stagamtiosero.ga/tix-los-mejores.php Ironically, the focus on gene flow means that little is being done to prevent or control the introduction of exotic and potentially invasive species, which in principle could be far more damaging than new varieties including GM varieties of the domesticated plant species currently under cultivation. A year study in the UK demonstrated that GM corn, potato, rapeseed and sugar beet lines are no more invasive or persistent than their conventional counterparts Crawley et al.
GM crops are currently submitted for risk assessment on a case-by-case basis using science-based risk assessment procedures, and it is acknowledged that as with all other technologies and, indeed, in all other areas of life we cannot expect zero risk. It might therefore be instructive to address this theoretical scenario. The reversibility of the GM trait is influenced by the competitive advantage under natural conditions conferred by the introduced trait and the ability of the GM plant to transfer such traits to wild plants.
However, the approval delays in the EU do pose a definitive and quantifiable risk for the safety of humans and the environment as they contribute to the perpetuation of older and less safe technologies, such as the use of chemical pesticides. The focus on risks also draws attention away from the clear environmental benefits of GM crops, including the fact that herbicide-tolerant crops allow the adoption of reduced tillage and conservation tillage practices, increasing carbon retention in the organic matter of the soil, restoring populations of organisms living or nesting in the soil, e.
Similarly, pest-resistant GM crops expressing Bt proteins are environmentally beneficial because there is no need to spray broad-spectrum pesticides onto the plants, thus reducing the use of fuel and avoiding environmental contamination with chemical pollutants Smale et al. Bt toxins are highly specific and are confined within the plant so that only pests actually attacking plants are affected, not beneficial insects and microbes.
Bt toxins are therefore recommended for more sustainable integrated pest control programs Romeis et al. The impressive safety record of Bt crops is unprecedented, yet Bt crops in Europe are subject to draconian rules which even the EC has admitted make no sense Ramessar et al. Soil animal and microbial flora are very important factors for the agro-ecosystem, so it is important to ask whether GM crops have a negative effect on soil organisms.
The impact of the herbicide glyphosate on NK corn mycorrhiza has also been found to be lower than conventional herbicides Barriuso et al. GM food crops were first planted commercially in and in they were cultivated on million ha of land James In all that time there has been not one single report of an adverse event caused by the consumption of GM food products; no reports of toxicity or allergenicity.
Indeed, no difference in nutritional or organoleptic properties compared to the non-GM equivalent [have been reported] at all. Several widely discussed reports about the potential adverse effects of GM crops in animal studies have also been comprehensively debunked Sears et al.
For transgenes conferring resistance to pests, diseases and herbicides, it has been suggested that this can also lead to an enhanced fitness, survival and spread of weeds. Also in this category are plants used to produce industrial raw materials e. Center for Whole Communities aims to create a more just, balanced and healthy world by exploring, honoring, and deepening the connections among land, people and community. Genetically modified food, Food production, Agro food science. Western Producer, 1 Oct , p With regard to foods derived from GM crops, consumers have not perceived any direct advantage, and therefore the public attention focused on the risk side of the risk—benefit equation.
StarLink is often put forward as an example of potential toxicity or allergenicity, but it is important to note that the summary of the investigation by the US Centers for Disease Control is very clear: The report also neglects to mention that microRNAs are a natural form of gene regulation in all plants and animals, and that humans therefore consume millions of plant and animal miRNAs every day in normal diets without any known effect. Furthermore, the pharmaceutical industry has struggled for over a decade to develop oral medications based on RNA-mediated gene regulation without success, because it is extremely difficult to persuade the human body to absorb these molecules in a functional form because of the significant degradation that takes place in the gut.
It is interesting that reaction to this report has immediately focused on the potential for negative effects while leaving out an important potential application of microRNAs: Despite the extraordinary safety record of GM crops, GM agriculture as a whole faces the most restrictive regulatory framework outside the nuclear industry Ramessar et al.
The central issue with GM crops is that because there are no concrete adverse effects for people to quantify, they can only focus on theoretical and largely unquantifiable ones. The hysteria about horizontal gene transfer is a key example of this phenomenon Twyman et al. It is well known that genes can be transferred horizontally between bacteria, and from bacteria to higher plants one of the methods scientists use to transfer DNA to plants exploits bacteria.
There is no evidence that antibiotic resistance transgenes have transferred horizontally from plants to bacteria that are human pathogens, therefore placing human health at risk, but no scientist can claim such an event is impossible, so there has to be a small but non-zero theoretical risk in the same way that there is a small but non-zero theoretical risk that someone walking down the street may be struck by a piano falling from a cargo plane.
However, on the basis of infinitesimal theoretical risk, the use of antibiotic resistance genes as markers in GM plants is now strongly discouraged Ramessar et al. The great irony is that these antibiotic resistance genes are themselves entirely natural and are present in billions of bacteria all over the world.
Every time someone eats non-GM fruits and vegetables, they are consuming these bacteria and the genes they contain. As stated above, gene transfer between bacteria is a well-known and very common natural occurrence so, again theoretically, these natural bacteria would provide a much more likely source of antibiotic resistance to transfer to human pathogens in the gut, yet this process has never been documented Ramessar et al.
Finally, the selective antibiotics are no longer used in a clinical setting, so even if resistance did jump to human pathogens, it would have no impact at the point of care. Even so, millions of euros were invested into the development of politically expedient technologies to remove antibiotic resistance markers, thus ensuring the risk of transference from GM plants was reduced from almost zero to zero, when nature teems with the very same antibiotic resistance genes and no steps are taken to avoid them.
There are no other technologies that demand zero risk, certainly none with such impressive credentials that the EU could state in a report following a year study — involving public research institutions and costing 70 million euros: In a subsequent report covering the next decade, the EU commission affirmed this outcome and reiterated: As with the first question, the focus on imperceptible risks means that the many potential benefits of GM agriculture are ignored.
It is generally acknowledged that first-generation GM crops provide higher yields with fewer inputs principally fuel and pesticides , which has important economic benefits for the agricultural industry in the industrialized world, but the more significant positive effects are seen in the developing world where GM crops allow subsistence farmers not only to survive but to take surplus produce to market, providing additional wealth that supports education, improves access to medicines, and leads to the empowerment of women Christou and Twyman ; Yuan et al.
However, the hysterical anti-GM activism and the resulting political expediency is seriously delaying this process, particularly by holding back the deployment of newer first-generation GM crops that are protected from drought, salinity and better suited to grow in hostile environments, as well as second-generation GM crops that have enhanced output traits such as better nutritional composition Farre et al.
It is no exaggeration to say that the anti-GM precedent currently set by Europe is indirectly contributing to death on a massive scale in Africa and Asia Potrykus When I am asked this question I usually answer that I do not know for sure and the reason for this answer is that control agencies are not reliable.
I do not frankly know exactly what happens in all countries, but I believe it to be similar to what we have here in Europe with EFSA, which I do know fairly well. The main problems with EFSA are two. In the first place, EFSA does not utilize independent laboratories for the control of GMO bio-safety, and therefore relies on the answers from the producer companies to the questions posed by specific scientific committees. Therefore, while those committees are, as far as we know, quite independent, of course companies certainly are not and, moreover, they keep sending back the conclusions of their laboratories and not the raw data.
Therefore it is also impossible to check the reliability of the statistical treatment of the results, as happened in the unfortunate case of the Maize MON In that case the producing company Monsanto was obliged by a German Court to release the data, and I personally saw the amazingly poor statistical treatment utilized. This omission does not allow the screening of putative changes in host gene expression, the transcription of fusion RNAs and proteins, etc.
Moreover, epigenomic analyses are not requested, studies on the metabolomes and physiological changes, particularly in hormone patterns, the study of effects on the environment are limited to the possible weed resistance to herbicides, and so on. Finally, requested studies of GMO toxicity in rats are very poor and carried out for periods that are much too short. However, my feeling not my scientific opinion due to the lack of data is that health risks of transgenic food on the market now are limited, micro-RNAs may in theory block genes having complementary sequences.
I think that the risks from blocks in genes relevant to human health is very low, but it may happen. It should be recalled from this point of view that not-aimed insertion of DNA into the receiving genomes is the main reason of the unfortunate failure of gene therapy in humans. The real danger being, also in this case, glyphosate and its adjuvants.
As far as the future is concerned, I am really extremely worried about open air cultivation of plants which are transgenic for pharmaceuticals, because in that case cross-pollination with vaccines or other proteins could be really dangerous, as it could lead to unneeded pharmaceuticals in food. Of course, on the other hand, plants transgenic of proteins not liable to be produced by prokaryotes, if the plants are not to be grown in open air, may certainly be interesting.
Which are the major technical advancements in plant genetic engineering since the release into the market of the first genetically modified products? The first GM crops on the market were engineered for herbicide tolerance; these were soon followed by plants engineered for pest resistance. Smartstax corn, jointly developed by Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences, combining eight different herbicide and pest resistance traits.
Despite the rather limited scope of current commercial GM crops, the development pipeline is incredibly rich and diverse. Innovations in the development of GM crops fall into four major areas, which can be described as improved first-generation crops focusing on input traits but using innovative approaches , novel second-generation crops delivering better output traits , third-generation crops delivering value added products and technical developments such as the control of transgene expression Farre et al.
In the first category, several new approaches have been developed to achieve pest resistance in addition to the current reliance on Bt genes, because Bt genes do not exist to counter the effects of all known pests. Also, there is the potential for pest populations to evolve resistance to single Bt toxins Christou et al. As well, there are alternative protein toxins such as lectins that work against recalcitrant sap-sucking insects; novel approaches include the expression of toxin fusions Mehlo et al.
A small number of commercial crops are resistant to diseases, such as virus-resistant papaya, squash, plum and bean plants, and rice plants resistant to bacterial infections. Many additional GM crops resistant to various viral, bacterial and fungal diseases are under development, using a vast number of different approaches, such as enhancing natural plant defenses, the expression of pathogen proteins, the expression of plant-proteins that repel specific pathogens and even the expression of mammalian antibodies that neutralize pathogens inside the plant Collinge et al.
Many concepts have also been developed that will help crops withstand harsh environments, especially drought, high levels of salinity, waterlogging and poor soil quality Cominelli and Tonelli Although first-generation crops benefit farmers mainly by allowing them to overcome biological and environmental extremes biotic and abiotic stresses , the next breakthrough in GM agriculture will be the deployment of second-generation crops, where the benefits are targeted at consumers. In multivitamin corn, three distinct metabolic pathways are modified to simultaneously enhance the levels of three key vitamins.
There has also been remarkable progress in the development of third-generation GM crops, which are not intended for human consumption but instead have valuable industrial uses Naqvi et al. At the forefront are pharmaceutical crops producing proteins or small-molecules of medical relevance Ma et al. In our laboratory we have achieved the production of an HIV-neutralizing antibody in corn which could be used as a microbicide component to help prevent the spread of the virus Ramessar et al. The value of producing such molecules in plants rather than mammalian cells or bacteria as is usually the case is the reduced costs, the better safety profile no human or animal pathogens, no endotoxins and the massive production scale that can be achieved with little additional effort Stoger et al.
Also in this category are plants used to produce industrial raw materials e. In both cases, it is important to avoid competition with food crops. Finally, a variety of novel technologies have been developed to control transgene expression, e. Some might argue that the development pipeline discussed above is misleading because only four cultivated crops with the same two modifications have reached the market. Does this then mean that all the others have been failures? I would say that the answer is emphatically no. First, there are other products on the market that do not receive as much attention, e.
On top of this, the activity of NGOs that oppose GM crops is often supported by public administrations and welcomed by the media, resulting in approved GM crops like Bt potato being rejected by the food industry to avoid campaigns against their brands. We can define them as technical and regulatory successes, but marketing failures, as happens in many other areas of the economy. Golden Rice will soon be grown on a large scale in the Philippines. It has taken years to obtain regulatory approval and funding for this was raised only recently.
Because Golden Rice does not directly benefit farmers, there was no incentive for industry to cover the approval costs. My opinion is that these costs should have been covered by government public health authorities, as they stand to lose the most from a population riven by vitamin A deficiency and they have the most to gain from the health benefits derived from this crop. After the development by M. Chilton in of the first method of plant genetic engineering through the usage of Agrobacterium tumefaciens, the first transgenic plant tobacco , was produced in and a few years later Bt genes for resistance to insects and genes for the resistance to herbicides were introduced into crops.
The first transgenic cultivar to enter the market was the Tomato Flavr Savr, resistant to rotting, in , but it was very soon withdrawn, because of unexpected negative side effects of the transformation. In both insect resistant maize and RR soybean herbicide resistant plants were introduced into the market.
As reported by Clive James in the annual review of cultivated GMPs in , only four cultivated crop plants, still bearing the same two modifications, are in the market and have been widely commercialised soybean, maize, cotton, canola. In the meantime, research intensity on the part of the leading companies has been decreasing as discussed by Schimmelpfennig et al. Of course this does not mean that new useful and efficient products could not be obtained, but this can occur only if new, reliable methods of control of the dynamics of the plant system are developed.
Apparently and unfortunately, the leading companies do not seem interested in following this process, probably because, as discussed further in the answer to question 6, incomes of leading companies derive from the control of the market, the intellectual property rights of the commercialised products, the stock exchange etc. As discussed thoroughly also in the answer to question 6, this question is misleading when it states that livestock farmers need GM-soybean They need soybean, but it need not necessarily be transgenic. A soybean production per acre steadily increased from to and the speed of increase did not change with the introduction of GM plants in The reasons most of world wide soybean production stems from GM plants is the economic advantage coming from a reduction in the needed manpower for herbicide spraying on herbicide resistant cultivars and the control of the market by the three large holdings: Monsanto, Dupont and Syngenta.
In our case the average size of farms is of 5—6 hectares; the farms with the extant GMPs may be up to more than hundred thousand. So, while in large farms airplanes can be utilized to spray herbicides, certainly our farmers have to rely on manpower working directly in the field.
So here and in most anti-GMO European regions there is no manpower advantage. The EC has recently proposed to give Member States the freedom to veto the cultivation of GM crops on their own territory without needing to provide any scientific evidence relating to new risks European Commission b , ostensibly to prevent tactical voting leading to EU-wide bans Casassus However, although the proposed amendment will allow member states to adopt measures against the cultivation of GM crops, they will not be allowed to prohibit the import or marketing of authorized GM products from elsewhere , which means that EU markets are likely to be flooded with imported GM products that could just as easily be home-grown.
This is clearly a ludicrous position, which simultaneously restricts the freedom of EU farmers to grow the crops they choose and forces them to accept GM animal feed from abroad Sabalza et al. A critical point is that if the EU continues to obstruct GM agriculture, it will force farmers to use environmentally hazardous, expensive and unsustainable agricultural practices, spend unnecessary resources on fossil fuels and agrochemicals, while at the same time importing GM products from the Americas.
This policy will also discourage research and drive researchers overseas where the value chain can be realized in terms of released GM crops. Within the EU, researchers working on GM plants know that the best they can expect for their products is greenhouse cultivation, and that despite their benefits, GM crops are unlikely to be deployed in any setting where they could perform a useful function.
Here the EU policy on GM crops is attacking its own foundations as a competitive bioeconomy because with one hand the EC offers funding for innovative biotech research and values or even requires the participation of small- to medium-sized enterprises SMEs and large industry partners, while with the other they prevent the same companies from realizing the value of their development pipeline. Many individual scientists and large companies with ambitious GM research projects have moved abroad to continue their work, and promising European SMEs have been unable to find investment partners The Guardian , The attitude of European policymakers reveals the immense divide between the rational evaluation of science and business, and the panicky, expedient politics pandering to a populist media and activists Farre et al.
Of course there are more conventional methods to stop the attacks both through the use of chemicals and of biological agents, but certainly insect resistance may be a valid one when and if the plant is resistant to all corn borers at the same time and not only one of them, and of course the borers are not naturally selected for resistance to Bt toxins.
This is happening in the case of maize in the USA and induced the Government to rule the maintenance of areas with susceptible plants to partially overcome this problem. In the case of cotton in China, the resistance to the boll worm induced the multiplication of more than a hundred competitor species, and therefore the amount of insecticides rose to levels never reached with non-boll worm resistant crops. Fumonisins are mycotoxins produced by Fusarium molds when they colonize cereal grains. They are toxic to humans, particularly affecting liver and kidney functions, causing esophageal cancer, increasing HIV transmission rates Williams et al.
Many nations have established regulatory standards stating maximum tolerance levels for mycotoxins in food and feed. Therefore, aside from the health risks described above, mycotoxin contamination can also reduce the price paid for food crops, or in extreme cases, can cause market rejection of entire food or feed shipments Wu et al. This is not a recommended practice, nor is it consistent with other EC decisions including the application of the precautionary approach, because several corn herbicides have been banned in the EU at contamination levels far lower than allowed for fumonisins Wu There is a clear relationship between corn borer damage and unsafe levels of fumonisins in raw corn, reflecting the penetration of damaged corn kernels by the fungus Munkvold et al.
Any method that reduces insect damage in corn also reduces the risk of fungal contamination, but foliar Bt sprays are not sufficient because the corn borers are protected inside the cob Sanahuja et al.
Bt corn confers resistance to corn borers and therefore reduces mycotoxin contamination. This information comes directly from the Spanish Ministry of the Environment http: Similar indications come from import checks in Italy where contamination in Bt corn is consistently registered as lower than conventional corn. The benefit of Bt corn in terms of the reduction of mycotoxin damage has been virtually ignored in policy debates, despite its positive economic impact in the US and its effect on both health and the economy in developing countries Wu et al.
GM crops provide tools that are compatible with many of the other approaches used currently to increase food production, while reducing the environmental footprint of agriculture and increasing the affordability of crops Christou and Twyman The socioeconomic advantages of GM crops are demonstrated by the consistent growth in adoption since the first commercial releases James combined with ample evidence of greater farm profitability in both developed economies like the US Smale et al.
There has been considerable debate about economic potential of GM crops in developing countries Park et al. In the case of Bt crops, these benefits include yield improvements, higher revenues and lower pesticide costs, which more than compensate for the higher seed prices.
This nonprofit collaborates with scientists, researchers, government officials and others to "support the health of pollinating animals and the plants and habitat they support. Shows how to safely encourage wildlife in public and private spaces. Total Habitat is one of many firms that create chlorine-free "natural swimming ponds.
Nedlaw Living Walls is a Canadian company that produces indoor "living walls" of ficus, hibiscus, orchids, and other plants. A sampling of others in the vertical garden business includes: Other sources are listed in New York Times' May 5, article. Their Web site includes a searchable directory for places across the U. A Web search for "salvaged building materials" in your area should reveal a number of sources. Create a neighborhood butterfly zone by giving seeds or starts of butterfly-attracting plants to your neighbors during the holidays.
The Living Building Challenge: The organization's journal, Gatherings, is a good starting point. National Environmental Education Foundation , provides a forum for environmental educators. Participants boost their physical strength and stamina as they tackle useful outdoor projects under the guidance of experienced leaders.
Casting for Recovery , founded in , is a nonprofit that teaches fly-casting to breast-cancer survivors.
Be a Citizen Naturalist Volunteer at a wildlife rehabilitation center or other wildlife care facility. Help restore habitat and monitor endangered species under the guidance of natural history museums, state and national parks, and wildlife protection groups. Join a Master Naturalist or Wild Ones chapter in your state or region. The Cornell Lab of Ornithology offers the Celebrate Urban Birds program in English and Spanish, focusing on species often found in urban neighborhoods.
You can post bird sightings onto satellite maps and track bird populations in your own neighborhoods. Many communities now have local plant nurseries that specialize in native species. All nurseries, including chains such as Home Depot, could do the same, and also distribute information, either through tags on the plants, or material at the checkout stand, that promotes bioregional species and identity, outdoor play for kids and families, and ideas for designing, planting, and growing wild places.
Follow Aldo Leopold's example and put your money where your ideals are: Love it to life. Be a plant salvager. The Native Plant Salvage Program, run by the King County Department of Water, in Washington, has "saved tens of thousands of plants in the path of commercial and residential development" by enlisting hundreds of volunteers, many of them graduates of nature-scaping classes that encourage the use of native plants.
See also " Last Ditch Efforts " in Audobon magazine. For Spacious Skies , a sky-awareness program; Dark Sky Initiative preserves and protects the nighttime environment; Cloud Appreciation Society , aims to foster understanding and appreciation of clouds. Bay Area Ant Survey recruits citizen naturalists to help document more than a hundred distinct types of ant species in the eleven-county Bay Area. Does this give you ideas? Hooked on Nature offers educational materials and workshops to help connect children to the natural world.
There is growing notion that not all healthy diets are sustainable and not all sustainable diets are healthy, thus an integral system approach will be necessary to produce sufficient, safe, and nutritionally enhanced food. Increasing demand for nutritious, safe, and healthy food because of a growing population, and the pledge to maintain biodiversity and other resources, pose a major challenge to agriculture that is already threatened by a changing climate.
Diverse and healthy diets, largely based on plant-derived food, may reduce diet-related illnesses. Investments in plant sciences will be necessary to design diverse cropping systems balancing productivity, sustainability, and nutritional quality. Cultivar diversity and nutritional quality are crucial. We call for better cooperation between food and medical scientists, food sector industries, breeders, and farmers to develop diversified and nutritious cultivars that reduce soil degradation and dependence on external inputs, such as fertilizers and pesticides, and to increase adaptation to climate change and resistance to emerging pests.