I would like our sciency people to reassure me that Frankenrice isn't going to cause the end of the World, please. Thank you.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035745_GMO_rice...l#ixzz1y8cYjnfO

ewwww ewwwww ewwwww ewwwwwww ewwwwwwww

that is wrong on so many levels.....i will not be eating human rice, thats practically canniballism

It's worse! It's liver DNA and, frankly, I don't do offal.

and more

I watched a fun little experiment yesterday where a strong magnet was used to pull the iron (yes the stuff you make nails and ships out of) out of breakfast cereal. I was rather surprised at how much you can get from a cup full. Worse yet, they don't really know if that particular iron does any good in your food.

So frankenrice is just the tip of the iceberg and we're all doomed.
sighs

If it cooks like rice and tastes like rice I have no problem eating it like rice.

The 'human DNA' label is also misleading when you consider that we share 98% of the same DNA with, for example, rats.

Still don't fancy eating human liver flavoured rice. Yuk.

Eating a banana? you are eating 96% human DNA.

Don't care. Not eating it (I hope). Told you - I don't like liver and, more to the point, I don't like them messing about with the things people eat. Especially rice which is the staple diet of millions of people. Whatever DNA is in bananas is natural. The human liver DNA in the rice isn't.

We've been messing with our food ever since we stopped being hunter gatherers and started farming. 20.000 years ago we were all lactose intolerant, look at us now.

They mess about with it for the very purpose of feeding the poor - imagine the difference having a grass that was able to survive in conditions that it couldn't ordinarily - how many people could be fed

And that humble banana - the bane of the Creationist - manipulated by Man to look and taste exactly as it does.

I'm all for applying the precautionary principle in this case. Until they can prove that genetically modified plants are not a threat to the planet's biodiversity, human health and so on, then I think it needs to be kept in very restricted environments.

Oh come on, who doesn't want a banana with teeth or a tomato with tentacles?

I'd rather we were better able to feed the people affected by severe drought - we can't make it rain but we can introduce hardy food plants through GM

@ Duck. NO! Unequivocally no.

@ Fells. And was that the kind of charitable thinking that led farmers to feed animal waste products to their cows and sheep? Look where that seems to have got us. There's research going on into ways to breed better wheat without messing with it genetically.

Nice straw man, Les. No, I won't indulge it.

No it wasn't. It was an example of man forcing through a quick change in a foodstuff which caused harm.
Can you honestly tell me that there's no threat to us or our environment by the introduction of GM food? Surely we have to guard against damage to our environment brought about by the introduction of non natural plants into our bio systems. I won't even mention Japanese Knotweed. (Yes I will, but you don't have to indulge it).

It was a straw man, Les. The conditions that caused BSE had nothing to do with variety modification (genetic or otherwise) - it was caused by unethical feeding of animals including using, among other things, spinal chords.

GM alters plant's DNA - specific genetic switches that cause intolerance to certain conditions or incorporating genes that are known to allow hardiness in other plants that survive in barren conditions (including alpine plants). Mentioning other farming methods, such as those that caused BSE, which have nothing to do with genetic modification is scaremongering and based on poor logic and science.

I can honestly say that there has been no identified threat to our environment in the 10 years of controlled study.

There is nothing synthetic about GM crops.

That's the wonderful thing about GM, you can inhibit the genes that cause dominant spreads - or the genes that make them fertile.