http___www.tportal.hr_vijesti_svijet_12062_Modificirani-geni-zagadili-meksicki-kukuruz.html_1.xml
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 13.1 14.1 15.1 16.1 16.2 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 23.1 24.1 24.2 25.1 26.1 27.1 28.1 28.2 29.1 30.1 31.1 32.1 32.2 33.1 33.2 33.3 33.4 34.1 35.1 36.1 37.1 37.2 37.3 38.1 39.1 39.2 40.1 41.1
It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker. Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool. Thank you. Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker. Originally posted by circuitsports most of the arguments against Monsanto don't make very much sense - what does make sense is that like any other business should be held accountable for any claims and the government should weigh heavily the cost vs gain or more specifically the potential or real danger of these seeds and a single genetric string to the reality of not taking advantage of them. The reality is GMO foods will take over someday with the increasing population it's a given - now whether they are through Monsantos current methods or through more advanced methods of manufacturing that may include more strains and either no or different anti bug measures is going to be the future choice. What the corporate shill says MIGHT be correct if consumers aren't willing to pay any more for non-GMO crops, but I don't think that's a reliable assumption. Originally posted by EyeHeartBigfoot The corporate shills and lobbyist are already making their rounds: GMO maize damage may total billions, says expert Ecologist and forensic expert Imre Lanszki insisted that Hungary will not be in a position to reject GMO in the future, and Hungarian seeds will be at a disadvantage, which may compromise the productivity of national farming. The corporate shills and lobbyist are already making their rounds: Interesting then that a contributor to the FAO's Forum, Professor El-Tayeb, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Industrial Biotechnology at Cairo University commented that: "..currently available (GMO's) mostly contribute negatively to poverty alleviation and food security - and positively to the stock market." www.warmwell.com... I do not support Monsanto nor am a proponent of GM food, but this is just ridiculous. True, the pollination could travel and breed with heirloom or pure stock, but destroying it is, in a way, foolish, unless it is A) only to prevent said cross-pollination or B) to eradicate crop grown strictly for seed, which we do not know.... Study: Modified genes contaminated Mexican corn AP News - 863 days ago Study may end bitter debate, claims that modified genes contaminate corn in central Mexico One of the more acrimonious scientific debates of the decade may have ended with the publication of a study showing that genetically modified material did contaminate native corn in the crop's birthplace in southern Mexico, scientists said Wednesday. But Elena Alvarez Buylla, author of the article published in the February edition of Molecular Ecology, said the difficult atmosphere surrounding the original debate — which threatened the reputations of some scientists — persists. The controversy started in 2001 with an article in the journal Nature, which said that biotech genetic material had been detected in native Mexican corn in the southern state of Oaxaca, where the crop was first developed thousands of years ago. Experts say preserving the genetic diversity of corn in Mexico is important, in case those native genes are later needed to reinforce modern varieties. Berkeley, California, biologist Ignacio Chapela, the co-author of the 2001 article, was subject to a storm of criticism over his methodology, and Nature published an editor's note saying the evidence had not justified publishing the original article. Chapela was denied tenure after the article was published... informsciencenetwork.com... Originally posted by circuitsports The reality is GMO foods will take over someday with the increasing population it's a given - now whether they are through Monsantos current methods or through more advanced methods of manufacturing that may include more strains and either no or different anti bug measures is going to be the future choice. The report, the U.N.'s latest World Economic and Social Survey, said a sharp move away from large-scale, intensive systems of agriculture was essential if growing environmental and land degradation was to be halted. The food crisis of 2007-08 and a price spike this year "have revealed deep structural problems in the global food system and the need to increase resources and innovation in agriculture so as to accelerate food production," the survey declared. Originally posted by Pervius Blast some microwaves at Hungary's fields stunting their crops and they'll eventually be begging Monsanto for seeds. The world has no idea what they are up against. The US no longer funds its military retirements.... Ronald Reagan created a "Fund" where money was put and invested around the world to turn a profit to be able to pay the US military their retirements.. Monsanto is just one of many of those investments. They WILL turn a profit. They don't care if they have to starve/kill millions to get those profits. They've got tools to keep turning a profit you can't even comprehend. Originally posted by solsticks Um, hello, I hate Monsanto too, but...aren't any of you noticing (especially on ATS) the irony of you all cheering on a GOVERNMENT DESTROYING PRIVATE PROPERTY? Originally posted by solsticks Um, hello, I hate Monsanto too, but...aren't any of you noticing (especially on ATS) the irony of you all cheering on a GOVERNMENT DESTROYING PRIVATE PROPERTY? I understand the seeds were illegal...but some of you have said 'this should happen in America'. That smacks of something very wrong to me...jus' sayin.... Originally posted by alfa1 The day will come (if it hasnt already) when local villages in third world countries can develop and patent GMO crops to suit their own local conditions. Do we stomp on top of them and burn them down too? Originally posted by incrediblelousminds I would be very much interested in seeing the data that you base this statement on.
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 10.2 11.1 12.1 13.1 14.1 14.2 16.1
Jedna od najžučnijih znanstvenih rasprava desetljeća mogla bi uskoro završiti nakon objave istraživanja koje pokazuje da je genetski modificirani materijal zagadio autohtoni kukuruz u domovini te žitarice u južnom Meksiku, kazali su znanstvenici u srijedu MEXICO CITY/WASHINGTON - Elena Alvarez Buylla, autorica članka objavljenog u časopisu Molekularna ekologija od veljače, kaže kako se još osjeća teško ozračje koje okružuje prvotnu raspravu, a koja bi mogla ugroziti ugled nekih znanstvenika. Proturječja je 2001. izazvao članak objavljen u znanstvenom časopisu Nature, po kojem je u autohtonom meksičkom kukuruzu u južnoj državi Oaxaca, gdje se žitarica uzgaja nekoliko tisuća godina, pronađen biotehnički materijal, prenosi agencija AP. Stručnjaci kažu da je čuvanje genetske raznolikosti kukuruza u Meksiku važno, u slučaju da ti izvorni geni poslije budu potrebni za jačanje modernih vrsta. Biolog Ignacio Chapela sa sveučilišta Berkeley u Kaliforniji, suautor članka iz 2001., bio je izložen poplavi kritika zbog svoje metodologije. Nature je poslije objavio urednički komentar u kojem je naveo da dokazi nisu opravdali objavu članka. Godine 2005. u članku objavljenom u časopisu Proceedings Nacionalne akademije znanosti, navodi se da neme dokaza o genetskom zagađenju. No danas jedan od autora studije iz 2005., biolog Exequiel Ezcurra, kaže da je uvjeren u točnost članka Elene Alvarez Buyllae, koji kaže da su zabilježene vrlo niske razine zagađenja. Istraživanjem je dokazana prisutnost gena 35S Promotor, koji se široko koristi u genetski modificiranih usjeva za jačanje otpornosti na bolesti. "Što se tiče javnog mišljenja ja to vidim kao osvetu", izjavio je Chapela. Alvarez Buylla je rabila puno veće uzorke, razrađenije genetske testove i različite tehnike, uzimala je lišće i klipove kukuruza, nego Chapela. Njezina je studija pokazala da zageđenost jako varira ovisno o lokaciji, od nulte na nekim poljoprivrednim površinama do 10 posto usjeva na nekoliko mjesta. Alvarez Buylla se namučila dok je našla nekoga tko će objaviti članak, a odbili su je Proceedings, Nacionalne akademije znanosti, s argumentom da članak može odvući pozornost sa znanstvenog na politički aspekt rasprave. Po riječima Alvarez Buylla ostaje veliko pitanje: Odakle dolazi to genetsko zagađenje i kako se širi? Ona sumnja da bi neka vrsta hibridnog kukuruza, možda onog koji dijeli vlada, mogla biti zagađena te dodaje da je objektivna znanost jedini način da se to utvrdi. - Sviđa vam se članak? Preporučite ga prijateljima putem ovih servisa: Pošaljite mailom