Poisoning Ourselves

[Destructus86]

Keep in mind...i'm not some crazy health nut. But over the years i've found more and more disturbing issues with our country the deeper I look into the foods we eat. Take for example food color....it's just about in EVERYTHING (many times without a good reason) and yet places like Europe have actually banned these chemicals due to the harmful side effects on the body and mind. Yet the FDA approved it (and let's be honest, they'll approve nearly anything for the right price) and we eat it...knowing what it does to us. (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...ou-or-your-family-eating-toxic-food-dyes.aspx)

And that's just the tip of the iceburg. Perservative and other toxic chemicals permeate nearly all the food we eat. And that food that contains natural ingredents for reasons unknown to nearly everyone cost more than the chemically produced.

Why do we do this? Why do we willingly ingest crap we know is horrible for our bodies? Is it that we are just too busy to care? Or too lazy to learn?

Why do you eat it? And why don't you resist?

 

[NickNitro]

Did you know they color the salmon you buy pink with food dye in the supermarkets to make it look more appealing and fresh? Absolutely disgusting...and its one of the healthier things you can buy to eat

 

[Godzilla2000]

This news will be very discouraging for Bacon Lovers:

http://shine.yahoo.com/shine-food/l...f-l-kill-you--new-study-finds--174609721.html

 

[Victarion]

I thought everyone knew that bacon, sausage and red meats were generally bad for you. Too busy to do anything about it, in regards to the **** they put in our cheap food. If I had time, I'd grow as much of it out back as I could. Are even the frozen fruits and veggies-straight, no added sugars and sauces-so contaminated?

 

[NickNitro]

^ yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone knows bacon/sausage is generally terrible for you. Delicious...but terrible.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

It's a delicious, terrible, privilege.

 

[Destructus86]

Did you know they color the salmon you buy pink with food dye in the supermarkets to make it look more appealing and fresh? Absolutely disgusting...and its one of the healthier things you can buy to eat

You know...I actually did NOT know that. Now i'm going to have to be more cautious about fish! sheesh

 

[NickNitro]

Yeah its pretty horrible

 

[Anita18]

It never makes sense to me how MORE processed foods could cost LESS than less processed foods.

I think we should put a tax on every processing step. The more processed a food is, the more expensive it gets. Our health crisis, solved immediately!

GMOs are pretty sketchy too. Good old cross-breeding is still legit, but what they're doing in the labs is seriously sketch. It's not only what genes they're putting in to get the result, but what they're using to turn the main genes on. These are called promoters, and some of them are made with viruses. And it isn't a guarantee that the virus promoters we put in to turn on anti-drought (or whatever) genes aren't turning on other things too. (Like, cancer-causing genes, or making crazy mutant viruses...) That's why drugs always have side effects - sure they do what they claim to, but we can't be sure what ELSE they do! The human body is immensely complicated, and everything's connected.

Making soybeans resistant to Roundup is a big WTF in particular.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Did you know they color the salmon you buy pink with food dye in the supermarkets to make it look more appealing and fresh? Absolutely disgusting...and its one of the healthier things you can buy to eat

You know...I actually did NOT know that. Now i'm going to have to be more cautious about fish! sheesh

This applies to farmed salmon more often than not. Wild-caught salmon usually doesn't have this particular additive.

 

[Doctor Evo]

GMOs are pretty sketchy too. Good old cross-breeding is still legit, but what they're doing in the labs is seriously sketch. It's not only what genes they're putting in to get the result, but what they're using to turn the main genes on. These are called promoters, and some of them are made with viruses. And it isn't a guarantee that the virus promoters we put in to turn on anti-drought (or whatever) genes aren't turning on other things too. (Like, cancer-causing genes, or making crazy mutant viruses...)

Cancer-causing genes, or gene products that cause cancer in consumers of the end product? That seems as though it would be a rather important distinction. The latter seems rather unlikely, and unless the genomes of the GMOs and those of the consumers are regulated in radically different manners, it seems as though we'd learn about the presence of cancer-causing physiological products pretty quickly (because symptoms would manifest in the products themselves).

With regard to the formation of mutant viruses, how would this happen (mechanistically)? Which part of the process would facilitate the formation of mutant viruses? What would be the danger to the consumer of the end product? Are there many viruses that could infect both corn and humans, for example? I find this rather doubtful.

Overall I can understand the reluctance to accept this technology on the basis that there may be unforseen pleiotropic effects and epistatic interactions, but we need to ask what, realistically, could result from these phenomena rather than speculate wildly. Cancer-causing genes and mutant viruses don't seem like very probable outcomes.

Making soybeans resistant to Roundup is a big WTF in particular.

What is biochemically and physiologically responsible for this resistance? I'm sure the people that engineered the soybeans know.

 

[Anita18]

Cancer-causing genes, or gene products that cause cancer in consumers of the end product? That seems as though it would be a rather important distinction. The latter seems rather unlikely, and unless the genomes of the GMOs and those of the consumers are regulated in radically different manners, it seems as though we'd learn about the presence of cancer-causing physiological products pretty quickly (because symptoms would manifest in the products themselves).

With regard to the formation of mutant viruses, how would this happen (mechanistically)? Which part of the process would facilitate the formation of mutant viruses? What would be the danger to the consumer of the end product? Are there many viruses that could infect both corn and humans, for example? I find this rather doubtful.

Overall I can understand the reluctance to accept this technology on the basis that there may be unforseen pleiotropic effects and epistatic interactions, but we need to ask what, realistically, could result from these phenomena rather than speculate wildly. Cancer-causing genes and mutant viruses don't seem like very probable outcomes.

What is biochemically and physiologically responsible for this resistance? I'm sure the people that engineered the soybeans know.

Yes, fiddling with your soybeans so you can spray Roundup all over them to get rid of weeds is the obvious explanation. But poison is poison, and making excuses to spray our soils with them just rubs me the wrong way.

I'm actually not THAT well-read on how our body processes GMO foods. For one, I'm not an expert in human digestion and if we actually carry these promoters intact into our own cells.

I do work in a cancer research lab, on the genetic side of things. And two of my PhD coworkers were VERY concerned about GMOs, for the reasons I listed. Full disclosure: one of them is from Caen, in France, where they did the study of mice that found they grew aggressive tumors if they were fed GMO corn their entire lives. (This is the same guy fighting stage 4 pancreatic cancer today, but that's neither here nor there...)

 

[Anita18]

In the lab, we did try lentiviruses to carry genes into the stem cells we're culturing. (Yes, we genetically modify cells too...I presume this is quite similar to what the GMO labs do.)

We actually have to put up more stringent safety protocols when using them (only trained personnel in the tissue culture room, keep the door closed, dump everything in bleach), and we weren't even eating the results. That should tell you all you need to know about that.

The viruses actually didn't work at all for us, so we got back to zapping cells and forcing liposomes into them to do it instead.

 

[Piper Maru]

I'll continue to consume my delicious poison thank you very much.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Yes, fiddling with your soybeans so you can spray Roundup all over them to get rid of weeds is the obvious explanation. But poison is poison, and making excuses to spray our soils with them just rubs me the wrong way.

And that's perfectly understandable. I think that the most compelling arguments against GMOs concern potential ecological impacts. This would fall into that category, I think, even if indirectly.

I'm actually not THAT well-read on how our body processes GMO foods. For one, I'm not an expert in human digestion and if we actually carry these promoters intact into our own cells.

I really don't see how we would. I don't think DNA is stable enough to survive our digestive tract, and the cells that would be immediately susceptible to lateral gene transfer die off pretty quickly. You'd also need something to actually deliver the promoters and incorporate them into the chromosomes directly. Viruses tend to have a high level of specificity with respect to the cells they invade, so even if virions were still present in the consumed product, the odds of them effectively invading human cells seem minuscule.

I do work in a cancer research lab, on the genetic side of things. And two of my PhD coworkers were VERY concerned about GMOs, for the reasons I listed. Full disclosure: one of them is from Caen, in France, where they did the study of mice that found they grew aggressive tumors if they were fed GMO corn their entire lives. (This is the same guy fighting stage 4 pancreatic cancer today, but that's neither here nor there...)

Then my assessment of the situation may very well be flawed. Did they find out why?

Seems as though it would be easy enough to do transcriptome analysis of GMO corn and compare it to non-GMO corn to pinpoint regions of increased gene expression and figure out which genes (and gene products) may be responsible. They've mapped the corn genome, I think. This may also reveal epistatic interactions, too.

 

[Doctor Evo]

In the lab, we did try lentiviruses to carry genes into the stem cells we're culturing. (Yes, we genetically modify cells too...I presume this is quite similar to what the GMO labs do.)

We actually have to put up more stringent safety protocols when using them (only trained personnel in the tissue culture room, keep the door closed, dump everything in bleach), and we weren't even eating the results. That should tell you all you need to know about that.

I'm confused. You destroyed the modified stem cells?

 

[Anita18]

I'm confused. You destroyed the modified stem cells?

We eventually destroy them when we want to see the results of what we've done to them.

But I think you mean during the gene delivery process. You put the virus in the liquid food that the cells sit in. The viruses then do what viruses do and infect the cells, carrying the genes we want into them.

Whatever touches that media (pipets and plates, mostly), goes straight into bleach afterwards before going into the biohazard waste, because there's virus in it. Keep in mind that this is a modified virus which technically shouldn't even be able to replicate itself using its host cell.

It isn't until a few days later, when the virus gene is inserted into the stem cell's genes and there are no more viruses floating in the liquid, that it is safe and we can go back to normal safety protocols.

 

[Anita18]

Then my assessment of the situation may very well be flawed. Did they find out why?

Seems as though it would be easy enough to do transcriptome analysis of GMO corn and compare it to non-GMO corn to pinpoint regions of increased gene expression and figure out which genes (and gene products) may be responsible.
They've mapped the corn genome, I think. This may also reveal epistatic interactions, too.

Of course they didn't find out "why." That would take a decade or more of research. That was merely a "we did this and this happened to the rats *throws hands up in the air in bewilderment*" kind of study. Here's the link to the article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 (Warning: gross pics of tumor-ridden rats and rat liver and kidneys if you scroll down enough.)

I'm not sure of the extent of our knowledge of the corn genome. I mean, even if we knew what genes the entire genome contained, the number of gene products would by far eclipse the number of genes.

And to be honest, we are far, far from understanding the entirety of epigenetic relationships. It is incredibly complex.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Of course they didn't find out "why." That would take a decade or more of research. That was merely a "we did this and this happened to the rats *throws hands up in the air in bewilderment*" kind of study. Here's the link to the article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 (Warning: gross pics of tumor-ridden rats and rat liver and kidneys if you scroll down enough.)

I'm not sure of the extent of our knowledge of the corn genome. I mean, even if we knew what genes the entire genome contained, the number of gene products would by far eclipse the number of genes.

And to be honest, we are far, far from understanding the entirety of epigenetic relationships. It is incredibly complex.

Epistatic interactions =/= epigenetics.

 

[Doctor Evo]

We eventually destroy them when we want to see the results of what we've done to them.

But I think you mean during the gene delivery process. You put the virus in the liquid food that the cells sit in. The viruses then do what viruses do and infect the cells, carrying the genes we want into them.

Whatever touches that media (pipets and plates, mostly), goes straight into bleach afterwards before going into the biohazard waste, because there's virus in it. Keep in mind that this is a modified virus which technically shouldn't even be able to replicate itself using its host cell.

It isn't until a few days later, when the virus gene is inserted into the stem cell's genes and there are no more viruses floating in the liquid, that it is safe and we can go back to normal safety protocols.

Which leads me back to one of my original questions: where is the danger to the consumer? I'm sure they take steps to ensure that virions aren't present in the final product.

 

[Anita18]

Epistatic interactions =/= epigenetics.

You're right, I got my epi's mixed up. It's late.

We are still far from understanding either of them. And actually, our lab does a lot of work with epigenetics, so all that can certainly be related to cancer as well, that we need to account for.

Which leads me back to one of my original questions: where is the danger to the consumer? I'm sure they take steps to ensure that virions aren't present in the final product.

We aren't eating our final product, so as long as it isn't floating in the liquid, they trust that we aren't going to lick the cells off the plate.

Once that virus gets into the gene, it's staying in there. Technically, it shouldn't be able to replicate because we've modified it, but that's what they said about the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

According to a recent study which has just concluded, if we eat more than one rasher of bacon a day we are more likely to keel over and die.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21682779

I'm glad I went vegan a few months ago...
There seems to be one meat related scandal/scare after another these last few months.

 

[I'm Old Greg]

I eat vegan.
I see more people freaking out and more kids acting crazy maybe because of all the crap they put into our food.
It is poison, doesnt mcdonalds contain plastic??

I cook my own food rarely eat out. I worked in the food industry amd saw how gross the food was and worse the people preparing it. So i stay away.

Vegan meals taste great to. I dont feel like sh t after eating non meat non dairy.

I visit family in the west and we make fun of how the food has fear sh_t in it. Animals crap has been found in the meat.
I dont eat the stuff anymore just too much gross stuff about it.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

I never knew the ingredient 'natural flavoring' was actually some code word for MSG and / or MSG like product.

 

[Doctor Evo]

You're right, I got my epi's mixed up. It's late.

We are still far from understanding either of them.

Which is why I proposed a design comparing transcriptomes of unmodified corn with GM corn. You should - in theory - be able to detect and characterize epistatic interactions this way.

Once that virus gets into the gene, it's staying in there. Technically, it shouldn't be able to replicate because we've modified it, but that's what they said about the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park.

But even if it does, there's no real danger to the people eating the product (I'm assuming we're talking about GM crops). What WOULD concern me, however, is the potential for a virus to run rampant in wild plant populations. I think that's legitimate.