Scary news!

The USDA has finally reacted to the contamination of the U.S. rice
supply by an unapproved, genetically engineered variety of rice
created by the Bayer Corporation. Three weeks ago, it was discovered
that Bayer's mutant rice, gene-spliced to survive heavy doses of a
powerful herbicide called glufosinate, had contaminated U.S. long
grain rice stocks. The USDA admitted it had "no idea" how extensive
the contamination was. Meanwhile Japan has banned all U.S. rice
imports, while the EU is rejecting U.S. imports that test positive for
contamination. The rice industry has been in a state of upheaval, with
rumors of a massive market recall spreading across the country. This
week, the USDA announced its plan of action: instead of recalling this
illegal, and potentially unsafe rice, it is working with Bayer to
fast-track the approval process. "Illegal, potentially hazardous rice
in grain bins, on supermarket shelves, in cereal, beer, baby foods,
and all rice products. It should be a no-brainer. Recall this stuff to
make sure no one eats it," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director of
the Center for Food Safety. "Instead, USDA plans to rush through
'market approval' of a genetically engineered rice that Bayer itself
decided was unfit for commerce. Why? To free Bayer from liability."

Learn mo http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_2159.cfm

said...

> Scary news!


sf,

THAT sucks!!!

"Liberty Link Rice 601"

The BUMS!!!

Andy

Steve Wertz said...

> On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:31:37 -0500, Andy wrote:
>
>> "Liberty Link Rice 601"
>
> "Liberty Link"?
>
> Where the hell do the marketers and mad scientists come up with
> these names? You think this rice was going on some sort of
> peace-keeping mission.
>
> ObFood: Chipotle-rubbed flap and home fries (made from frozen
> french fries) for breakfast.
>
> -sw


Steve,

LOL!

Sadly, you have to wonder about the previous 600 genetics they released
for public consumption.

That and the unknown "Freedom fries" lurking at fast food restaurants
near you.

But yeah, when it's packaged for supermarket consumption WORLDWIDE,
something has REALLY gone wrong!!! So what else is new?

Andy
Cautiously nibbling peanuts

sf wrote:
> Scary news!
>
> The USDA has finally reacted to the contamination of the U.S. rice
> supply by an unapproved, genetically engineered variety of rice
> created by the Bayer Corporation. Three weeks ago, it was discovered
> that Bayer's mutant rice, gene-spliced to survive heavy doses of a
> powerful herbicide called glufosinate, had contaminated U.S. long
> grain rice stocks. The USDA admitted it had "no idea" how extensive
> the contamination was. Meanwhile Japan has banned all U.S. rice
> imports, while the EU is rejecting U.S. imports that test positive for
> contamination. The rice industry has been in a state of upheaval, with
> rumors of a massive market recall spreading across the country. This
> week, the USDA announced its plan of action: instead of recalling this
> illegal, and potentially unsafe rice, it is working with Bayer to
> fast-track the approval process. "Illegal, potentially hazardous rice
> in grain bins, on supermarket shelves, in cereal, beer, baby foods,
> and all rice products. It should be a no-brainer. Recall this stuff to
> make sure no one eats it," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director of
> the Center for Food Safety. "Instead, USDA plans to rush through
> 'market approval' of a genetically engineered rice that Bayer itself
> decided was unfit for commerce. Why? To free Bayer from liability."
>
> Learn mo http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_2159.cfm

Liberty link (glufosinate tolerant rice) - additional information from
an agricultural database of genetically modified crops.

>From the AgBIOS database of genetically modified crops
http://tinyurl.com/fnhlr

You can access all of the USDA regulatory documents, as well as acts,
regualtions and guidance documents here. Canadian documentation is also
available.

-SD-

sf wrote:
> Scary news!
>
> The USDA has finally reacted to the contamination of the U.S. rice
> supply by an unapproved, genetically engineered variety of rice
> created by the Bayer Corporation.

I knew they cloned that witch.


Three weeks ago, it was discovered
> that Bayer's mutant rice, gene-spliced to survive heavy doses of a
> powerful herbicide called glufosinate, had contaminated U.S. long
> grain rice stocks. The USDA admitted it had "no idea" how extensive
> the contamination was. Meanwhile Japan has banned all U.S. rice
> imports, while the EU is rejecting U.S. imports that test positive for
> contamination. The rice industry has been in a state of upheaval, with
> rumors of a massive market recall spreading across the country. This
> week, the USDA announced its plan of action: instead of recalling this
> illegal, and potentially unsafe rice, it is working with Bayer to
> fast-track the approval process. "Illegal, potentially hazardous rice
> in grain bins, on supermarket shelves, in cereal, beer, baby foods,
> and all rice products. It should be a no-brainer. Recall this stuff to
> make sure no one eats it," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director of
> the Center for Food Safety. "Instead, USDA plans to rush through
> 'market approval' of a genetically engineered rice that Bayer itself
> decided was unfit for commerce. Why? To free Bayer from liability."
>
> Learn mo http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_2159.cfm

Bali > wrote:
>
>sf wrote:
>> Scary news!
>>
>> The USDA has finally reacted to the contamination of the U.S. rice
>> supply by an unapproved, genetically engineered variety of rice
>> created by the Bayer Corporation.
>
>I knew they cloned that witch.

The original had wiring problems.

--Blair
"blink...blink blink...blink blink
blink blink blink...blink"

sf wrote:
> Scary news!

Glufosinate is marketed under the trade names Basta or Liberty - active
on both broadleaf and grass-type weeds of certain genuses. It's used
to select for genetically engineered plants in tissue culture, as well.
The Basta resistence gene won't be turned on in humans - we do not
possess the promoter which activates the gene. It's likely to be
digested as amino acids and used for energy. A bigger threat is any
other gene which may have been spliced in simultaneously on the same
piece of DNA as the Basta gene. The most likely candidate is kanamycin
resistance gene, or another antibiotic gene. These genes *can* become
transferred to the sub-nuclear DNA of the gut flora in the human
intestine and become part of the "organism" which is the human. The
risks to human health, though likely small, are unknown.

-L.

Andy wrote:
> Steve,
>
> LOL!
>
> Sadly, you have to wonder about the previous 600 genetics they released
> for public consumption.

It's most likely plant #601 which was the original clone.


>
> That and the unknown "Freedom fries" lurking at fast food restaurants
> near you.
>
> But yeah, when it's packaged for supermarket consumption WORLDWIDE,
> something has REALLY gone wrong!!! So what else is new?
>
> Andy
> Cautiously nibbling peanuts

You're at far more risk to your health by eating peanuts - those things
are laden with fungicides, and the organic varieties are laden with
fungi.

-L.

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:31:37 -0500, Andy wrote:
>
> > "Liberty Link Rice 601"
>
> "Liberty Link"?
>
> Where the hell do the marketers and mad scientists come up with
> these names? You think this rice was going on some sort of
> peace-keeping mission.

By and large farmers in the US are conservative red-neck asshole types
who buy into the "patriotic" naming schemes. The "Link" was thrown in
there because it's a genetics term they understand - a "linked trait".

-L.

-L. wrote:
These genes *can* become
> transferred to the sub-nuclear DNA of the gut flora in the human
> intestine and become part of the "organism" which is the human. The
> risks to human health, though likely small, are unknown.

become part of the organism? that's wild

human health risk? wouldn't that depend on how much you eat? of course

I know nothing of what you just typed up there, but.. this part got my
attention

gut flora dna sticking to my intestinal wall? and staying there?

-L. wrote:
sub-nuclear DNA


-
we eat dna everyday
why do these want to hang around

do you think it is chemically possible to become invisible.

heh heh

i've got some things I'd like to do incognito

did you see that movie the entity? well throw that outtcha mind, I was
thinking more like robbing a couple hundred banks

chili palmer wrote:
> -L. wrote:
> These genes *can* become
> > transferred to the sub-nuclear DNA of the gut flora in the human
> > intestine and become part of the "organism" which is the human. The
> > risks to human health, though likely small, are unknown.
>
> become part of the organism? that's wild

Well, what they do is if they stay intact, they can be incorporated
into the DNA in the gut flora - usually E. coli. E.coli recognizes the
promoter used to turn on the gene, so the E. coli would start making
the antibiotic. Whether or not it makes you sick probably depends on
the person - what is most likely to happen is that you develop
resistence to Kanamycin.

>
> human health risk? wouldn't that depend on how much you eat? of course

No. It depends on whether or not the bacteria in your gut incorporate
the DNA.


>
> I know nothing of what you just typed up there, but.. this part got my
> attention
>
> gut flora dna sticking to my intestinal wall? and staying there?

LOL...your gut flora are the bacteria, fungi, protozoans, worms, etc.
that live in your intestines. Yes, Barry, hon, you are a living cess
pool down there! They have colonized your guts and live happily,
reproducing and renewing their populations continuously. Some bacteria
have DNA that is extra-nuclear, that is, it is found on little circular
pieces of DNA called plasmids. Plasmids can be reproduced and
transferred from one cell to another, through a process called
"mating". The E. coli have a little penis-like appendage called a
pilus (plural pili) which they use to transfer the plasmids:
http://www.buddycom.com/bacteria/gnr/gnrenter.html
About a third way down the page is a pic of two E. coli "doing it".

If the foreign DNA gets incorporated into the plasmid (or even the
nuclear DNA) of the E. coli, it will be passed from one cell to another
and reproduced so that all of the cells in the gut eventually have a
copy. If the E. coli recognizes the promoter, the gene will be turned
on, and the protein that is encoded by the gene will be made. In the
case I was talking about, that would be the antibiotic Kanamycin.

-L.

-L. wrote:
> chili palmer wrote:
> > -L. wrote:
> > These genes *can* become
> > > transferred to the sub-nuclear DNA of the gut flora in the human
> > > intestine and become part of the "organism" which is the human. The
> > > risks to human health, though likely small, are unknown.
> >
> > become part of the organism? that's wild
>
> Well, what they do is if they stay intact, they can be incorporated
> into the DNA in the gut flora - usually E. coli. E.coli recognizes the
> promoter used to turn on the gene, so the E. coli would start making
> the antibiotic. Whether or not it makes you sick probably depends on
> the person - what is most likely to happen is that you develop
> resistence to Kanamycin.
>
> >
> > human health risk? wouldn't that depend on how much you eat? of course
>
> No. It depends on whether or not the bacteria in your gut incorporate
> the DNA.
>
>
> >
> > I know nothing of what you just typed up there, but.. this part got my
> > attention
> >
> > gut flora dna sticking to my intestinal wall? and staying there?
>
> LOL...your gut flora are the bacteria, fungi, protozoans, worms, etc.
> that live in your intestines. Yes, Barry, hon, you are a living cess
> pool down there! They have colonized your guts and live happily,
> reproducing and renewing their populations continuously. Some bacteria
> have DNA that is extra-nuclear, that is, it is found on little circular
> pieces of DNA called plasmids. Plasmids can be reproduced and
> transferred from one cell to another, through a process called
> "mating". The E. coli have a little penis-like appendage called a
> pilus (plural pili) which they use to transfer the plasmids:
> http://www.buddycom.com/bacteria/gnr/gnrenter.html
> About a third way down the page is a pic of two E. coli "doing it".
>
> If the foreign DNA gets incorporated into the plasmid (or even the
> nuclear DNA) of the E. coli, it will be passed from one cell to another
> and reproduced so that all of the cells in the gut eventually have a
> copy. If the E. coli recognizes the promoter, the gene will be turned
> on, and the protein that is encoded by the gene will be made. In the
> case I was talking about, that would be the antibiotic Kanamycin.
>
> -L.

Thanks, lol

that must be one slick promotor to turn the gene on, he's probably got
a gold card and platinum on his teeth

I didn't know something lived inside of me that has a different dna
than I do

of course under a microscope, you would see the e.coli before you see
it's dna...
you would say.. barry's dna is not stamped inside the e coli

do all e coli in different bodies have the same dna? is this a
universal dna?

chili palmer wrote:
>
> do all e coli in different bodies have the same dna? is this a
> universal dna?

Most of the DNA will be the same in all cells, but each cell will have
specific mutations (DNA changes) unique to the individual - either
having spontaneously occurred or having been picked up through the
process I described before. So in essence, each individual is unique
just like in humans, but the core DNA is the same - just like in
humans.

Humans have on average 7 unique mutations, most of which are mute,
which means they have no affect on the body.

-L.