a pretty dang efficient one at that. There isn't any sort of "alternate electricity" research, nor will there be, because, quite frankly, we don't know what else we could use.

I do not earn $ in the food industry, I am just very aware of what I put into my body, and dont enjoy putting "fake" things into it.

Define "fake".

Why is it more natural to have a conglomeration of cells in a cow vs in a petrie dish. They are still cow cells, doing their cow cell thing. The difference being that no cow had to suffer for you to eat them.

IMO, there is no such thing as "unnatural". The only way for something to fit into that category is for that thing do defy the laws of nature. Currently, we know of nothing that does that. Nature made man, man makes things, ergo nature makes things through man (Unless you would argue that man is somehow not a part of nature).

 

[VirtualLarry]

Yuck. "Mystery meat". No thanks.

I'll stick to eating what God provided on this earth for us to eat. Including other species.

 

[DrPizza]

"The end of keeping enormous amounts of livestock in a brutal way is coming to an end." is an exaggeration.

Go to the SPCA. Look at the animals. See if you can figure out which ones have been abused. You can - it's not difficult. Look for people who aren't happy & are suffering from depression. You'll often find that health problems follow; they don't eat right, etc.

The same is true of livestock. Treat them well & they flourish. Abuse them & it hurts your bottom line. Don't give me the bullshit about "ohhh, look how crowded the chickens are! That's torture!" Look to nature for examples of flocks of birds. "But the cattle are so densely packed into a small area!" Look at wildebeest migrations, look at old pictures of the west when there were tons of bison. I don't have to go out to my barn to know that all of the female goats are clustered closely together in 2 groups along the wall, close to the corners. They have far more space than they necessarily want.

Do some animals get abused? Sure. Some children get abused too. Unfortunately, many of those animals are going to be abused regardless of whether they're destined to become food. However, companies that support the abuse of these animals will be hurt on the bottom line - profits will go down & it will work itself out of the system.

Oh, and the twitch & relax - that builds muscle mass, not tender muscles. Some of the tenderest muscles are because they're used the least, not the most. That's why calves are kept from moving around a lot before they become veal.

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to home grown meat & lots of tasty venison. I prefer to get my meat from the farm & from the woods. I'm hoping that 5 years from now, I'll be 95% self-sufficient for all my food. And that doesn't mean I'm going to get it from a petri-dish.

 

[William Gaatjes]

"The end of keeping enormous amounts of livestock in a brutal way is coming to an end." is an exaggeration.

Go to the SPCA. Look at the animals. See if you can figure out which ones have been abused. You can - it's not difficult. Look for people who aren't happy & are suffering from depression. You'll often find that health problems follow; they don't eat right, etc.

The same is true of livestock. Treat them well & they flourish. Abuse them & it hurts your bottom line. Don't give me the bullshit about "ohhh, look how crowded the chickens are! That's torture!" Look to nature for examples of flocks of birds. "But the cattle are so densely packed into a small area!" Look at wildebeest migrations, look at old pictures of the west when there were tons of bison. I don't have to go out to my barn to know that all of the female goats are clustered closely together in 2 groups along the wall, close to the corners. They have far more space than they necessarily want.

Do some animals get abused? Sure. Some children get abused too. Unfortunately, many of those animals are going to be abused regardless of whether they're destined to become food. However, companies that support the abuse of these animals will be hurt on the bottom line - profits will go down & it will work itself out of the system.

Oh, and the twitch & relax - that builds muscle mass, not tender muscles. Some of the tenderest muscles are because they're used the least, not the most. That's why calves are kept from moving around a lot before they become veal.

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to home grown meat & lots of tasty venison. I prefer to get my meat from the farm & from the woods. I'm hoping that 5 years from now, I'll be 95% self-sufficient for all my food. And that doesn't mean I'm going to get it from a petri-dish.

Although most animals do not have a "free will" like us, they still have programmed responses. Stress is one of them. An animal in the wild with out a predator is a lot more "happy" then one that is being chased. I can assure you that those "dumb" animals are very aware that we are predators for them. Even if you give it food and keep it in a barn. It's hunger response may be stronger but it sure knows that one day you are going to slit it's throat. But i agree, that they will ignore their instincts if you treat them well. But the instinct is still there... Doing it's work.

 

[Gibsons]

Although most animals do not have a "free will" like us, they still have programmed responses. Stress is one of them. An animal in the wild with out a predator is a lot more "happy" then one that is being chased. I can assure you that those "dumb" animals are very aware that we are predators for them. Even if you give it food and keep it in a barn. It's hunger response may be stronger but it sure knows that one day you are going to slit it's throat. But i agree, that they will ignore their instincts if you treat them well. But the instinct is still there... Doing it's work.

How did you come by this knowledge? Able to read minds? or did a cow just tell you this?

 

[DrPizza]

Although most animals do not have a "free will" like us, they still have programmed responses. Stress is one of them. An animal in the wild with out a predator is a lot more "happy" then one that is being chased. I can assure you that those "dumb" animals are very aware that we are predators for them. Even if you give it food and keep it in a barn. It's hunger response may be stronger but it sure knows that one day you are going to slit it's throat. But i agree, that they will ignore their instincts if you treat them well. But the instinct is still there... Doing it's work.

"I can assure you that those "dumb" animals are very aware that we are predators for them." And why are you able to assure me of that? Because you think so, without any evidence? Again, you're wrong. I spend a great deal of time in the woods hunting. On multiple occasions, I have approached quite close to deer while they were aware of my presence. It's behavior that scares them off, not the fact that we're humans. I have closed to within a couple of feet from does. Last week I closed to within 25 feet of a group of 21 deer - some of which likely saw me shoot several other deer & drag them off the hill. Whales are considered to be rather intelligent & capable of communicating. Yet, they don't run from humans & allow whale watching tours, despite having been our prey for centuries.

(edit: I should add, most other hunters don't have experiences similar to mine because, they behave like predators.)

 

[William Gaatjes]

"I can assure you that those "dumb" animals are very aware that we are predators for them." And why are you able to assure me of that? Because you think so, without any evidence? Again, you're wrong. I spend a great deal of time in the woods hunting. On multiple occasions, I have approached quite close to deer while they were aware of my presence. It's behavior that scares them off, not the fact that we're humans. I have closed to within a couple of feet from does. Last week I closed to within 25 feet of a group of 21 deer - some of which likely saw me shoot several other deer & drag them off the hill. Whales are considered to be rather intelligent & capable of communicating. Yet, they don't run from humans & allow whale watching tours, despite having been our prey for centuries.

(edit: I should add, most other hunters don't have experiences similar to mine because, they behave like predators.)

I have spend a great deal of time in my youth with primarily farm animals and i base my opinion not only on my experience but on the experience of others as well.We where talking about farm animals. Not about deers in the wild. Give those animals the time to learn that you are a predator before you shoot them and they will next time not allow you to come close. Although there are exceptions even within the same species. If you shoot an animal before it found out that you want eat or shoot it, how does it suppose to learn ? Now farm animals live long enough to learn. Although most farmers are more kind to animals then most "greenpeace" people. With deers, i do not know them. Perhaps you should try to keep a pack of them in the barn and see how they respond...

It is all not as simple as you seem to think. For example , why does a dog become aggressive to the second owner while the second owner is the most loving and caring person ? It was after all the first owner that treated the animal wrong... Part Pavlov behaviour. Part instinct. Part random behaviour of the individual animal.


And talking about the whales, i would like to know what would happen if you capture a whale, hurt it and then try to capture it again. I bet it would fight a whole lot harder. But usually, the moment a whale gets captured, it is slicing and dicing time. And why other whales do not seem to learn ? I do not know, perhaps they already fled the situation before learning from it...

I assume you are a skillful hunter, capable of deceiving the prey you hunt.
But does that say more about you, or does it say more about the animal ?
I wonder if the deers would let approach you if you smell like deers blood ?

Now to be honest, these are hypothetical questions. Although the answers would be interesting i would rather have you would not put it to the test..
However, if you kill a deer once in a while for the food. It should not be a problem to do such a test... Living in balance with nature is not a bad thing, by the way. To only consume what you need is the first step...

 

[William Gaatjes]

How did you come by this knowledge? Able to read minds? or did a cow just tell you this?

One day i was walking in the field, and there was a cow with a guitar...
It sang this song describing how it felt. It had a choir of goats and chickens. Did i mention the horse did the low deep base voice ?

 

[William Gaatjes]

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to home grown meat & lots of tasty venison. I prefer to get my meat from the farm & from the woods. I'm hoping that 5 years from now, I'll be 95% self-sufficient for all my food. And that doesn't mean I'm going to get it from a petri-dish.

I am still doing some historical research on food additives , processed foods.
Biotech crops. It may not be the reason why you want to be self-sufficient, but with what i have recently have read(which i came across by accident),i can certainly understand how important it is to have some homegrown food, if that may be vegetation or animal stock.

To the people with an education in chemistry and/or biology.
If i take for example aspartame, does anybody on this forum with a chemical education and a neutral view on the matter has ever done some tests of his/hers own ? Because i see more tests that asparame is actually lethal then tests that it is save. Combine that with the fact that Donald Rumsfeld was CEO of G.D. Searle and later on secretary of defense of Ronald Reagan in 1981 and was one of the people in Ronald Reagan's team to appoint Arthur Hull Hayes as FDA commissioner. The FDA commissioner that approved the use of aspartame in food, while it was still not proven safe.
EDIT Forgot to mention that Hayes later on after being removed from his post of FDA commissioner went to work for G.D. Searle.


Reading about all this, about food manipulation with chemicals/ growth factors (milk that contains puss from ulcers forming inside the cows udders, yes in the USA) from Monsanto (who just happened to have bought G.D. searle), i can fully understand the hesitation/ decline of "petri dish" meat. Not even mentioning that monsanto went to Bush senior when Bush senior was president to get some favours with respect to de-regulation when it comes to certain lethal chemicals /additives/antibiotics for for example live stock... But to make sure that i do not seem politically biased (there is that word again ) During the Clinton administration, the same thing was happening. Ask Daniel Glickman...
EDIT Forgot to add the Obama's administration choice with respect to the FDA, Michael R. Taylor.


A long story, but i would like to ask if someone has prove of their own that aspartame is lethal or not. I know that aspartame should not be heated because it will form phenol formaldehyde (according to this scientific paper i read). Who has some prove for me that it is save or not save ? Or let me just put it this way, when in normal use and in the body of an average person with a average diet, will it be lethal. It seems that aspartame has some worrying effects when used together with medicine...

EDIT

To clarify my question a little, and not getting hammered with wikipedia pages...
I know that aspartame is tested in a lot of countries. But have their ever been combination of chemical tests ? I can only make up that aspartame is tested not in the presence of other materials which would be very likely in a digestive system or at least this is done in a limited fashion due to the fact that it is not ethical to use humans as test subjects in trials and research that might turn out to be harmfull...

For example some people love a whiskey cola or a bacardi cola. Now forget for a second that alcohol itself is not the most healthy substance when ingested. What happens when bacardi and a diet cola (which is very likely) containing aspartame is ingested ? Or what is likely, someone eats a large amount of fruit (with pesticides on them) and consumes afterwards a diet cola ? I am more curious to these kinds of mixing of different chemicals. How about a combination of fruits and diet cola and medicines, leaving out the alcohol ofcourse...

 

[Juncar]

Simply put, FDA is incompetent and filled with corporate interests. Americans should fight harder against corporate greed that will poison your citizens' body.

 

[Cotswolds]

I have spend a great deal of time in my youth with primarily farm animals and i base my opinion not only on my experience but on the experience of others as well.

Your problem seems to be the inability to seperate your opinion from the facts you read.

 

[gsellis]

First, the dose makes the poison. About everything has a lethal concentration. And to focus in the word 'formaldehyde' is not understanding chemistry. Moving a single hydrogen on a molecule can do amazing things. Moving a hydrogen on Fructose can make inert as far has the human digestive system goes.

Aspartame is safe as long as you do not have issues with phenylalanine (the reason I get headaches from Aspartame.)

BTW, I just did a spell check on phenylalanine (always want to add an 'o') and spotted a long diatribe at Snopes... Lord, you are getting sucked into all the web conspiracies. You might want to research the Pus thing too. PETA legend.

 

[William Gaatjes]

First, the dose makes the poison. About everything has a lethal concentration. And to focus in the word 'formaldehyde' is not understanding chemistry. Moving a single hydrogen on a molecule can do amazing things. Moving a hydrogen on Fructose can make inert as far has the human digestive system goes.

I see.

Aspartame is safe as long as you do not have issues with phenylalanine (the reason I get headaches from Aspartame.)

BTW, I just did a spell check on phenylalanine (always want to add an 'o') and spotted a long diatribe at Snopes... Lord, you are getting sucked into all the web conspiracies. You might want to research the Pus thing too. PETA legend.

Do not worry about me being a conspiracy lover. A big company will always have some people who will do everything for money. At the same time there will also be working people with ethics and who will not push it too far and some people will work at that company with a strong moral about honesty and justice. There can also be people who just overlooked something without intent. Just to provide some examples, the issue is balance.

An example is this story about Henry T Ford(Correct me if i am wrong). Yes the person who wanted to have every American a Model T. When he looked at the land he owned, he realized that the corn could be made into ethanol ( yes during the 1900 all that knowledge that is now being boasted about soja diesel and corn ethanol was already present). The only issue was that the process was at that time to expensive when compared with oil that came squirting out of the ground. The thing is, Mr Ford wanted to supply everybody with a car his company build, And that car would use ethanol grown from his land as well. Now of course he would never be able to supply all the demand but you see what i am getting at. He was trying to create a market. And he succeeded. Now the same thing is happening with Monsanto. Biotech Soy beans and Biotech corn can be grown to make soy diesel and corn ethanol. Now that oil seems to get scarce and everybody is believing in the carbon neutral hype. Monsanto sees a market and is trying to create one succesfully for years. which is obvious as every company would do. Is it conspiracy, no. entrepreneur, yes. Besides the fact of course that soy and corn is used in many food products for consumption.

EDIT
What does get me worried though, is that it seems there is no regulation on genetic engineered material. I mean, somebody who is able to genetically engineer a plants dna can not foresee that the genetic material of that plant would spread rapidly ? I really doubt that or i am right about some scientists. They only see what the torch shows them in the dark. If that maybe because they can not see it or they do not want to see it.

 

[JTsyo]

This is what we'll need for surviving in space. People always resist change but that can be a good thing since it makes sure that what we move into isn't worse than from where we came. With the mess seen with genetically modified corn, we'll have to be more cautious of who watching over the cooperate shoulders.
Personally I don't mind not eating animals instead of lab tissues as long as it passes long term studies. It'll free up a lot of land and resources for other uses.

 

[gsellis]

GMOs are usually safe. Evolution requires GMOs. Kudzu is not a gengineered organism and it spreads rapidly. Invasive is based on how it can fit into an environment without any checks or balances and it is geared to rapid reproduction.

Example - Monsanto creates a cotton that is resistant to a blight and RoundUp. The goal is higher yields as weeds are kept down and production is higher. The crazies think this is bad. No, it is actually BETTER for the environment. Higher yields mean less land use. That can result in lower water requirements, lower fertilizer, etc. They might add nitrogen fixing into the gene... self fertilizing.

The caution with GMOs is what history has taught us with the Irish potato famine. Biological diversity must be maintained or you can be hit hard by a single event.