You!

Yeah, you!

Speak up! Let me know you're out there. Comment! Don't be shy!

The more I know people are watching, the more apt I'll be to posting! And trust me, I've got some strange shit to say.

Abandon hope, all ye who read me!

I am taking the time to put purpose into my life again. I have not written nor cared for a blog in a very, very long time. I started writing one back in 2003, to aid me through the nights of dark insomnia. It helped. So here I stand, starting anew, puking forth the words that I desperately seek to speak aloud, but refrain for fear of making myself feel awkward.

I am on a mission.

I am conducting a personal trial of Social Experiments, mainly on men in distraught marriages and unhappy relationships. Through here, I wish to include my stories one-by-one, as well as draw out a contextual map of my life, the world as I see, and my every day desires.

We'll see just how far I travel.

Rough Draft

Genetically Modified Organisms:

Our Right for Modified Labels

Labels are everywhere. From the large cans that express their products maker to the small stickers that identify the vegetables in the produce section of your favorite store, you can be sure that everything comes with a label. Labels will have instructions on how to cook your store bought food; they will have nutrition guides, ingredient lists and even bi-lingual text to ease our multicultural world. Some products are even identified with a small block of text that states “Non-GMO!” to let consumers know their product is consumer savvy, that these manufacturers know what the 'hype' is all about.

However, the problem does not lie within the labels that are already produced, but rather the labels that are not on our grocer's shelves, the labels that would inform us, the consumer, what we are or are not putting into our bodies. Marketed products that are fit for human consumption should state whether or not they contain genetically modified organisms (GMO) / genetically engineered foods, and therein lies our problem. Right now, none of our food sources provide such information, nor are they required to; macht nicht to labeling!

So what exactly are GMOs? Genetically modified organisms, as defined by Bill Lambrecht in Dinner at the New Gene Cafe are “what you get when you move genes across the traditional species boundaries of plants and animals in quest for new traits” (4). Genetic engineering of organisms began in the 1980s when a company named Monsanto began altering the genes of tobacco and petunia plants.

Monsanto, a Saint Louis based organization leads the transgenic food industry world-wide with new developments in gene splicing and engineering. Monsanto has “been the company with the foresight to see the horizons of biology and the steadfastness to try to reach them” (Lambrecht, 23). Monsanto paved way for biotechnology. The company mass-mediated their findings in 1982, introducing to the public their ability to alter the DNA of petunias [and tobacco], and how the future held promise in biotechnology.

The genetic alteration was the introduction of a bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens (At) that was injected into the plant cell’s DNA, and the antibiotic kanamycin. The scientists at Monsanto were experimenting with the gene for resistance to the antibiotic, introducing At which would destroy the cells, and adding a hormone to promote the growth of the cells. The result of their experiment proved fruitful, and their newly genetically modified organism was resistant to kanamycin, thus providing the first antibiotic resistant modified plant.

In the years following Monsanto's 1982 findings, the company “engineered a tomato in 1985. In 1986, a canola plant was modified. In 1987, they genetically engineered cotton, soybeans, potatoes, flax, and alfalfa. Sugar beets were engineered in 1988, and then, in 1990, corn” (Lambrecht, 32). These findings are an absolute success, but just how safe is it to incorporate new genetic material to already existing DNA structures of plants and animals?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is an organization that sets the standards for the products we put into our bodies. The FDA is a government organization that oversees the processes in which food items are labeled and manufactured for quality and safety for human consumption. These production overseers believe that the current system manufacturers have in product safety suffices all informational needs for any and all consumer concerns.

The FDA is also the same organization that regulates distribution and processes of spinach, tomatoes, and peanut butter; yet within the past few years, it has been noted that there have been substantial amounts of recalls regarding these food items. The recalls were largely due to salmonella outbreaks that began at specific packaging plants and found their ways spread wide across the world. This same organization that has been unable to contain salmonella is directing whether or not consumers should be made aware that they are eating genetically modified food by putting a simple label on their products. How safe really are the foods we eat?

In Dinner at the New Gene Cafe, Bill Lambrecht states, “Cry9C is one of a family of crystalline proteins, known as endotoxins, that come from Bacillus thuringiensis, Bt, a naturally occurring soil organism. Bt is deployed by gardeners and organic growers around the world for its insecticidal capabilities, thereby allowing them to avoid chemicals. Starting in the mid-1990s, genetic engineers harnessed Bt's power by splicing it into corn, potatoes, and cotton. Because the Cry proteins from Bt act the same way as insecticides, they sound dangerous. But the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has welcomed them into the environment. They pose no “unreasonable adverse effects” on wildlife, surrounding plants and organisms in the soil, the EPA reported in 2000.”

Cry9C has been approved by the EPA “solely for its use in corn called StarLink” and, “Because of its unknown effects on humans, the EPA decreed that StarLink corn could be eaten only by animals, and not by humans” (Lambrecht, 44). According to the EPA, Cry9C does not break down in stomach acids or in high temperatures which makes it difficult to digest. Farmers of StarLink corn were informed to keep their product “seperate from other hybrids and to be planted only with buffers to guard against cross-pollination” (Lambrecht, 44).

In 2000, however, Cry9C was found through DNA testing in taco shells and other corn derived products distributed throughout the United States by Kraft Foods. Somewhere during the transportation and production of these food items, StarLink corn had found its way into the base ingredients, therefore subjecting human consumable foods into food not fit for our consumption. The concern was originally brought out by an environmental and consumer advocacy group that calls itself Genetically Engineered Food Alert.

A man by the name of Larry Bohlen, who belonged to an entity within GEFA called Friends of the Earth, had bought the taco-shells, as well as other corn-derived products from a local supermarket, and shipped them for testing at a laboratory called Genetic I.D. in Fairfield, Iowa. When the results came back positive that these corn-filled products contained Cry9C, they went back to the grocery stores and bought another batch of corn-derived items and sent them for another set of testing. The conclusion? The newly submitted products came back positive as well.

The question brought to light regarding this problem is, how well do our food regulators ensure our safety through lack of labeling, as well as the production of genetically engineered crops close to non-GM crops?

Another set of safety concerns is regarding DNA transmutation. A study was conducted for whether or not consumption of GMOs would cause human DNA alterations – a “concept scientists call “horizontal” gene transfer (“vertical” gene transfer is what happens when you pass your genes onto your children)” (Fedoroff, 156).

Walter Doerfler, a scientist at the Institute of Genetics in Germany, did a study with mice and a bacteriophage called M13, where they traced the ingested M13 DNA through the digestive system. Here, the M13 DNA was detected “in the small intestine, the large intestine, and the blood, as well as the feces. They had found it in the spleen and liver cells, and in one out of a thousand white blood cells” (Fedoroff, 158). This study concluded a report that particles of DNA can transfer into an organism’s cells through the stomach lining, and the DNA may show possibility of gene transmutation, or gene-altering, of the original organism’s cells.

Another concern for consumers is the introduction of biopharmaceuticals. Peter Pringle in Food, Inc. states, “Pharmaceutical companies realized that they could make medically important proteins more cheaply in the kernel of a corn cob than in fermentation factories.” While drug costs are always a concern, the idea of corn-derived pharmaceuticals should be of higher concern. The concept (and reality) of biopharming has caused biotech companies to ensure farmers, marketers, and manufacturers that their biotechnology shall not interfere with the natural growth processes of corn. There was a promise that these biotech organizations would remain distanced from the major corn-producing states. The major corn growing states include Illinois, Indiana, and Nebraska.

In 2002, pharmaceutical proteins were found in genetically modified corn that was growing in soybean fields in Iowa and Nebraska. The “offending corn had grown from seeds left over from the test crop planted the year before…” and, “Exactly what genes were found and what drugs they were for remained a company secret” (Pringle, 191). These findings resulted in the burnings of 155 acres of corn, and “the quarantine of half a million bushels of harvested soybeans from the test field” (Pringle, 191), as ordered by the United States Department of Agriculture. This incident was “potentially more disastrous than StarLink” (Pringle, 191).

I am for complete eradication of genetically engineered crops. While such modifications may have positive outcomes, I am of the theory that whatever was made should remain the same. I believe in science, I believe in endless possibilities, but I do not believe in fast paced development of genetically modified organisms. This field of science is far too complex for our naïve understandings that scientists have gathered in the past 25 years. We do not understand the dangers that may present themselves further down the line of evolution. Science should evolve itself; if such necessity is to be had from genetic modification, the study should be experimented under extreme caution with many preventative measures.

We, as individuals, should feel safe with what we put into our systems, because the government supposedly regulates all items manufactured and grown for human consumption. Without proper labeling of genetically engineered foods and genetically modified organisms, humans are putting themselves at risk for possible complications during their lifetime. One of the solutions would be to take away such anti-God, anti-Darwinistic approaches and begin to farm with ethics, albeit old fashioned. Unfortunately, this solution doesn’t seem to fit the bill of our own evolution, so it is highly unlikely we would resort to older farming techniques.

With all of the information provided, it should provide enough background for FDA labeling on all genetically engineered food. We as a people have a right to know what we are putting into our bodies. We should not have to make a choice due to ethics, morals, or beliefs when it comes to what we eat. Therefore, all genetically modified products should be labeled, whether we eat them, wear them, or inject them. It’s the principle of the matter.

I am a pescatarian. Pescatarians are primarily vegetarians that still eat fish, shellfish, and other seafood. Being knowledgeable about the foods I put into my system is essential. The idea that I am putting insecticide-filled cellulose into my body without my public knowledge is unsettling. It frightens me the possibilities that I may surrender to later in life that could have been prevented, if such occasions should arise due to GMOs. I already have a deficient auto-immune system with numerous diagnoses; I should not have to concern myself with the possibilities of genetic mutations, introduced toxins and allergens, or drug-based foods. It is my right, and I choose to exercise it.