What is GMO?

[Moindreffor]

by Moindreffor »07 / 01 / 19, 10: 05

for someone who has been in robotic design, you lack a little scientific spirit, it's a shame

You are badly placed to judge the thing, I suppose that you never created, invented anything and therefore presume you competent in scientific spirit, I am allowed to doubt it!

the scientific spirit has nothing to do with inventing or creating, it is a way of conceiving things, gives the same calculation even simple to do to a person with a scientific spirit it will do it in a different way from that who has a literary spirit for example
I feel a little defensive about this cost, and I see that the very concept of scientific spirit escapes you, so I understand more easily your vision of things

come on if you drink soy milk, you eat GMOs and apparently it doesn't affect your health

I don't drink soy milk, (oh, the ready-made thought patterns ) or GMOs taken consciously and voluntarily and therefore it does not affect my health. For almost 50 years, I have more needed to use pharmaceutical chemical poisons and I doubt you can say the same. Perhaps you have consumed too much GMO?

when you are pushed to your limits and faced with your inconsistencies, you see your true face, you are very lucky not to see the doctor for a long time, I am not jealous, but when we are able to make such a reflection, it indicates a very bad spirit, even unhealthy, I do not argue with people capable of going down so low to be right

[Janic]

Moindreffor »07/01/19, 14:08

janic wrote: by Moindreffor »07/01/19, 10:05
for someone who has been in robotic design, you lack a little scientific spirit, it's a shame

You are badly placed to judge the thing, I suppose that you never created, invented anything and therefore presume you competent in scientific spirit, I am allowed to doubt it!

the scientific mind has nothing to do with inventing or creating, it's a way of conceiving things,

Exactly! but a way of seeing things that does not materialize through an achievement is just a view of the mind, not of science.

give the same calculation even simple to do to a person with a scientific spirit it will do it in a different way from that which has a literary spirit for example

2 + 2 = 4 scientific or literary spirit.

I feel a little defensive about this cost, and I see that the very concept of scientific spirit escapes you, so I understand more easily your vision of things

I am as said Exnimachin: pragmatic, by turn of mind and by professional deformation and therefore my vision of things depends on these aspects that you probably escape.

come on if you drink soy milk, you eat GMOs and apparently it doesn't affect your health

I don't drink soy milk, (oh, the ready-made thought patterns) or GMOs taken consciously and voluntarily, so it doesn't affect my health. For almost 50 years, I have no longer needed to use pharmaceutical chemical poisons and I doubt you can say the same. Perhaps you have consumed too much GMO?

when you are pushed to your limits and faced with your inconsistencies,

Funny as reasoning! What are the inconsistencies in question, the fact of not drinking soy? It is talking to say nothing in this case!

on see your real face,

Psycho and physio at the same time? You are wasting your time philosophizing here, exercising your talents with those who really need it! Maybe starting with your mirror!
My father, wise at times, said: " on he's a jerk " because this on does nothing but make believe that this one is credible, especially when it is not nominative.

you're lucky not to see the doctor for a long time, I'm not jealous, but when we are able

it is not a matter of luck, but of lifestyle. I have been, like most people of my generation, fervently believing in a better society where, according to beautiful promises (never kept) disease, suffering and soon death would disappear thanks to THE science, the all powerful science , and in this case medical.
I even (what a horror!) Was probably among the first to take the Sabin oral polio vaccine. But like all the others who pay attention, just realize that it's the complete flop! Never have there been so many serious, degenerative, autoimmune diseases, they, decimating the wealthy populations in France as in other nations with the same standard of living, you have to be blind or willfully blind (say nothing, do nothing see, hear nothing!) so as not to realize it. [*]
603.000 deaths per year, including 159.712 deaths from cancer, 108.802 from cardiovascular diseases, 55.177 from neurological disorders, etc. the infections that usually caused the most deaths were only 10.768. So we replaced a blind with a blind man and that's what we should be happy about? BP drugs work less and less because organisms get used to it or develop resistance to it. So: either wait until the disease strikes and die; or one precedes it by developing the REAL resistance and effectiveness of the immune system through an adequate lifestyle. It is therefore not a question of luck, even less of illusory vaccines, but of an adapted lifestyle which health authorities are gradually starting to do their job: 5 fruits and vegetables per day, antioxidants to reduce these diseases in order to fight against free radicals whose origins are now officially recognized (we have been outside the circuit for decades we have alerted the authorities, turning a deaf ear, as long as the protest does not growl in sheep to be shorn.) and that becomes the most aggressive of the opponents who turns into promoter of what he has discriminated against and fought fiercely! It's beautiful !

[*] Americans who like, the figures, studies, statistics had noticed that poor black or Hispanic populations who reached a social and financial status equivalent to white population, saw developing the same pathologies as these affluent populations
there is no smoke without fire!

[Did67]

As usual, let's clarify before diving into the debates of ideas ... which, without a serious basis, can become smoky.

1) "genetically modified", it means what: indeed, each time an evolution is integrated by the alive one (because advantageous - one does not speak of the thousands which are lethal or unfavorable and disappear), the previous organism has been changed ...

If the initial bacteria had refused to die or had multiplied identically perfect, we would not be there!

By the way, if you have insomnia, philosophize:

a) death generates a "more complex life" for the offspring, we can also say that it is necessary to go through death for the overall system to improve

b) therefore, "dreamers" of an eternal life form are deeply morbid!

c) imperfection, even error, generates improvement in living things; notice to "perfectionists"! A mutation is nothing more than an error in the duplication / transmission of genes!

2) These "genetic modifications" (selection of the right genes) have been accelerated under the action of man, by mass selection; spelled and old wheats are only grasses, finger mills and whatever, improved, selected. So "genetically modified". Little by little appear the form, durum wheat ... Not yesterday. Not at Monsanto! Slowly, certainly, but a little with each generation ... I have expressed myself elsewhere on the mythology that the "old varieties" constitute for the poor lost minds on the internet.

3) In the 19th, it accelerates again, with genetics (science) ... We do this in an "organized", targeted way. We understand how such and such a character is transmitted. While remaining within species (in general).

I say in general, because the mule or the donkey are old. Or the triticales (hybrid of rye and wheat).

We are already bordering on "genetic manipulation" when we have "polyploidized" a lot of plant species: many of our wheat (even "old"), sugar beet or fodder (old varieties) are polyploid: instead of having 2n chromosome, they have 3n (triploids), 4n (tetraploids) sometimes 6n (hexaploids).

Mutagens (such as colchicine) are used. And radiation (Cadarache was a center for agricultural research).

There were not yet any green Khmer. It went like a letter in the mail. We still knew famines. We didn't ask ourselves a lot of questions. Science was powerful.

So in the old varieties, there were already inter-specific hybridizations, and polyploidization. Was it still natural? I guess the donkey who straddled a mare did not ask the question ??? It turns out that it worked.

Another thing still is hybridization in the sense of F1 hybrids: manipulation within the same species; creation of pure lines (often weak), precise recombination in a hybrid which benefits from the "hybrid effect" or "heterosis" (the famous 1 + 1 = a little more than two, which is also found in the resistance of bastards , much stronger than the pure races from which they came). Nothing really bad in these manips ... A major pain: the next generation, it goes downhill in cattails I meant ...

4) And then more recently, new techniques have appeared. Who allowed :

a) to introduce genes from species A into species B

b) to more easily introduce genes of interest from a wild species A of such a plant, into a variety B of the same species, cultivated ...

This is what we generally mean when we talk about GMOs. The sentence "organism genetically modified by introduction of genes by a process other than fertilization / crossing" should be ended.

Note that 4) a) sometimes poses huge questions (when we "disseminate" genes encoding the synthesis of such insecticides in such a common plant - GMO corn from Monsanto): what will happen with these genes? Or will it end? The question is serious.

But note that 4) a) poses fewer questions when we introduce the human genes encoding the synthesis of insulin into bacteria, which we breed for 3 cents in fermenters. The "clean" and cheap insulin made that the dwarves disappeared (there are no more young dwarves; is it a scandal?). Or stronger, when we heal - correct genes, through manipulation - "moon children" (who cannot be exposed to light) or "glass children" (whose bones are brittle). These will be GMOs !!! I bet they'll be happier.

Note that 4) b) is not fundamentally different from classical selection. We're just going faster. Bayer has succeeded in bringing together in the same variety of potato different genes of resistance to late blight harvested in different wild potatoes. They used bacteriophages, a bit like making a mixture, we would use pipettes. So "GMO"! This variety, which would have made it possible to avoid the toxic use (for the soil and the "vegetable" ecosystem) of copper sulphate, was "torpedoed" by "environmentalists" ... Bayer gave up.

So much for science.

Khmer Green people need fighting. Being against Monsanto is the latest chic. We fight against glyphosate, but it is not it that makes our children sick after leaving Bordeaux schools. There are dozens of much more severe molecules. Please note, I am not defending glyphosate. I say there would be much more urgent fights!

I use hybrids. Occasionally. In general, I prefer to make my own seeds. And so the varieties called sand varieties interest me more.

I would have grown well, if I had found one, this potato (fortunately, I do not have a big problem of late blight on my potatoes and it comes out without, and without copper treatment of course). I banish copper from my vegetable patch. In my lifetime, there will never be (even if a few hundred g per hectare would not be a disaster; I am there a little Khmer Green - I do this to raise awareness and show that it is possible, by private gardening).

[Did67]

I hadn't seen that while I was posting - it took a little while - the "debate" was already gone. Ciao les gras ... I said what I had to say.

[Moindreffor]

I hadn't seen that while I was posting - it took a little while - the "debate" was already gone. Ciao les gras ... I said what I had to say.

excellent!!!

[Moindreffor]

2 + 2 = 4 scientific or literary spirit.

I was talking about a simple calculation, but I didn't see it that simple ... example: 19 - 4 to allow you to understand

[Moindreffor]

603.000 deaths per year, including 159.712 deaths from cancer, 108.802 from cardiovascular diseases, 55.177 from neurological disorders, etc. the infections that usually caused the most deaths were only 10.768.

10% of a population of 1 billion = that's 100 million,
5% of a population of 6 billion is 300 million, so increase in number or decrease?
Alzheimer's is most often triggered after 65 years, so the increase in the number of patients, vaccines, junk food or increased life expectancy?

[Janic]

@ least effort

Janic wrote:
2 + 2 = 4 scientific or literary spirit.

I was talking about a simple calculation, but I didn't see it that simple ... example: 19 - 4 to allow you to understand

It doesn't change the simplicity of the example. Orientals use abacuses and no need for that to be a scientist or a literary, nor anything else for that matter. But we are coming out of GMOs!

10% of a population of 1 billion = that's 100 million,
5% of a population of 6 billion is 300 million, so increase in number or decrease?

about what?

Alzheimer's is most often triggered after 65 years, so the increase in the number of patients, vaccines, junk food or increased life expectancy?

what does this have to do with sauerkraut or the age of the captain? Express yourself clearly on the right subject because we are still emerging from the GMO subject

@ did
that would take us too far, but I do not share all of your demonstration which maintains a confusion, but it is what you believe, and which emerges from the common theory which must, to give credibility to this discourse, use very periods , very long (this is the essence of evolution, moreover, but partly questioned by Gould for example and other researchers)

[Moindreffor]

@ least effort

Janic wrote:
2 + 2 = 4 scientific or literary spirit.

I was talking about a simple calculation, but I didn't see it that simple ... example: 19 - 4 to allow you to understand

It doesn't change the simplicity of the example. Orientals use abacuses and no need for that to be a scientist or a literary, nor anything else for that matter. But we are coming out of GMOs!

if you don't see the difference is that you don't have a scientific spirit, but that would take us too far to quote you

603.000 deaths per year, including 159.712 deaths from cancer, 108.802 from cardiovascular diseases, 55.177 from neurological disorders, etc. the infections that usually caused the most deaths were only 10.768.

what does this have to do with sauerkraut or the age of the captain? Express yourself clearly on the right subject because it still comes out of the GMO subject

I'm just answering you, you too may have got the subject wrong, or you have a short memory ...
you're talking about increasing the number of illnesses by launching figures, taken out of context once again, these figures mean nothing, since everything has to be simplified ... (yes, it's more complicated than 2 +2) Alzheimer's disease did not manifest itself because people died before anything else, and the more the population increases, the more the number of diseases increases, and the more science progresses the more we diagnose it, so it is beast like cabbage

@ did
that would take us too far, but I do not share all of your demonstration which maintains a confusion, but it is what you believe, and which emerges from the common theory which must, to give credibility to this discourse, use very periods , very long (this is the essence of evolution, moreover, but partly questioned by Gould for example and other researchers)

pushpin when you nail your beak, you make us the short version

[Did67]

but I do not share all of your demonstration which maintains a confusion ...

This is by no means a demonstration. I did not try to demonstrate anything ... (it is clear or not this double negation or it says the opposite of what I think ???) In short, I did not try to demonstrate something (like that , it's better !).

I am not trying to convince anyone.

I try to shed light on some concepts, as we understand them, and to look beyond the battles that inevitably generate the "portfolios" (everyone puts what they want; GMO is one; I do not demonstrate anything, I specify the meaning I give to the word). A portmanteau word, everyone puts what they want. One is traveling with fluorescent briefs. The other with a tail coat! From then on, the discussions are endless. And without any interest.

It may not be perfect ,? But without false modesty, I have the impression that it still goes a notch above what I read on average - and which is distressing with confusion!

I testify of what I do - I use hybrids, but rather less; I find the fashion for "ancient vegetables" absurd in many ways; I will without hesitation use the GMO potato from Bayer (although I would have much preferred that INRA still be able to do research and that this pdt variety be in the public domain) ... Etc ...

And you, do what you want! As long as you are happy about it - and that you do not piss off others with Khmer Green terrorism!