Agrobacterium & the risks no one is willing to discuss

We are all aware of the unintended consequences for which GMOs and Agrochemical synthetic farming inputs have caused to our environment. But there is another source of transgenic contamination no one really ever discusses or wishes to avoid altogether. Mostly because there is no way to prevent nor correct it. The subject is the tool itself originally used by the Biotech geneticists called Agrobacterium thumefacians which has been used to infect target crop organisms with the transgenes for desired traits. The potential is not only for this same naturally occurring soil organism to transfer this gene to other crops, but also other plant families and mammals. Wasm't quite sure where to post this, but it's a subject I have long thought about. With so many things breaking down out in the natural world, I've wondered whether there have been any unintended consequences from this source.

Agrobacterium & the risks no one is willing to discuss

As far as I can tell, GMO proponents aren't willing to discuss any of the risks associated with this process. They seem to live in a fantasy world.

Tyler Ludens wrote:As far as I can tell, GMO proponents aren't willing to discuss any of the risks associated with this process. They seem to live in a fantasy world.

Incredibly, I had one GMO proponent named David Westebbe, over on Google Plus insist my post was both anti-science and anti-scientist, both accusations of which were completely false and cowardly. First, whenever I see the term "anti-science" or "pseudoscience" or even "Luddite" applied to someone not on board with the GMO technology, it's reveals that they actually have no real scientific arguments t back their claims. Mr Westebbe's other lame accusation of me being "Anti-Scientist" was completely false and proved he hadn't actually read the entire post since I referenced numerous scientists in the Mycology & Soil microbiological fields, most of whom who are tops in their field and several who actually have written decades ago some of the original research papers on scientific discoveries. He accused me of not wanting to discuss science, but when I restated the scientific references I used and the scientists themselves, he said he didn't have time to waste and continued along the lines of derogatory insults. I don't know what it is with this younger generation of these Sciencey Dweebs who through "blind faith" believe blanket science is going to save everything, but fail to acknowledge that the long history of science being misused and abused has brought the natural world to it's knees. Looking over his Google+ profile, he apparently follows over 80 anti-gmo sites and groups and just lurks, with periodic appearances to offer filthy and foul language. At what historical pint did science degenerate this low caliber ? This junk has more to do with religious worldview than actually raw data driven science following where ever the evidence leads. When the evidence is contrary to one's worldview, then the attacks appear to be the only scheme left in their playbook.

Yes, I've gotten the Luddite label also for not being with the nuke program. Nuke-boosters and GMO-boosters seem cut from the same cloth.

I have a high school friend who is a gene jockey professor now at a large university. He's a super great guy, and we get along on so many topics but when it comes to his work, and the type of industry his work promotes, I just don't bother to say anything, or bring up the topic at all. He has just focused way to much of his vast intelligence in one direction to really 'get' me. It's like he's in a kayak in a canyon and I'm asking him to paddle upstream because it's better and he's totally committed to going with the flow, and can't see the logic to it (and from his perspective that's how it seems, I'm sure). I doubt, Kevin, that you would be able to make any progress trying to change that sort of mindset. Sometimes a mind can be super narrow in one way and not so much in others. The narrow mind is a difficult nut to crack!

On the subject of your post, I'd say there likely are people discussing it, but it is probably not going to be with idiots like the pseudo-scientist flamer geek that you mentioned. The people who are discussing it probably do not do so in a public forum that said idiot might gain access to.

I wish I had more to say. The issue is huge. The potential is dire. The silence on it is deafening. And the government seems to have to much cash lining it's pockets from these folks to really look at it objectively.

The Union of Concerned Scientists might be a place to look for a community that is studying and conversing about this topic.