just curious, if genetic engineering is not a breeding technique, what is it? also curious how the term "breeding technique" is propaganda.
-
-
For the first, ask Dr. Folta who also doesn’t like the term. For the second: It is a scientifically inaccurate description used by GMO advocates to argue their case.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
There are many different ways to modify a genome. Traditional breeding, marker assisted selection, chemical mutagenesis, cell fusion, rDNA technology, gene editing... if I needed a term for all of those together, breeding techniques seems a decent one.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
It’s hard to believe that anyone would make the argument that there is no real difference between classical plant breeding and the myriad of techniques used today to genetically engineer plants. It’s sophistry, and thus propaganda, whether deliberate or not.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
There are differences between all of those methods of changing an organism's genome, but they are all still methods to change an organism's genome.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Okay we are going around in circles. Making changes in the genome is not the definition of classical plant breeding. I can’t be more clear, really, but I object to attempts to obfuscate what is being done.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ok, so if "classical plant breeding" doesn't change the genome then how does plant breeding work? Like, what is being changed?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I did not say that classical plant breeding does not change the genome. I am having the same issues now with you that I had with David Gorski. Please have an honest discussion about this. Modern genetic engineering uses entirely different methodologies.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
You said "Calling GE a “breeding technique” is introducing blatant propaganda into a scientific discussion." So that's what I'm curious to get at. When you say "modern genetic engineering" do you mean rDNA technology?
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @geneticmaize @mbalter and
There’s been a rather smooth gradation in the power & control of genetically manipulative techniques dating back to Gregor Mendel’s pea plant experiments. Perhaps Michael considers pre-mendelian plant breeding to be the cut-off. After all, it was the unclosable box of knowledge.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I suspect you're right. I also suspect he's working under the fallacy of the appeal to nature, wherein something considered "natural" must inherently be better and more safe. I guess I'll never know, given that he left me little choice but to block him and has blocked me back.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @JeffFountain and
Some people have the exact opposite weakness. They would endorse anything with the '
#science' label on it. Even if that label is a bit rance and if that science is out of their domain of expertise.0 replies 1 retweet 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.