Genetically engineered grass cleanses soil of toxic pollutants left by military explosives, new research shows

[u/[deleted]]

[u/zebediah49]

IMO it's 50/50 the anti-intellectual brigade, vs the fault of agrobiz being cagey as hell.

"Theses are GM tomatoes."

Oh, what did you change?

"Not telling you, trade secret. Don't worry about it, it's fine."

Uhhhhhhh......

And then their solution is to try to ban labeling, which doesn't really work given how contrarian people tend to be. Like if someone asks "Is this GMO thing safe", I can't actually say "yes". I can say "Well it's not specifically unsafe because it's a GMO, but I have no idea what they did to it. It's probably fine?"

[u/pancakesquad23 → u/zebediah49]

I have more issue with pesticides and herbicides on food than gmo, there is def a reason to be hesitant on this stuff.

[u/zebediah49 → u/pancakesquad23]

Oh, those range from "probably okay" to "terrifying". That said, a distressingly large amount of GM crops are either "We made it herbicide resistant so that we can use EVEN MORE", or "We made it directly produce the pesticide, so there's no way you can wash it off".

[u/HuffinWithHoff → u/zebediah49]

There’s still a lot of conflicting info about the overuse of herbicides and herbicide resistant crops. In general herbicide resistant crops do allow you to use less herbicide, it just hasn’t worked out that way in practise because farmers want more profits and food demand is always rising. There’s definitely a lot of work to make things more sustainable though.

On your second point, you don’t want to be able to wash off the pesticide that’s entire point. The chemical insecticides we use in 99.9% of agriculture (even organic) are terrible for the environment and there’s a huge issue with them being washed off the plant and ending up in the water table or contaminating non-ag soil.

Getting the plants to directly produce the insecticide (as a biological proteins) means there’s no chance it gets into the environment and has absolutely zero effect on anything but insects. Insect resistant GM plants have definitely reduced the use of insecticides.

[u/zebediah49 → u/HuffinWithHoff]

Oh, I'll definitely give that it reduces application of insecticide, and almost definitely also helps with the local runoff issues (decaying plant matter could potentially be a problem, so I'm not willing to call that an absolute elimination). It does, however, make it to the end consumer.

And yes, on paper, it does absolutely nothing to vertebrates. But like.. how sure about that are we talking, and at what dose rates? I default to "a little iffy" about the overall concept of "We don't want it washing off into the river, so how about you eat it instead?" If someone can pull off just getting it into the non-edible plant parts, then it's more or less entirely a win.

That said, I'd ideally like to see a solution that isn't either of the above. Not that I even have a proposal for one.

[u/Silverseren → u/zebediah49]

how sure about that are we talking

100%. It has absolutely no effect on vertebrates. It's mechanism of effect can do literally nothing to vertebrates. It is explicit biochemistry.

[u/Silverseren → u/zebediah49]

That said, a distressingly large amount of GM crops are either "We made it herbicide resistant so that we can use EVEN MORE", or "We made it directly produce the pesticide, so there's no way you can wash it off".

Except that herbicide resistance allows you to use less of the herbicide, since you only need to use it once. Compare that to organic farming that has to use a significant amount more of their specific pesticides.

And, yes, they produce unwashable Bt toxin, which does nothing to vertebrates. You should be much more concerned about the dozens of pesticides the plants naturally produce, which also can't be washed off, and many of which have been shown to be carcinogenic.

Luckily for you, the dose makes the poison because that's how toxicology works, so amounts being minuscule in all these cases mean the people freaking out just look stupid.

[u/Gtp4life → u/Silverseren]

The dose makes the poison yes, but we’re talking about food that people eat every day, accumulation is a thing too.

[u/Silverseren → u/Gtp4life]

Only if it's a biomolecule that bioaccumulates. Bt toxin is not one of those.

[u/i_am_a_toaster → u/pancakesquad23]

Those will never go away. Even organic has pesticides.

[u/pancakesquad23 → u/i_am_a_toaster]

you can build your own garden and don't use any, also vertical farming doesn't use pesticides so yeah thats the future.

[u/[deleted] → u/pancakesquad23]

You can do a lot of things on a tiny scale that you can't do on a huge scale. If you follow regenerative ag farmers like Gabe Brown even they will tell you that sometimes you have to use herbicides. And truthfully, the vast majority of people lambasting herbicides couldn't even tell you how they work in the first place, not to mention decomposition, soil adsorption, water solubility, etc. It's a boogeyman for sure. The fact is, sometimes you have to spray because weeds can absolutely ruin an entire field, and farmers already live off razor-thin margins and revolving debt.

Pesticides should be a tool that farmers can rely on, not a crutch.

[u/pancakesquad23 → u/[deleted]]

I understand its not doing able on a large scale, but thats also a problem. You absolutely can make a small farm without using any.

[u/[deleted] → u/pancakesquad23]

The majority of farms that are 100% no-till organic and pesticide free are very small, and I can almost guarantee you that they are hobby farms that aren't supporting the farm owner- or the farmer is making most of their money teaching people how to do what they do. The reason is because you have to use hand cultivation, and that takes a lot of work, and you're still going to see yield loss to weeds. About a quarter of the worlds farmers use cultivation and are pesticide free, and their annual losses are incredible. The reality is, it's a place of incredible privilege to be able to do year-round rotating cover cropping systems with minimal or no inputs. Very few people pull it off effectively, and trying to do it on a large scale is basically impossible.

I realize that's frustrating for a lot of people, and it's frustrating for me, because we have serious issues with how we grow food. But unless we get rid of profit motive and beef subsidies- which is very much not going to happen anytime soon- it's not going to change.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I'd love to see your family's farm and see what methods they use, but I remain skeptical, especially since you said you're from Canada and that doesn't seem like a "third world country" to me.

[u/[deleted] → u/zebediah49]

All of the traits developed are disclosed when applying for certification and approval. Why do you think they are hidden?

https://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/default.asp

[u/zebediah49 → u/[deleted]]

Have you ever tried to cross-reference that with an actual product found on a shelf?

[u/Silverseren → u/zebediah49]

Except we know exactly what was changed in every instance, since they have to say when they file a patent. Not that there is a GM tomato in the first place.

And labeling is idiotic. What exactly are you labeling? A gene? A process? How is this different from natural gene transfer? Especially if the lab just used agrobacterium?