quote:One of the arguments in defense of GM food is that we have been modifying the genes of food crops for centuries and that the main difference with todays efforts is that we can do it so much more efficiently now. How does the banana example change the validity of that argument? Will agricultural science save the day again or will the banana go the way of the dodo? I don''t know about you, but I like bananas and would hate to see them vanish in this fashion. (And no that''s not a banana in my pants
... The banana''s main problem is that it has become sterile and seedless as a result of 10,000 years of selective breeding. It has, over time, become a plant with unvarying genetic sameness. The genetic diversity needed to cope with environmental stresses, such as diseases and crop pests, has long ago been bred out of the banana. Consequently, the banana plantations of the world are completely vulnerable to devastating environmental pressures. ... Then Panama disease, a soil fungus, attacked banana plantations and the genetically enfeebled Gros Michel banana was virtually wiped out. By 1960, the Gros Michel was no longer a viable crop. Tireless agricultural research eventually produced a successor, the Cavendish. For the past 40 years or so, the Cavendish has been virtually the only commercially grown stock available on store shelves in developed nations. ... But like its genetic predecessor, the Cavendish is also sterile, equally unprotected from diseases and crop pests. And now a powerful plant pathogen, the Black Sigatoka fungus, has appeared on the scene, attacking the Cavendish stock around the world. Banana yields have already dropped by 50-70 per cent, and banana-tree life spans have been reduced from about 30 years to just about two years. The genetic uniformity among Cavendish bananas has made them helpless to fight Black Sigatoka. ... The selective plant breeding that has brought us to this impasse is comparable to genetic engineering. Both change the genetic makeup of a plant, perhaps irreversibly. So the case of the banana gives ammunition to critics of genetic engineering and to their claim that much can go wrong when we tamper with plant genetics. Such warnings aren''t new. In 1995, biologists warned that changing the genetic makeup of a plant is like playing with fire. Even so, genetic alteration continues. At Oregon State University, scientists are at work on generating sterility in poplar trees; the Canadian Forest Service is looking into breeding insect resistance in white spruces; at the University of California, work is being done on changing root systems in walnut trees. And at the Independent University in Madrid, orange trees are being modified to promote early fruit-bearing and to grow oranges that are easier to peel. ... The disappearance of the banana should be a wakeup call -- to what can result from reckless genetic manipulation, complacency and inattention. If this can happen to the world''s most popular fruit with all humanity as its witness, imagine what could happen to more obscure, but no less useful plants whose fates are less publicized and open to public scrutiny.
🔒 Locked
Bananas!
Advertisement
Original Post
According to a former senior biologist for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, bananas are facing extinction because centuries of genetic manipulation by human beings have left them vulnerable to disease. Biologist Robert Alison further argues that the impending demise of bananas should serve as a wake up call to the dangers of genetically modifying food plants. Yes, we''ll have no bananas
)
NNOOOO NOt the BANANNAS!!
[edited by - Xtremehobo on July 20, 2003 2:07:02 PM]
[edited by - Xtremehobo on July 20, 2003 2:07:02 PM]
Go Banana!
~~~~~
"Ranked #1 Tiberian Outsider of the Year"
Download and play Slime King I.
[edited by - dede on July 20, 2003 2:45:54 PM]
Boy this thread sure went downhill in a hurry.
As for your question about the validity of that argument, I think both sides can spin this to their favor. On the one hand, you''ve got slowly modified foods going bad. Modifying them quickly just means they''d go bad faster. On the other hand, the very problem we''re facing is that traditional methods can''t save the bananas in time. Using more advanced techniques may return bananas to where they were before they were in danger of going extinct.
So how many people here know (or knew at some point) the PLU for your average banana? I''ll bet the number''s fairly high. If bananas go extinct, what will take its place as the most easily remembered produce code?
CM
As for your question about the validity of that argument, I think both sides can spin this to their favor. On the one hand, you''ve got slowly modified foods going bad. Modifying them quickly just means they''d go bad faster. On the other hand, the very problem we''re facing is that traditional methods can''t save the bananas in time. Using more advanced techniques may return bananas to where they were before they were in danger of going extinct.
So how many people here know (or knew at some point) the PLU for your average banana? I''ll bet the number''s fairly high. If bananas go extinct, what will take its place as the most easily remembered produce code?
CM
Yes, welcome to a few years ago. But I think it is just BS, bananas make tons of money, so they will find a solution for that.
Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory
Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory
quote:
Original post by Nypyren
Apples
I have no less than 15 different apple codes memorized, and at best one of them is as easy to remember as bananas (large granny smith). Bananas are both easy, and common. Granny Smith just doesn''t stand up to bananas in the "common" department.
Unless you weren''t answering my question. In which case you can disregard everything I just said.
CM
quote:
Original post by TSwitch
Cabbage: 4069
At my place, red delicious is 4022 and those green motherfuckers are 4023.
Whacky, huh?
quote:
Original post by TSwitch
Cabbage: 4069
At my place, red delicious is 4022 and those green motherfuckers are 4023.
Whacky, huh?
If you check, I''ll bet they accept 4016 as a red delicious as well. All the apples have multiple codes (as do most of the produce), and Kroger at least has them all programmed in.
And I''m going to go ahead and call Erunama on his Granny Smith claim. 4015 is another one of Red Delicious''s identites. I made a Safeway run, and their small reds are 4015 just like King''s are. The code I was refering to in my original post is 4020, which actually may belong to Golden Delicious [if I had one of them in my hand I could tell you what it is, but I just can''t work without the actual physical apple].
4030 are kiwi, 4050 are cantalope, 4060 are brocolli, 4070 is celery, and 4090 are spinich. 4554 is, I believe, brocoflower, and 4550 is some sort of pepper. Those are all nice and easy numbers to remember. But none of them are particuarly common sales, so one isn''t likely to associate the number with the produce that easily. You see a fair amount of spinich, brocolli, and celery, but the rest are just not as widespread. The apple codes fight with each other for seniority, so 4020 just doesn''t have a chance to dominate in the face of all that competition.
Really, bananas are the perfect fruit. Which is why science must prevail and save this perfect fruit from being lost to future generations.
CM
I just mash on the keypad, voiding stuff off when it''s wrong, hoping I''ll get it eventually.
That''s why I was fired for gross incompetence. That, and I didn''t show up for work four days in a row. But I think it was mostly because I told one of the managers that she was !hawt.
That''s why I was fired for gross incompetence. That, and I didn''t show up for work four days in a row. But I think it was mostly because I told one of the managers that she was !hawt.
quote:
Original post by Conner McCloud
As for your question about the validity of that argument, I think both sides can spin this to their favor. On the one hand, you''ve got slowly modified foods going bad. Modifying them quickly just means they''d go bad faster. On the other hand, the very problem we''re facing is that traditional methods can''t save the bananas in time. Using more advanced techniques may return bananas to where they were before they were in danger of going extinct.
Yes, that''s the dilemma facing the banana - but what does it say about how we deal with other food crops? Is it wise to risk sterilizing corn for instance? And what if more advanced techniques fail to restore the genome of some food crop facing extinction? And what if many food crops faced this threat simultaneously? That might sound far fetched - but monsanto et al. aren''t limiting their modifiations to just one type of plant.
Topic Locked
This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.
Sign in to reply to this topic.
Advertisement
