From Dr. Dixon in Britain:

quote:

---

What is Genetic Engineering?
Genetic engineering is the alteration of genetic code by artificial means, and is therefore different from traditional selective breeding.

Genetic engineering examples include taking the gene that programs poison in the tail of a scorpion, and combining it with a cabbage. These genetically modified cabbages kill caterpillers because they have learned to grow scorpion poison (insecticide) in their sap.

Genetic engineering also includes insertion of human genes into sheep so that they secrete alpha-1 antitrypsin in their milk - a useful substance in treating some cases of lung disease.

Genetic engineering has created a chicken with four legs and no wings.

Genetic engineering has created a goat with spider genes that creates "silk" in its milk.

Genetic engineering works because there is one language of life: human genes work in bacteria, monkey genes work in mice and earthworms. Tree genes work in bananas and frog genes work in rice. There is no limit in theory to the potential of genetic engineering.

Genetic engineering has given us the power to alter the very basis of life on earth.

---

quote:

---

From: emailmsf@kelloggs.com
To: lrs1952@hotmail.com
Subject: Contact Us Feedback - Morningstar Farms [T2000100100FX]
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:21:51 -0400

To: kelagent@speedymail.com

Thank you for contacting us regarding the ingredients used in our products.

Throughout its 60-year history, Worthington Foods has provided consumers with
the best tasting, highest quality vegetarian and other healthful foods. We will
continue to do so as part of Kellogg Company.

The ingredients we use have been approved by the appropriate regulatory
authorities and all of our products comply with the food labeling requirements
in the markets in which they are sold throughout the world. Nevertheless, we
recognize that consumers of Worthington Foods products may prefer that such
products not include ingredients produced through biotechnology. For this
reason, we have completed a conversion to non-genetically modified soy proteins
in all Morningstar Farms(R), Worthington, Natural Touch(R) and Loma Linda(R)
products.

We are currently purchasing all non-genetically modified soy proteins and have
been using these in production since April 1, 2000. These products have filled
our distribution channels and should be in consumers' homes by this time.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. We appreciate your interest in
Worthington Foods products and look forward to your continued patronage.

Katina
Consumer Affairs
Kellogg Company

---

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

I am not completely sure what Canada is doing about food labelling. I do know, however, that there is a petition in the health food store I frequent (Vita Health) requesting that genetically engineered foods be listed in the ingredients of foods. Hopefully the petition will win out!

------------------
Sarah Moss
*Prayer Changes Things!*

------------------
What is popular is not always right.
What is right is not always popular.
Gerry B.

from Rueters, 12-1999

quote:

---

Dr Guenther Stotzky and researchers at New York University have shown that BT corn — the seed variety which is resistant to corn borer pests — releases an insecticide through its roots into the soil.

The toxin remains in the soil because it is not easily broken down. It retains its insecticide properties, which could help to control pests or promote insects resistant to the pesticide — the scientists aren't sure which.

"Further investigations will be necessary to shed light on what might happen underground," Stotzky and his colleagues said in a report in the science journal Nature.

Their work is the first to show that the toxin from the genetically-engineered BT corn can seep into the soil.

Stotzky said so far there was little evidence that GM technology was potentially harmful but the discovery would add to the confusion about the safety of GM crops.

---

quote:

---

Gene Used as Pesticide

Bt is short for bacillus thuringiensis, a naturally occurring soil bacterium that acts as a pesticide. The gene has been inserted into millions of acres of UL.S. corn and cotton plants to repel the European corn borer, bollworms and other pests.

The researchers placed potted milkweed plants in and around Bt cornfields to simulate naturally occurring conditions.

Pollen from Bt crops also drifts onto nearby plants, including those eaten by harmless insects like the Monarch. The orange and black butterflies are at greatest risk within 10 meters of Bt fields, Obrycki said in an interview.

"There exists a good possibility that we will see some mortality of Monarchs in the field," he said. "The level and amount will depend on the timing of when the corn is shedding its pollen and when the Monarch larvae are in the fields."

The Iowa study analyzed the impact on larvae from two types of BB corn developed by Novartis AG and sold under the brand names NatureGard and Attribute. The research built upon work by Cornell scientists who created a stir one year ago when they reported Monarch larvae died when fed relatively large amounts of Bt corn pollen in the laboratory.

Novartis defended the safety of its Bt corn, saying the new study did not duplicate real-world conditions.

"Research conducted outdoors doesn't indicate what happens in a field environment," said Novartis spokesman Rich Lotstein. "The weight of evidence of published and preliminary research indicates that milkweed within one meter of Bt corn fields are highly unlikely to be dusted with toxic levels of Bt pollen."

A dozen university researchers stretching from Canada to the Midwestern corn belt are currently studying Bt corn fields and whether the pollen impacts migrating Monarch butterflies.

University of Illinois scientists said in June they found no ill effects for black swallowtail butterfly caterpillars who ate pollen from a variety of Bt corn developed by Pioneer Hi-Bred International, a unit of DuPont Co.

---

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

Before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, United States Senate. October 7, 1999

quote:

---

FOOD BIOTECHNOLOGY
First, let me explain what we mean when we refer to food biotechnology or genetically engineered foods. Many of the foods that are already common in our diet are obtained from plant varieties that were developed using conventional genetic techniques of breeding and selection. Hybrid corn, nectarines (which are genetically altered peaches), and tangelos (which are a genetic hybrid of a tangerine and grapefruit) are all examples of such breeding and selection. Food products produced through modern methods of biotechnology such as recombinant DNA techniques and cell fusion are emerging from research and development into the marketplace. It is these products that many people refer to as "genetically engineered foods." The European Commission refers to these foods as Genetically Modified Organisms. The United States uses the term genetic modification to refer to all forms of breeding, both modern, i.e. genetic engineering, and conventional.

The new gene splicing techniques are being used to achieve many of the same goals and improvements that plant breeders have sought through conventional methods. Today's techniques are different from their predecessors in two significant ways. First, they can be used with greater precision and allow for more complete characterization and, therefore, greater predictability about the qualities of the new variety. These techniques give scientists the ability to isolate genes and to introduce new traits into foods without simultaneously introducing many other undesirable traits, as may occur with traditional breeding. This is an important improvement over traditional breeding.

Second, today's techniques give breeders the power to cross biological boundaries that could not be crossed by traditional breeding. For example, they enable the transfer of traits from bacteria or animals into plants.

In conducting its safety evaluations of genetically engineered foods, FDA considers not only the final product but also the techniques used to create it. Although study of the final product ultimately holds the answer to whether or not a product is safe to eat, knowing the techniques used to create the product helps in understanding what questions to ask in reviewing the product's safety. That is the way FDA regulates both traditional food products and products derived through biotechnology.

---

quote:

---

Judge dismisses GM labeling lawsuit

10/5/2000
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration by biotechnology critics who demanded required labeling on foods made with genetically modified crops. The lawsuit was a direct challenge to FDA's policy that considers gene-altered crops to be essentially the same as those produced by conventional breeding methods and thus not subject to the same regulatory controls as food additives.

In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said the biotech foes failed to prove that FDA violated procedural and environmental laws in establishing the policy or that the agency should mandate labeling of the foods. She further wrote in her decision that unless the agency decides biotech ingredients are materially different from conventional products, it "lacks a basis upon which it can legally mandate labeling, regardless of consumer demand."

. . . The FDA is currently finalizing a mandatory review proposal that will be open for public comment in the next few months.

Several anti-biotech organizations, including The Center for Food Safety, and a group of scientists and religious leaders originally filed the lawsuit against FDA in 1998 by. Representatives for the groups said they don't plan to appeal the decision and will instead wait to see what rules FDA's mandatory review proposal suggests.

Edited by Scott Hegenbart
Managing Editor, Food Ingredients Online

---

quote:

---

Using crops genetically engineered to resist weedkillers might harm birds — not because the genetic changes are harmful but because killing weeds means less food for birds, researchers said today.

Some farms where such crops are used could see a 90 percent drop in the number of weeds — a boon to farmers but bad news for hungry birds, Andrew Watkinson of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, said. . . .

Monsanto Corp., which makes the Round-Up Ready soybean genetically modified to resist its herbicide of the same name, was quick to issue a response to the study.

"It is important to understand that this is not an issue of biotechnology," the company, a division of Pharmacia Corp., said in a statement.

"It is an issue of weed control, whether through biotechnology or other methods. This mathematical model, and any conclusions drawn from it, must be viewed with caution because it does not reflect real farming conditions." {This seems to be a favorite retort to any studies showing harmful effects of GM crops}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

With bioengineered crops now in about two-thirds of America's processed foods, there are growing questions about what the government does to regulate them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

With the tools developed from biotechnology, a gene can be inserted into a plant to give it a specific new characteristic instead of mixing all of the genes from two plants and seeing what comes out. Once in the plant, the new gene does what all genes do: It directs the production of a specific protein that makes the plant uniquely different.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Modifications have also been made to canola and soybean plants to produce oils with a different fatty acid composition so they can be used in new food processing systems. Researchers are working diligently to develop crops with enhanced nutritional properties.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

French genetic researchers created Alba for artist Eduardo Kac. Thanks to genes borrowed from a jellyfish, the albino rabbit glows green when placed under special lighting. . . .

The French scientists created Alba using a process called zygote microinjection. In this process, the scientists plucked a fluorescent protein from a species of fluorescent jellyfish called Aequorea victoria. Then they modified the gene to make its glowing properties twice as powerful. This gene, called EGFG (for enhanced genetic fluorescent gene) was then inserted into a fertilized rabbit egg cell that eventually grew into Alba. As the cell divided, the "green gene" also replicated and made its way into every cell of Alba's body. . . .

Other researchers are working on developing glow-in-the-dark hair mousse, ink and cake frosting. There is even preliminary research underway to produce glow-in-the-dark beer and champagne.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

FDA Consumer: Let me ask you one more scientific question. I understand that it is common for scientists to use antibiotic resistance marker genes in the process of bioengineering. Are you concerned that their use in food crops will lead to an increase in antibiotic resistance in germs that infect people?

Dr. Henney: Antibiotic resistance is a serious public health issue, but that problem is currently and primarily caused by the overuse or misuse of antibiotics. We have carefully considered whether the use of antibiotic resistance marker genes in crops could pose a public health concern and have found no evidence that it does.

---

"It directs the production of a specific protein that makes the plant uniquely different." The producers claim this is not harmful, but I am reminded of the fairly new disease, spongiform encephalopathy, better known as mad cow disease in cattle, scrappie in sheep, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans. This disease is based, not on bacteria, not on viruses, but on protein called prions. How can we be sure that GM foods will not start a chain reaction that could well lead to other similar prion based diseases? Nobody on earth knows.

[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited October 10, 2000).]

quote:

---

Genetic Engineering Critics Meet to Sound Alarm for India

NEW DELHI (Sept. 30) XINHUA - They have come from different parts of the world and have different professions, but they have one common enemy -- genetically engineered products and one common cause -- to "save" India from the disastrous end of "genetic pollution".

Though dubbed "Genetic Engineering or Organic: Which Future For Agriculture?", the press conference hosted by Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) and International Forum for Agriculture (IFA) here this afternoon turned out to be a gathering of pure critics of the introduction of genetic engineering (GE) in farming and foods.

"We are trying to form an international coalition against GE products, which are being introduced across the world," said Dr. Vandana Shiva, director of RFSTE, an India-based environment activist group.

They might sound a bit radical and biased, but one after hearing their stories would surely feel they are not worrying for nothing.

"Five years ago, genetically engineered rape seeds were introduced in our region, which were claimed to be more nutritious with better yields and less use of chemicals. But now they have turned out to be less yielding and less nutritional and the chemical cost goes up 6 times more than originally thought," said Percy Schmeiser, a farmer from Saskatchewan, Canada.

Moreover, Schmeiser, who claimed to have spent 15 years developing his own rape seeds and have chosen not to use the GE seeds, was sued by Monsanto, the world's leading GE seeds distributor, for "intellectual theft" as the GE seeds crossed into his land from his neighbors' fields.

"I was forced to launch a counter-suit against Monsanto for developing a 'super-weed' they themselves cannot control," said Schmeiser, who is still fighting the legal battle.

Revealing a more appalling story, Dr. Arpad Pusztai, a nutritional scientist from Scotland, claimed that studies he and his colleague conducted on animals showed genetically engineered potatoes "interfere with" the normal development of internal organs, tissues and immune system of young rats, thus having "a potential harmful effect" to health.

As soon as he released his report, he found himself against the "whole scientific establishment" and faced enormous pressure from the biotechnology industry, said Pusztai, adding that "some scientists are also genetically modified by the genetic modification industry".

Ellen Hickey, one of the founders of the U.S.-based Genetic Engineered Food Alert Organization, said that contrary to the impression that GE food is warmly welcomed in America, many consumers have no idea what the supermarkets are selling to them, and that "once they learn the truth, their reaction range from sorrow to anger".

While consumers in rich countries are rejecting GE foods and forcing the authorities to recall them from store shelves, developing nations like India are "being flooded with untested unlabeled genetically engineered foods", said a leaflet distributed by the RFSTE.

Genetically modified seeds and crops could also infuse toxins in the soil, contaminate genes of native plants and reduce bio- diversity, heighten the financial burden of poor farmers and lead to agricultural monopoly by multinational bio-tech corporations, said participants of the press conference, some of them also from Peru, South Africa and Sri Lanka.

"We are seeking a 10-year moratorium on commercialization of genetic engineering in food and farming in the country," said Vandana Shiva. She was echoed by Glenda Lindsay from South Africa, who is also heading a coalition in her country seeking a five-year freeze on GE products.

Dr. Pushba Bhargava, former director of India's Central Council of Microbiology, said that efforts should be made to prompt the government to strengthen testing of GE products and educate the farmers not to sign "blind contracts" while purchasing seeds.

However, all the opponents of GE products should know exactly what a mighty enemy they are fighting with, especially when there are still so many governments and so many people in the world that view genetic engineering as a fruit of hi-tech revolution and a propeller to agricultural production, in both quantity and quality.

Will Allen, a farmer from the United States, claimed that he and his fellow cotton growers had no other choice but genetically modified seeds, although such seeds had caused yield losses in all 18 U.S. southern states.

"We were forced by banks and seed companies to do so," said Allen, adding that while he and other farmers voluntarily formed a research group on organic farming, they could get no money from either the government or research institutes.

In India, Agriculture Minister Nitish Kumar has stated that it is imperative to adopt genetic engineering in Indian agriculture because of increase in productivity. The minister, however, also called for a debate on biotechnology.

In the southern state of Karnataka, state Chief Minister S M Krishna has bluntly called opponents of GE "quacks who spread rumors about the ill effects of biotechnology" and accused them of conspiring to "curb India's growing power". The state had formally started field trials of Biotech cotton from September 20.

Still, Shiva, Allen and their fellows believe they have every reason to be optimistic.

"We have great chance to win the battle," said Allen, who claimed that more and more farmers are joining his group and one day they will force the bank to allow them to go back to the track of organic farming.

Shiva noted that the Indian government has started bio-technology training for officials in relevant departments since four years ago and has also imposed strict procedure for GE products import clearance.

What's more important, she said, people across the world are becoming more cautious with their bio-safety awareness enhanced, as indicated by the fact that the use of genetically engineered seeds was down by 25 percent last year.

---

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

Genetic Engineering is playing God. As Creator, God holds the patent on life,not Monsanto. He created the species barrier so that each living entity would reproduce only after it's kind. Man has no right to remove that barrier & evil will surely result. Left alone we would make ourselves extinct, instead the Bible tells us God will intervene & "destroy those who destroy the earth."

I still haven't figured out the rules on posting links yet, since I just started posting here yesterday.

Information on Genetic or Bio Engineering is really easy to find on the internet but one site that might particularly interest you is CAGE. Canadians Against Genetic Engineering. If you can't find it let me know if it's O.K. to post the link or I can send it to you via Email. They have many interesting links i.e. Monsanto vs Schmeiser - a landmark case of a US giant vs a small Canadian farmer family.

Kate

------------------
The Lord is the strength of my life and my portion forever.

quote:

---

But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. God purposed to destroy by a flood that powerful, long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before him. He would not suffer them to live out the days of their natural life, which would be hundreds of years. It was only a few generations back when Adam had access to that tree which was to prolong life. After his disobedience he was not suffered to eat of the tree of life and perpetuate a life of sin. In order for man to possess an endless life he must continue to eat of the fruit of the tree of life. Deprived of that tree, his life would gradually wear out. {1SP 69.1}

---

I truly believe that we have reached that time that Jesus told us would come when it would be like the days of Noah. I never saw the film Jurassic Park but according to what little I have read about it, it was about cloning dinosaurs. Mention of the movie often comes up in discussions of cloning (another form of genetic engineering) and GM foods as if it is somehow a harbinger of what may happen if we keep tampering where we ought not. Should God let this continue for long, I belive that we would indeed destroy ourselves. There will be such confusion between man, plant and animal, that biodiversity will decline to the point of extinction of all life on this planet. We know that God has promised to put an end to it.

Brave new world? How about frightening, terrifying, startling, new world? God destroyed the Noachian world because they had destroyed the image of God in man. Today we are working on the same thing. We're playing God and combining things that were never meant to be together. We are putting our whole future at risk for the sake of greed. You've heard about the golden rule: he who has the gold rules? it seems true in this case. Those who care about what is happening and want to see frankenfoods labeled at the very least (the ones without the gold), are told they are overreacting, there is nothing to fear (by the ones with the gold).

Perhaps we should make David's prayer our prayer:

quote:

---

Satan is not asleep; he is wide awake to make of no effect the sure word of prophecy. With skill and deceptive power he is working to counterwork the expressed will of God, made plain in His word. For years Satan has been gaining control of human minds through subtle sophistries that he has devised to take the place of the truth. In this time of peril, rightdoers, in the fear of God, will glorify His name by repeating the words of David: "It is time for Thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void Thy law." Psalm 119:126. {9T 92.2}

In the exercise of the longsuffering of God, He gives to nations a certain period of probation, but there is a point which, if they pass, there will be the visitation of God in His indignation. He will punish. The world has been advancing from one degree of contempt for God's law to another, and the prayer may be appropriate at this time, "It is time for thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void thy law" (Ps. 119:126). . . . {3SM 396.3}

For years Satan has been gaining control of human minds through subtle sophistries that he has devised to take the place of the truth. In this time of peril, rightdoers, in the fear of God, will glorify His name by repeating the words of David, "It is time for thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void thy law." {HP 345.3}

---

Kate, if you would email me the websites you find, I will place them in the websites topic. Thank-you

________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited October 11, 2000).]

Canola
1997-- Glufosinate Tolerant Canola - Agrevo, Inc.
Phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene from Streptomyces viridochromogenes.

1995-- Glufosinate Tolerant Canola - Agrevo, Inc.
Phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene from Streptomyces viridochromogenes.

1995-- Laurate Canola - Calgene Inc.
The 12:0 acyl carrier protein thiosesterase gene from California bay, Umbellularia californica.

1995-- Glyphosate Tolerant Canola - Monsanto Co.
Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4.

Corn
1998-- Glufosinate Tolerant Corn - Agrevo, INC.
Phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene from Streptomyces viridochromogenes.

1998-- Glyphosate Tolerant Corn - Monsanto Co.
The enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4.

1997-- Insect Protected Corn - Dekalb Genetics Corp.
The cryIA (c) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis.

1996-- Glufosinate Tolerant Corn - Dekalb Genetics Corp.
Phosphinothricin acetyl transferase gene from Streptomyces hygroscopicus.

1996-- Insect Protected Corn - Monsanto Co.
The cryIA (b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki

1996-- Glyphosate Tolerant/ Insect Protected Corn - Monsato Co.
The enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 and the glyphosate oxidoreductase gene from Ochrobactrum anthropi in the glyphosate tolerant lines. The CryIA (b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp.kurstaki in lines that are also insect protected.

1996-- Insect Protected Corn - Northrup King
The cryIA (b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) subsp. kurstaki.

1996-- Male Sterile Corn - Plant Genetic Systems
The barnase gene from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens.

1995-- Glufosinate Tolerant Corn - Agrevo Inc.
Phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene from Streptomyces viridochrogenes.

1995-- Insect Protected Corn - Ciba-Geigy Corp.
The cryIA (b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki

Cotton
1998-- Bromoxynil Tolerant/ Insect Protected Cotton - Calgene Co.
Nitrilase gene from Klebsiella pneumoniae and the cryIA(c) gene from Bacillus thursingiensis subsp. kurstaki.

1996-- Sulfonylurea Tolerant Cotton - Dupont.
Acetolactate synthase gene from tobacco, Nicotiana tabacum cv. Xanthi.

1996-- Glyphosate Tolerant Cotton - Monsanto Co.
Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4.

1996-- Insect Protected Cotton - Monsanto Co.
The cryIA(c) from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) subsp. kurstaki.

1996-- Bromoxynil Tolerant Cotton - Calegene Inc.
A nitrilase gene isolated from Klebsiella ozaenae.

Flax
1998-- Sulfonylurea Tolerant Flax - University of Saskatchewan
Acetolactate synthase gene from Arabidopsis.

Papaya
1997-- Virus Resistant Papaya - University of Hawaii and Cornell University
Coat protein gene of the Papaya ringspot virus.

Potato
1998-- Insect and Virus Protected Potato - Monsanto Co.
The cryIIIA gene from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) sp. tenebrionis and the Potato Leafroll Virus replicase gene.

1996-- Insect Protected Potato - Monsanto Co.
The cryIIIA gene from Bacillus thuringiensis.

1994-- Insect Protected Potato - Monsanto Co.
The cryIIIA gene from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) sp. tenebrionis.

Radicchio Rosso
1997-- Male Sterile Radicchio Rosso - Bejo Zaden BV
The barnase gene from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens.

Rapeseed
1996-- Male Sterile/ Fertility Restorer Oilseed Rape - Plant Genetic Systems
The male sterile oilseed rape contains the barnase gene from the Bacillus amyloliquefaciens; the fertility restorer lines express the barstar gene from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens.

Soybean
1997-- High Oleic Acid Soybean - Dupont.
Sense suppression of the GmFad2-1 gene which encodes a delta-12 desaturase enzyme.

1994--Glyphosate Tolerant Soybean - Monsanto Co.
Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase gene from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4.

Squash
1997-- Virus resistant squash - Seminis Vegetable Seeds.
Coat protein genes of cucumber mosaic virus, zucchini yellow mosaic virus, and watermelon mosaic virus 2.

1994-- Virus resistant squash - Asgrow Seed Co.
Coat protein genes of watermelon mosaic virus 2 and zucchini yellow mosaic virus.

Tomato
1998-- Insect Protected Tomato - Calgene Co.
The cryIA(c) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki.

1996-- Modified Fruit Ripening Tomato - Agritope Inc.
S-adenosylmethionine hydrolase gene from E. coli bacteriophage T3.

1994-- FLAVR SAVR Tomato - Calgene Inc.
Antisense polygalacturonase gene from tomato.

1994-- Improved Ripening Tomato - DNA Plant Technology
A fragment of the aminocyclopropane carboxylic acid synthase gene from tomato.

1994-- Improved Ripening Tomato - Monsanto Co.
Aminocyclopropane carboxylic acid deaminase gene from Pseudomonas chloraphis strain 6G5.

1994-- Delayed Softening Tomato - Zeneca Plant Science.
A fragment of the polygalacturonase gene from tomato.

_____________________________________________

I have a second list which includes sugarbeets which are not on this list, otherwise it seem to be the same. Unless labeling is made mandatory in the US and Canada, we can't know when we are getting GM products and when we are not.

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

The second one is especially disturbing because of where the work is being done:

quote:

---

(AP) Safeway Inc. has removed taco shells from its stores after tests showed they may contain a variety of genetically engineered corn that isn't approved for food use.

It is the same biotech corn that prompted a nationwide recall of taco shells Sept. 22 by Kraft Foods. Safeway pulled its shells Wednesday night after learning of the test results that were performed for a coalition of environmental groups that are opposed to biotech food.

"In something like this we're very close to our customers and we wanted to act out of an abundance of caution," Safeway spokesman Brian Dowling said Thursday.

The Kraft and Safeway taco shells were produced by different manufacturers but contained the same variety of corn developed by Aventis CropScience. Safeway's product was made by Mission Foods Co. of Irving, Texas.

Safeway's action applied to shells sold under both its private label and the Mission name. Customers who purchased the shells are being offered refunds. Safeway had been assured by Mission Foods that the corn was not in its products, Dowling said. Officials with Mission Foods did not immediately return phone calls Thursday.

__________________________________

Taters for tots provide an edible vaccine.(genetic engineering produces potato that acts as cholera vaccine)(Brief Article)
Issue: March 7, 1998

Consider the versatile potato. Even most children consume it in at least some form--baked, mashed, French fried, the list goes on. Now, molecular biologists predict that through genetic engineering they can turn spuds into the darling of the medical world: low-cost, nutritious vaccines.

William H.R. Langridge and his coworkers at Loma Linda (Calif.) University School of Medicine say they have inserted into potatoes a gene that enables the tuber to make a nontoxic component of the cholera toxin. The research could lead to protection against a scourge that afflicts 5 million people annually, they assert.

_________________________________

A dazzling upside to biotech foods can be found in the greenhouses at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y.

There, Charles Arntzen is growing plants to vaccinate the world. For example, in a batch of tomatoes, he has gene-spliced a virus that makes the fruit make medicine.

In other words, Arntzen says, the vaccine is inside the fruit itself. "It's a manufacturing system. As that fruit develops every cell is manufacturing vaccines."

The vaccine in Arntzen's tomatoes will treat diarrhea, a disease that kills 2.5 million people a year. But he is also growing the potential cures for malaria, cholera and hepatitis B. Very soon Third World children may not need shots. They'll eat biotech tomatoes or bananas instead.

"I definitely see the day when children in the developing world will eat a banana chip, and in that chip will be the vaccine."

---

I'm adding some new websites about GM food to the websites topic for those who want to find out more.

________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited October 12, 2000).]

------------------
What is popular is not always right.
What is right is not always popular.
Gerry B.

Authors: Ronnie Cummins is the national director of OCA, the Organic Consumers Association… and the editor of BioDemocracy News, a monthly online newsletter devoted to genetic engineering, factory farming and organics. Ben Lilliston is a writer on health and the environment and is the communications coordinator for the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in Minneapolis.

Reviewer Norma Woods states:

"This book is definitely 'biased', even 'alarmist'. It frequently refers to genetically altered foods as 'Frankenfoods', an allusion to Frankenstein. The authors have stated two primary objectives in writing the book: 'to help you to clearly understand why you should be concerned about purchasing or consuming genetically engineered foods' and to 'alert you to the risks genetically engineered crops are posing to the environment.'

I think the book is an excellent overview of the real and potential dangers of genetically engineered food and other products of biotechnology which we are consuming with increasing frequency. It is chock-full of facts and presents a coherent statement against the propaganda of the biotech industry."

------------------
The Lord is the strength of my life and my portion forever.

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

I mentioned this at last Friday evening's Vespers and learned from Lorelei [She is also a member of MSDAOL.] that the complete genetic make-up of a human being had been determined several months ago. Correct me, if necessary, or add to this Lorelei.

This reminded me of the fact that mankind now has the same capability to do what they did prior to The Flood which were one of the key factors that brought about The Flood.

_________________________
It is more blessed to give
than to receive. (Acts 20:35)

Daryl

The project is not due for completion until 2003. But last summer a "working draft" was released. Her is how the Encarta Encyclopedia (online) describes a "working draft."

quote:

---

Item: In early April, the papers carry a story about the Monsanto Corporation's having arrived at "a working draft" of the genetic code of the rice plant. Obviously, if rice, which is eaten regularly by most people in the world, can be redesigned in ways to make it hardier, healthier, or tastier, it will do a lot of people good (in addition to making Monsanto a lot of money). What does a "working draft" involve? "By analogy," a researcher is quoted as saying, "think of an encyclopedia of how to construct a rice plant made up of 100 volumes, each with 1,000 pages and with 1,000 words to a page." Monsanto printed out all these pages, albeit with some errors and gaps. The volumes contain the information, the information is vast, and this information constructs the rice plant. Q.E.D.

---

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

Methods for Genetically Engineering a Plant
Two very different techniques exist for giving a plant new genetic characteristics. But both share several steps.

Step 1: The DNA that encodes the genetic information for the desirable trait must be isolated.

At step 2, the different techniques diverge into an "a" path and a "b" path:

In Step 2a, the new DNA is linked to a circular ring of genetic material called a transfer plasmid. Plasmids act like molecular taxicabs that carry genes from one place to another. The plasmid can be absorbed by a bacterium that transfers it to plant cells.

At Step 3a, the bacterium attaches to the plant cells, liberating the plasmid inside. The new DNA migrates to the plant's chromosome where the gene for the new trait is permanently integrated (Step 4).

At Step 5, the modified plant cells are identified and placed into a cell culture to multiply. As the cells reproduce, the new gene is reproduced along with them.

The bioengineered plant cells are then grown in a special culture (Step 6) that causes the cells to differentiate into the unique types of cells that make up the plant.

Finally, Step 7, the plantlets are transferred from the laboratory culture to soil where they grow like normal plants, except now they carry a gene that can give them a new, beneficial trait.

The alternative pathway uses a completely different gene-delivery technique. In Step 2b, naked DNA encoding the desired trait is painted on microscopic metal particles.

In Step 3b, the miscroscopic particles are then loaded into a so-called "gene gun" and fired as projectiles at plant cells growing in the laboratory. The miniature, gene-carrying bullets penetrate the plant cells where the fluids inside wash the DNA off the metal particles.

As before, in Step 4, the DNA migrates into the cell's nucleus, where the genetic material is permanently integrated into the chromosomes. The rest of the sequence is the same.

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda

This is a site hosted by Greenpeace, which I or the forum is in not way endorsing, but it is the only site where I have found a list of actual brand foods containing GMO products as well as those that do not.

------------------
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda