If you don’t understand what you’re reading, don’t link it.
Protecting DNA from GMO's
Colton Cooper
William Gutierrez
>Muh resistance
This is a stupid point. Resistance markers used are only for very generic antibiotics and tuned to low doses. Also a resistance marker is only for one particular antibiotic, it does not confer general resistance. Your average hospital poses more danger for antibiotic resistant bacteria than GMOs. Also you can put in counter selectable markers to act as suicide controls.
Owen Morgan
how? GM food is food that was selected and amplified their genes to be the best kind of food, when you eat it, all the DNA gets disolved in your stomach, they don't even reach your cells.
Also do you think the food we eat today is not modified? Nature is always changing the dna of everything, fucking carrots have like 4 sets of chromosomes or more, the wheat that makes your bread are fucking chimaeras of 4 types of ancient wheats.
Read about genetics son
Robert Long
>antibiotic resistance
Increasingly irrelevant as we figure out better methods of getting the genes in than 'lel just try and kill off any failures'.
>might contain toxic substances
So might 'organic' crap. And considering that 'organic' requires and involves far more aggressive usage of pesticides and the like, GMOs may be the safer option.
>not "substantially equivalent"
Yes, that's the entire fucking point. If they were, you just *failed to create a GMO*.
Tyler Roberts
>Notice that none of these have anything to do with the actual genetic engineering.
They do when you genetically engineer crops to be glyphosate resistant.
Nice argument you have there.
>Resistance markers used are only for very generic antibiotics and tuned to low doses
Except this isn't about antibiotics, you're essentially spouting strawman tier arguments and false equivalents
>GM food is food that was selected and amplified their genes to be the best kind of food
That's not genetic modification, that's artificial selection, two very different things.
Landon Richardson
mondolez pls go
Grayson Wood
>Except this isn't about antibiotics
Except that's literally the point raised in the post I responded to. Do you struggle with reading comprehension?
Easton Powell
>Increasingly irrelevant as we figure out better methods of getting the genes in than 'lel just try and kill off any failures'.
You don't just "get" new genes, you pervert their already existing biological structure.
>So might 'organic' crap
Except organic foods aren't genetically engineered not are they grown in pesticides and artificial fertilizers.
>Yes, that's the entire fucking point.
Not at all, the point is to create organisms resistant to certain diseases and pesticide/herbicides
Colton Miller
>Except that's literally the point raised in the post I responded to.
Did you not read the actual article? Lmao.
John Powell
>They do when you genetically engineer crops to be glyphosate resistant.
You say the problem is crops being oversaturated in glyphosate based pesticides. Explain to me how this is a problem with genetic engineering rather than the use of glyphosate based pesticides.