Comment by photochemsyn | Hacker News Reader

Comment by photochemsyn | Hacker News Reader

This author's example does not inspire confidence in the rest of the article:

> "Take the matter of genetically modified (GM) foods, which are overwhelmingly considered to be safe based on current scientific knowledge. Research has shown that people who hold the strongest anti-GM views, believing that they are harmful, are the most inclined to overestimate their relevant knowledge."

If I insert the genes coding the enzymatic pathway for production of a virulent mammalian toxin into a maize plant, that's going to be very unsafe, particularly if pollen from that plant can carry those genes into someone's non-GMO cornfield.

On the other hand, if I make a minor specific edit to the regulatory region upstream from a gene that controls the onset of flowering in a tomato plant, with the idea of producing an early-flowering varietal for northern climates, that's entirely safe (assuming no other accidental changes were made).

Claiming that GMO foods are 'universally acknowledged to be safe' is like claiming metallurgy is universally acknowledged to be safe. It all depends on the specific application and how it's done, e.g. heavy metal pollution is a major issue in many places because of lack of pollution controls.

Placing blind faith in governmental and corporate scientists because they wear the white coats of authority is not that different from blind obedience to the priestly caste of prior centuries. If they can't provide explanations that the educated layperson can understand, and if they can't respond to detailed criticisms of their claims, then they should not be trusted.

First, even if the author is mistaken with regards to GM foods, it's credibility with regards to shoshin shouldn't be affected (e.g. how are GMO and shoshin related??)

Secondly, your hypothetical super toxic GM food doesn't exist. He was referring to reality, not to sci-fi horror movies GM food where a mad scientist makes a maize expressing lethal bacterial toxins.

About 20 years ago 'mad scientists' were proposing introduction of Antarctic fish antifreeze proteins into strawberries and tomatoes to improve their shelf life...

> On the other hand, if I make a minor specific edit to the regulatory region upstream from a gene that controls the onset of flowering in a tomato plant, with the idea of producing an early-flowering varietal for northern climates, that's entirely safe (assuming no other accidental changes were made).

No, this is not true if someone is pointing a nuclear missile at NYC and will fire it if you "make a minor specific edit to the regulatory region upstream from a gene that controls the onset of flowering in a tomato plant". It's important that you clarify the point by also adding in the caveat excluding this case. I am also told that what you propose is unsafe in the event that there is a terrorist with a bomb who will explode in Penn Station if you make that edit.

It is important that we be precise with safety language since otherwise we may mislead people about the state of the field. Please be more responsible.

This is nonsense, it’s obvious what type of safety OP meant. I have no idea what could be irresponsible about not including contrived, ridiculous scenarios.

It’s like saying he also should have accounted for the possibility fairies will turn you into a newt if you edit a gene, or into a rabbit, or if a wizard will turn you into a newt. You can make up an infinite amount of this bs.

That's a pretty good point. We can make up an infinite number of contrived scenarios and it is obvious from context what type of safety is meant.

I can offer an analogy. Growing up in the northwestern US, I've seen firsthand how 95% of the forest in the lower 48 was harvested for timber, leaving only small pockets of primordial forest. That and global warming delivered us the runaway fire seasons we have today where summer is synonymous with poor air quality, poor water quality, erosion, loss of habitat, etc etc etc.

There are countless propaganda billboards here that say stuff like "thin the threat". The timber industry really wants to get back into wilderness areas and places designated roadless by the Clinton administration back in the 90s.

But what I think most of us want is for the timber industry to admit their guilt. Basically that would look something like a bankruptcy and a multi-billion dollar apology in the form of trusts and endowments to leave forests alone and invest in stuff like tree farms and hemp. Which will never come.

I've yet to see a major apology from GMO companies for the ways they've corrupted staple crops like wheat. We're eating processed whole grains today that were meant for animal feed (cows have 4 stomachs that can handle it, we can't), stuff like oatmeal loaded with glyphosate, and it's attacking our gut lining and causing autoimmune diseases at a scale that the previous generation can't understand.

So until there are reparations for the damage done, we simple can't trust those companies or the government agencies they've captured, or the politicians they've bought, or the court justices they've installed. The problem goes so deep in our political system that people can't even see it anymore. That's why the wealthy owners of those companies keep us divided over the merits of various remedies, so we don't wake up to the facts of how we're being manipulated into giving up our health to shave a few pennies off the price to increase their profits.

Edit: I'm struggling to find evidence for the effects of whole grain husks on the gut lining. But basically, the anti-pest compounds in grain husks make it past stomach acid, and when the villi (papillae was maybe the wrong term) in the lining of the small intestine try to eat the partially-digested proteins, it damages or kills them. The cycle of damage and repair continues through life until middle age, when the cells start losing their healing ability. Then one acquires sensitivity to wheat and other grains like I did, which I originally thought was sensitivity to legumes and nightshades:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2020.51731...

Then the villi become sparse or die, leaving the person unable to easily absorb vitamins and minerals, sending them into chronic starvation mode and obesity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intestinal_villus#Villous_atro...

GMOs exacerbate this by increasing the percentages of anti-pest compounds in husks. I try to avoid whole grains now after a lifetime of seeking them. If I must eat them, I try to stick to organic.

It's possible that you are struggling to find evidence because the evidence points in the other direction. For example, from the review article you linked:

"Based on all available scientific knowledge, wheat consumption is safe and healthy for the vast majority of people. There is no scientific evidence to support that the general population would benefit from a wheat-free diet."

Step 1 of fostering "shoshin" was to explain a theory or idea to someone else. Now step 2 is to stay aware of confirmation bias.

>We're eating processed whole grains today that were meant for animal feed (cows have 4 stomachs that can handle it, we can't)

Huh? Whole grains aren't "processed"; if anything they're less processed that other grains, hence the word "whole".

We can "handle" almost anything that cows can handle with their 4 stomachs, including grass. We eat lots of food that we can't digest very well, such as lettuce and other fibers. The difference between us and cows is that they derive more energy from plant matter, whereas we just poop most of it out, but it's ok because more fiber helps keep our colons clean, plus makes us feel full so we don't eat more calorie-laden foods that make us fat.

I just meant that processed foods aren't as likely to remove the husk as when people cook with flour themselves. I don't really disagree about the cow stuff, although they don't live long enough before slaughter to encounter the late digestive issues that humans are getting.

My real point was just that GMOs were advertised as decreasing the cost of feeding the world. What that meant in practice was reducing the cost of grain for livestock, since it takes 4.5-7.5 pounds of feed to make 1 pound of beef, so reducing that cost takes priority. Then those GMO crops, not meant for human consumption, cross-contaminated the crops we eat.

>although they don't live long enough before slaughter to encounter the late digestive issues that humans are getting.

What "late digestive issues"? People have been eating whole grains for thousands of years, and there's no evidence this causes any problems. Just look at people in the Mediterranean region; their diet has had such foods for ages and they're some of the healthiest people in the world, with very long lifespans.

>Then those GMO crops, not meant for human consumption, cross-contaminated the crops we eat.

There's no evidence so far that GMO crops have any bad effect on humans either. Pesticides, however... And not all GMO crops are simply designed to withstand pesticides; some are modified to make them resistant to plant diseases.

It's understandable if you haven't encountered this issue in your own life yet. It's relatively rare, but I know a ton of people (including family in the area) coming down with digestive problems like IBS and various autoimmune diseases, even as serious as multiple sclerosis (MS) in middle age.

There might be a few scientific reasons behind it. The background radiation after Fukushima was 80 times normal where I live, but that info has mostly been erased by revisionist history. But that could have injured everyone's thyroid, among other things.

To play devil's advocate, I'm also seeing more articles that IBS is caused by stress, affecting the vagus nerve and disrupting serotonin pathways in the gut and brain. That would make sense too, because western medicine can't seem to isolate a specific cause. It seems to work more like cancer, where 2 or more triggers sensitize the immune system. The closest thing I've found is the whole grain connection, where the husk gets past stomach acid and injures the lining of the small intestine, eventually leading to leaky gut and flattening of the cells in severe cases like Crohn's disease and eventually inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Once a person has leaky gut, food molecules pass through the gut lining into the blood. Then it's a roll of the dice as to how the immune system will react to molecules it's never seen before. I believe this happens in all people, but they get lucky and avoid reactions in youth.

In my case around the time I turned 40, it was sudden sensitivity to ALL of the foods I had been eating previously: wheat, milk, almonds, legumes (beans, etc), nightshades (potatoes, tomatoes, etc). For other people, the proteins in wheat get confused for the ones in the thyroid, so the body starts attacking it and it goes hypo or hyper. Or they get confused with ones on the nerves, causing neuropathy and even MS. I feel that my health problems were caused by acute, unending stress over 25 years until my body made the decision to stop working for me. The main pathways were probably sleep apnea, dehydration, too much alcohol, and not knowing the inflammatory effects of food-like substances from fast food chains like Taco Baloney. All I had to do was modify my lifestyle in any way, but like you, I was unaware of the risks or in denial about the severity of the consequences, so just kept going until I crashed. That's why I keep ranting about this stuff, because our sector is at high risk, but we'll never see this on the news.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com