Are you avoiding genetically modified corn?
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
In the last couple of years, "sweet corn", whatever that is, was supposedly non-GMO. But Monsanto recently got into the sweet corn business. That's why advocates were trying to get Walmart to say they would not sell sweet corn in it's stores. If Walmart does it, most folks think other stores will follow suit. This advocacy work was not successful that I'm aware of. I'm guessing most GMO corn is used for animal feed, flour, maybe corn chips. Sweet corn on the cob was the last frontier.
Thanks to Wikipedia, I think the corn we are trying to avoid is BT corn:
Sweet corn is corn that's eaten fresh, not dried and stored as grain. It is all genetically modified, as many crops are, but I think the danger is in those modified to resist insects or herbicides.Bt corn is genetically modified to resist certain insects. Commercial growers have access to sweet corn seed bred with this artificial trait. Bt corn and other transgenic varieties are not available to the home grower due to protocols that must be followed in their production.
Sweet corn (Zea mays convar. saccharata var. rugosa; also called Indian corn, sugar corn, and pole corn) is a variety of maize with a high sugar content. Sweet corn is the result of a naturally occurring recessive mutation in the genes which control conversion of sugar to starch inside the endosperm of the corn kernel. Unlike field corn varieties, which are harvested when the kernels are dry and mature (dent stage), sweet corn is picked when immature (milk stage) and prepared and eaten as a vegetable, rather than a grain. Since the process of maturation involves converting sugar to starch, sweet corn stores poorly and must be eaten fresh, canned, or frozen, before the kernels become tough and starchy.
Zizzle,
You're probably right about Bt corn not showing up in home gardens, because in order to be allowed to purchase and plant Bt corn seed, a grower has to agree to also plant an additional percentage of acreage (usually around 10%, but can range from 5 to 20%) of "refuge" corn. A "refuge" allows susceptible insects to reproduce and grow without exposure to the Bt trait. Without these "refuges", eventually all insects will become immune to Bt, if all insect populations are exposed to it over several generations. Early on, some producers didn't plant refuge plots, and now in some areas earworms are tolerant of Bt.
However, that limitation would not deter a commercial sweet corn producer from using a Bt seed. It's simply a normal part of doing business in today's high-tech ag world.
That said, I have no idea whether or not any sweet corn seed is available with the Bt trait, since I've never planted any sweet corn. Most of that stuff is grown in the upper Midwest and eastern growing areas, although some is grown in just about all parts of the country. Here's one way to tell if the corn you buy has either been grown from Bt seed or sprayed with a vermicide to kill the worms. This won't apply to ears that have the ends chopped off, obviously, but if you never encounter an ear with any worm damage on the pointed end of the cob, that corn has probably either been sprayed, or it grew from Bt seed. If you can see worm damage, or if the pointed end of the ear has been chopped off, that ear probably was not sprayed, nor was it grown from Bt seed. Of course, some vendors might chop off the end anyway, to make the corn look more uniform, even if it was sprayed or had Bt ancestry.
Bt is not the only GMO characteristic found in modern corn, however. Early on, glyphosate-tolerance was added by a GMO process, in order to allow cornfields to be sprayed with "Roundup" herbicide to simplify weed and grass control. Roundup will kill virtually anything that is green and growing, that does not have genetic glyphosate-tolerance. These days, most corn seed has this trait, because it significantly reduces the cost of production.
I'm not aware of any other GMO traits that are currently available in corn seed.
Tex
You're probably right about Bt corn not showing up in home gardens, because in order to be allowed to purchase and plant Bt corn seed, a grower has to agree to also plant an additional percentage of acreage (usually around 10%, but can range from 5 to 20%) of "refuge" corn. A "refuge" allows susceptible insects to reproduce and grow without exposure to the Bt trait. Without these "refuges", eventually all insects will become immune to Bt, if all insect populations are exposed to it over several generations. Early on, some producers didn't plant refuge plots, and now in some areas earworms are tolerant of Bt.
However, that limitation would not deter a commercial sweet corn producer from using a Bt seed. It's simply a normal part of doing business in today's high-tech ag world.
That said, I have no idea whether or not any sweet corn seed is available with the Bt trait, since I've never planted any sweet corn. Most of that stuff is grown in the upper Midwest and eastern growing areas, although some is grown in just about all parts of the country. Here's one way to tell if the corn you buy has either been grown from Bt seed or sprayed with a vermicide to kill the worms. This won't apply to ears that have the ends chopped off, obviously, but if you never encounter an ear with any worm damage on the pointed end of the cob, that corn has probably either been sprayed, or it grew from Bt seed. If you can see worm damage, or if the pointed end of the ear has been chopped off, that ear probably was not sprayed, nor was it grown from Bt seed. Of course, some vendors might chop off the end anyway, to make the corn look more uniform, even if it was sprayed or had Bt ancestry.
Bt is not the only GMO characteristic found in modern corn, however. Early on, glyphosate-tolerance was added by a GMO process, in order to allow cornfields to be sprayed with "Roundup" herbicide to simplify weed and grass control. Roundup will kill virtually anything that is green and growing, that does not have genetic glyphosate-tolerance. These days, most corn seed has this trait, because it significantly reduces the cost of production.
I'm not aware of any other GMO traits that are currently available in corn seed.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
-
humbird753
- Rockhopper Penguin
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:44 pm
- Location: Wisconsin
Zizzle, I told a sister of mine about this link. She has been reading a lot herself on GMO plants. She is very well educated - first with a major in biology, and also at attorney. Her comment is as follows, with another link some here may find of interest.
I reviewed the article you sent me. I am also reading Dr. Mercola's articles and that is one article I have already reviewed. I did not study botany so it is hard for me to tell how accurate his claims are regarding GMO plants. However, I reviewed the article about genetically-modified children. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... -born.aspx
In that article, he made some inaccurate statements, as well as statements that seemed to be made solely to put us all in a panic about future children. Considering that he is supposed to be a doctor, the errors he made means that he either doesn't understand human biology or he was purposely misleading the reader. He even stated that it wasn't his area of expertise, but inaccurately discussed the procedures anyway; if cytoplasm or ooplasm transfer are done correctly there is no transfer of DNA. His statements are irresponsible. While he may be correct that the procedures used caused problems for the children, the problems cannot be traced back to the procedures identified in his article.
I plan to be wary of accepting the claims he makes in other articles. But, as you have noticed, it is so hard to tell what is accurate without getting a Ph.D. in biology.
Anyway that was her response.
Paula
I reviewed the article you sent me. I am also reading Dr. Mercola's articles and that is one article I have already reviewed. I did not study botany so it is hard for me to tell how accurate his claims are regarding GMO plants. However, I reviewed the article about genetically-modified children. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... -born.aspx
In that article, he made some inaccurate statements, as well as statements that seemed to be made solely to put us all in a panic about future children. Considering that he is supposed to be a doctor, the errors he made means that he either doesn't understand human biology or he was purposely misleading the reader. He even stated that it wasn't his area of expertise, but inaccurately discussed the procedures anyway; if cytoplasm or ooplasm transfer are done correctly there is no transfer of DNA. His statements are irresponsible. While he may be correct that the procedures used caused problems for the children, the problems cannot be traced back to the procedures identified in his article.
I plan to be wary of accepting the claims he makes in other articles. But, as you have noticed, it is so hard to tell what is accurate without getting a Ph.D. in biology.
Anyway that was her response.
Paula
Paula
"You'll never know how strong you are until being strong is the only choice you have."
"Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass... It's learning to dance in the rain."
"You'll never know how strong you are until being strong is the only choice you have."
"Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass... It's learning to dance in the rain."
Yep, that sounds like good ol' Dr. Mercola, all right. I came to that same conclusion a couple of years ago, about some of his other articles. Most of his information is basically sound, but he doesn't have any qualms about citing sources that tend to distort the facts a bit, in order to make the tone of the article much more sensational.Paula wrote:In that article, he made some inaccurate statements, as well as statements that seemed to be made solely to put us all in a panic about future children.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
.jpg){kind=avatar}
My take on him as well. He is a fear monger, likes to sensationalize things. I agree with a lot of what he recommends but I dislike the sensationalism. I tend not to trust him as a reliable source of information.tex wrote:Yep, that sounds like good ol' Dr. Mercola, all right. I came to that same conclusion a couple of years ago, about some of his other articles. Most of his information is basically sound, but he doesn't have any qualms about citing sources that tend to distort the facts a bit, in order to make the tone of the article much more sensational.Paula wrote:In that article, he made some inaccurate statements, as well as statements that seemed to be made solely to put us all in a panic about future children.
Tex
Jean