BI280 Chapter 10 Genetic Engineering - Part 1 of 1 By: Heidi Bulfer … Continue reading →

BI280 Chapter 10 Genetic Engineering - Part 2 of 2 By: Heidi Bulfer … Continue reading →

The big agribusiness companies have achieved regulatory capture of government agenciesbut not in the way that many people think. At the urging of industry, since the 1980s federal agencies have over-regulated genetically engineered plants, animals and microorganismsat great cost to U.S.-based R&D and, ultimately, to consumers. Its no secret that although the Internet has vastly enriched our lives in many respects, it has downsidesless interpersonal interaction, more anonymous snarkiness, online harassment and even cyber-stalking. The net has also made it difficult to stop or correct the promulgation of misinformation, as I have learned to my dismay: A valid observation I made to a New York Times reporter for a 2001 article on the regulation of genetic engineering has been repeatedly taken out of context and misrepresented by activists. It continues to appear anewstill out of context and misconstrued13 years later. Here is the portion of the original article that is often quoted on anti-genetic engineering websites (such as here and here): Even longtime Washington hands said that the control this nascent [agbiotech] industry exerted over its own regulatory destinythrough the Environmental Protection Agency, the Agriculture Department and ultimately the Food and Drug Administrationwas astonishing. In this area, the U.S. government … Continue reading →

Genetically engineering tumors in mice, a technique that has dominated cancer research for decades, may not replicate important features of cancers caused by exposure to environmental carcinogens, according to a new study led by UC San Francisco scientists. In addition to pointing the way to better understanding of environmental causes of cancer, the findings may help explain why many patients do not benefit from, or develop resistance to, targeted drug therapies. In the new research, reported November 2, 2014 in the advance online edition of Nature, a team led by UCSF graduate student Peter M.K. Westcott found that chemically induced lung tumors in mice carry hundreds of point mutationsdeleterious alterations of single letters in the genomethat are not present in tumors induced by genetic engineering. The researchers demonstrated that chemically induced tumors display a starkly different mutational landscape even when chemicals cause a tumor-initiating mutation that is identical to that created by direct genetic manipulation. Since the 1980s, when genetic engineering came along, the mouse model community has been working on genetically engineered canceryou put a gene in or take a gene out, and you get a tumor, said Allan Balmain, PhD, the Barbara Bass Bakar Distinguished Professor in Cancer … Continue reading →

Election judges check signatures on ballots at the Denver Election Headquarters in downtown Denver, November 04, 2014. Closes races in Colorado are drawing a last minute rush to vote on election day. (RJ Sangosti, The Denver Post) Voters dished up rejection for Proposition 105, labeling of genetically modified foods, with 35 percent of votes counted. The measure would have required labels for GMOs foods produced with genetic engineering or containing genetically modified ingredients. More than 68 percent of voters said no to labeling. Most processed foods sold in America include GMO ingredients such as corn syrup, corn oil, soybean crops and sugar. Supporters of GMO labeling, such as Right to Know Colorado, Whole Foods and Natural Grocers, said it would give consumers a choice about what they serve their families. It's a label, not a ban, alerting people to an unnatural manipulation of food, they argued. Opponents of Prop 105 said the measure would create new costs and red tape for farmers, food manufacturers and grocery stores and consequently would run up grocery bills and cost taxpayers millions for the government oversight. See the article here: Colorado Prop 105: GMO food fight won by opponents of labeling … Continue reading →