Inner Circle Forums
Portions of the Dr. Davis Infinite Health Inner Circle Member Forum and its vast wealth of knowledge, are available only to our Members.
Becoming an Inner Circle Member will allow you to post topics, ask Dr. Davis questions, and view all replies.


WBB: What’s WORSE than genetic modification?


Member Forum >> Premium Content Mirror >> WBB: What’s WORSE than genetic modification?

Reference
No Avatar
STAFF
Join Date: 12/5/2017
Posts Contributed: 2521
Total Likes: 303
Recommends Recd: 0
Ignores Issued: 0
Likes Recd: 0

Posted: 3/25/2014 12:00:00 PM
Edited: 4/30/2022 1:04:59 PM (2)

Sourced from: Infinite Health Blog, by Dr. Davis, originally posted on the Wheat Belly Blog: 2014-03-25


What’s WORSE than genetic modification?

Food Mutation Wheat

Genetic modification (GM) is coming under increasing scrutiny, despite the efforts of companies like Monsanto and Coca Cola to squash legislative action to require the labeling of genetically-modified foods.

GM refers to the use of gene-splicing technology to insert or remove a gene, a collection of techniques advertised by agribusiness to be precise, generating the desired characteristic, such as resistance to an herbicide, and nothing more.

Of course, this is patent nonsense: Insert a gene to resist an herbicide, for instance, and there are unforeseen consequences in changing other genes alongside the inserted gene, alterations in epigenetic control over gene expression, interactions with the products of other genes, not to mention the uncontrolled nature of just where in the chromosomal collection the gene is actually inserted. We now have a number of reports, including a recent French study of glyphosate-resistant corn fed to rats documenting early deaths from large tumors, suggesting that genetically-modified foods, as well as glyphosate itself, are not as benign as advertised.

advertisers at work?

So could anything be worse than GM? Yes: Mutagenesis.

Mutagenesis refers to the intentional induction of mutations in an organism, usually using chemical methods, ultraviolet radiation, gamma rays, or high-dose x-ray. Geneticists make vigorous use of the methods of mutagenesis, as mutations can help define the function of various genes by turning them “on” or “off,” changing their code sequence, and other manipulations.

But key to understanding mutagenesis is that it is not a fully controllable process. If I aim a beam of gamma rays at a seed, embryo, cell, or other creature, plant or animal, I cannot predict what will happen, where in the genetic code changes will occur, or whether they result in viable or non-viable organisms.

Take a look at this study, for instance, from a Portuguese research group working with rice (not wheat): Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. (Transgenetic = GM. Yes: genetics is painful!) From the abstract:

We found that the improvement of a plant variety through the acquisition of a new desired trait, using either mutagenesis or transgenesis, may cause stress and thus lead to an altered expression of untargeted genes. In all of the cases studied, the observed alteration was more extensive in mutagenized than in transgenic plants. We propose that the safety assessment of improved plant varieties should be carried out on a case-by-case basis and not simply restricted to foods obtained through genetic engineering.

(Note that the genetics of rice are far simpler than the genetics of wheat. For instance, rice contains 24 chromosomes, while modern high-yield semi-dwarf Triticum species of wheat contain 42 chromosomes.)

In short, the techniques of mutagenesis have potential to exert greater genetic change and thereby more biochemical alterations in the plant than genetic modification. And the potential for unpredictable changes via mutagenesis are likely to be much greater in the more genetically-complex wheat plant than in rice.

So the mutated products of mutagenesis, such as imazamox-resistant Clearfield wheat, now grown on one million acres in the Pacific northwest, have been on store shelves for years. The Wheat Lobby is absolutely correct when it says that no commercially sold wheat today is genetically-modified. The wheat sold today, much of it the product of the techniques of mutagenesis, are the product of something potentially far WORSE.


D.D. Infinite Health icon


Tags: GMO


DISCLAIMER

The information contained within this Forum and website is of a general nature and intended purely as background reading for the participants taking part in Forum discussions and projects. It should not be construed as professional medical advice. Please read the website Medical Disclaimer for more information and limitations.

Changes may occur in circumstances at any time that may affect the accuracy or completeness of the information presented within any section of the Forum and website. This Forum and Track Your Plaque, LLC have taken reasonable care in producing and presenting the content contained herein, however, we do not accept responsibility for any loss, expense, or liability that you may incur from using or relying on the information sourced from this website, its forums and/or blogs.

Third-party content and links

This Forum and Track Your Plaque, LLC accept no responsibility for the accuracy of third-party content or links, or your reliance on any information contained within any such content available through our site. The comments published on this Forum represent a wide range of views and interests of the participating individuals and organizations. Statements made during online discussions are the personal opinions of the commentators and do not necessarily reflect those of others participating on this Forum. Track Your Plaque, LLC at all times and at its absolute discretion, reserves the right to remove reasonably offensive comments in line with our Moderation Guidelines.