You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How some fruits and vegetables looked like before we changed them
I knew it was a wild cabbage, but the watermelon and the corn was a total surprise!
I knew it was a wild cabbage, but the watermelon and the corn was a total surprise!
A lot of them have changed dramatically and corn has started from a thin bean pod and changed into the big, orderly and easy to peal ears of corn we have today.
And lots of them is unfortunately human-made.
I thought the corn would look about the same, just smaller, thinner...
Why unfortunately? Those plants were not changed for the worse.
Yep, the corn looks very very different, the current shape is something totally new.
Because in many cases they were changed genetically by a human. They do not look they way the nature made them.
Pretty much all of them don't look the way nature made them, the question is why is that a bad thing. Are modern carrots worse than the root thingy in the picture? Why do you think changed by humans necessarily means worse?
Well... my little brain tells me that is if something is genetically changed (GMO) to make it bigger or grow faster, more resistant to pests, diseases and so on, is not necessarily a good thing. It goes against nature. It is messing with the natural genetic code and that was made in a certain way for thousands of years for a reason.
Of course nature keeps changing and adapting too, but it is a natural process.
When things change, it's neither necessarily good, nor necessarily bad. All of those plants in my post changed because of humans for the better, not for the worse. That's why it was not unfortunate that they changed with time because of us.
The idea that everything GMO is bad is unsubstantiated. Doesn't using a computer go against nature, too? Maybe the fact that we are using them is unfortunate too?
Computer is not made by nature and I don't eat it ;)
Of course we all have different opinions about it that is great. I would prefer to eat less of modified food, but it is kind of impossible.
ewkaw, I think you are mistaking selective breeding with GMO's...there is a huge difference and they are nothing alike. Selective breeding is taking the seeds from a plant that has qualities you are looking for and only replanting those, then from those plants, only taking the seeds from the plants that again had the qualities you are looking for, and it keeps going until you get the desired effect. The plants already had the genetic information and the qualities simply being brought forward. That is how there are so many dog breeds in the world - they were bred for specific qualities to show. The same with chicken breeds, bovine breeds, sheep breeds etc.
GMO on the other hand is the result of a laboratory process where genes from the DNA of one species are extracted and artificially forced into the genes of an unrelated plant or animal. In other words, mixing different species DNA together...bad. This can never occur in nature or through selective breeding.
You have every reason to be against GMO's, but there is nothing wrong with selective breeding.
I agree with you.
In the conversation I was focusing on GMO as human made, not selective breeding. Maybe I wasn't clear about what I meant by Human made.
Oh, sorry I didn't realize.
It's fine :)
You explained it well.