GMO Marijuana

[master shake]

Totally wrong.You can selectively breed as long as you want, but you will never get a fish gene in a plant.

No, you're totally wrong. You don't even know what genetic modification literally means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food read the first 3 sentences.

"Other techniques by which humans modify food organisms include selective breeding; plant breeding, and animal breeding, and somaclonal variation."

I think this is a case where a term "GMO" might be used out of context.


GMO could me like "specially bred" as opposed to landrace cultivar. Like it is a strain that was selectively bred in the Dam for high yields and outdoor growth.

Not necessarily "GMO" as we know it in the US like Monsanto Round Up Ready Soy beans which have been spliced with the DNA of soil bacteria resistant to pesticides.

I dunno I just get the vibe something is lost in translation here or this article is cunningly written to scare people.

IL put it very well.

selective breeding is selective breeding

genetically modified, means they alter the dna of a the host with alien dna.

for example BT crop have dna from a bacteria, spliced into their dna, that causes them to produce the BT toxin...

Again, it only takes 2 minutes to actually inform yourself on what these terms mean. No point in debating definitions.


As Iron Lion said, they are taking these terms out of context and using it to create a propaganda hit piece on cannabis.

 

[purple_man]

rofl³, seems like someone sent those guys some SUPERSKUNK seeds
come on? 18% thc? gmo? no freakin way... sounds like the old newspaper articles from england, where they where scared of the new SKUNK weed which was 10 times stronger and ish...

blessss

 

[whodare]

No, you're totally wrong. You don't even know what genetic modification literally means.




Again, it only takes 2 minutes to actually inform yourself on what these terms mean. No point in debating definitions.


As Iron Lion said, they are taking these terms out of context and using it to create a propaganda hit piece on cannabis.

and you didnt clearly read it, it would have taken you leass than two minutes...

Genetically modified organisms have had specific changes introduced into their DNA by genetic engineering techniques. These techniques are much more precise[1] than mutagenesis (mutation breeding)

edit:

heres another good quote from your own article

Other techniques by which humans modify food organisms include selective breeding; plant breeding, and animal breeding, and somaclonal variation.

they seperate gmo from other techniques of plant modification

gm is a specific and unique technique, as is selective breeding

 

[master shake]

Eh you kinda got me there, smoking a joint of sour bubble doesn't improve my reading comprehension. But the way I was looking at it was in a more literal sense.. Say you take Oaxacan and Afghani and want to cross them. I think everyone would agree that those are not genetically identical. But we want the best of both OX and AFG, so we have to cross them and backcross, if desired, to retrieve the desired genetic traits in the offspring. The offspring have had their genes modified in a sense. The term genetically modified has been around longer than GMO's have been around, I thought. I'm just confusing with genetic alteration in general.

I have a feeling that is what this article may be exploiting. But either way, I highly doubt that there exists any real laboratory GMO cannabis... at least I hope. This article smells of BS.

 

[mountain_goat]

yeah they are confusing selective breeding with modified genetics

 

[supermanlives]

Eh you kinda got me there, smoking a joint of sour bubble doesn't improve my reading comprehension. But the way I was looking at it was in a more literal sense.. Say you take Oaxacan and Afghani and want to cross them. I think everyone would agree that those are not genetically identical. But we want the best of both OX and AFG, so we have to cross them and backcross, if desired, to retrieve the desired genetic traits in the offspring. The offspring have had their genes modified in a sense. The term genetically modified has been around longer than GMO's have been around, I thought. I'm just confusing with genetic alteration in general.

I have a feeling that is what this article may be exploiting. But either way, I highly doubt that there exists any real laboratory GMO cannabis... at least I hope. This article smells of BS.

i think you smoke too much

 

[superbolan]

Just another case of a reporter who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground

 

[ChaosCatalunya]

rofl³, seems like someone sent those guys some SUPERSKUNK seeds
come on? 18% thc? gmo? no freakin way... sounds like the old newspaper articles from england, where they where scared of the new SKUNK weed which was 10 times stronger and ish...

blessss

Well, I sent them some Kali Mist seeds that the mum [taken early by thieves] tested @19% in Canna's Lab .... ;-)

Sadly, I saw the same style of utter BS published by the BBC, just a few days ago, wankers trying to push the old "Skunk is way stronger than Hippy grass" bullshit.


There are many different Cripi producers all over Colombia, all backed by various Mafias and Paramilitaries, they have been at it for ages and run a lot of different US/Dutch genetics, plenty still also grow local varieties too. The Colombians are often far more advanced than most people believe, the first FoaF to run a 3d growsystem was a Colombian, in Colombia.

 

[GrowBudsGrow]

Obviously the article is wrong. I had been toying with the thought of GMO weed though, you could potentially get yields and potency that would make the fattest colas of today look like popcorn nugs....

 

[Greyskull]

yeah they are confusing selective breeding with modified genetics

i agree....


But now that Im thinking about it for another 5 seconds... what about Fem seeds? Especially Fem seeds created by a spray of STS or whatever concoction... i kinda think those fit into a "gmo" category....

 

[Weird]

heard it was defoliant resistance


PARAQUAT!

 

[Lazyman]

Gmo = good. Without GMO crops, over 2 billion people would have starved to death. Better yielding, drought resistant, pest resistant crops that can be grown in poor soil is the only thing that keeps some communities alive. Don't believe everything you think.

 

[GrowBudsGrow]

Gmo = good. Without GMO crops, over 2 billion people would have starved to death. Better yielding, drought resistant, pest resistant crops that can be grown in poor soil is the only thing that keeps some communities alive. Don't believe everything you think.

Sure, but what about the studies done suggesting GM foods cause sterility and infant mortality in mammals? Then there's the issue of patenting genetics and using it to monopolize the agriculture industry ala Monsanto. I agree there are lots of benefits and it is an inevitability for the future of agriculture (and humans as well but that's a different thread) but lets not ignore the kinks that need to be ironed out, as the profit motivated industry is currently doing.

 

[joeuser]

Sure, but what about the studies done suggesting GM foods cause sterility and infant mortality in mammals? Then there's the issue of patenting genetics and using it to monopolize the agriculture industry ala Monsanto. I agree there are lots of benefits and it is an inevitability for the future of agriculture (and humans as well but that's a different thread) but lets not ignore the kinks that need to be ironed out, as the profit motivated industry is currently doing.

So...we NEED to genetically modify our food because we can't grow enough without it?

Maybe the REAL problem is...too many people to feed?

 

[redneck shogun]

So...we NEED to genetically modify our food because we can't grow enough without it?

Maybe the REAL problem is...too many people to feed?

We're arguing over what the problem is but in reality the solution has already been implemented. What would you choose? Starvation or sterility? Some might say if you are going to heaven anyway when you die then why not go with a full stomach.

P.S. I don't believe that last part myself

 

[joeuser]

We're arguing over what the problem is but in reality the solution has already been implemented. What would you choose? Starvation or sterility? Some might say if you are going to heaven anyway when you die then why not go with a full stomach.

P.S. I don't believe that last part myself

Sterilizing of course. Put it in the water and you need the antidote to have a child. The world has 5X more people than it can support without oil. You have no right to reproduce...or shouldn't. Don't get me started how EASY it is to put society on the hook for several hundred thousand! IF people were held responsible we wouldn't NEED to limit births...since we REFUSE to hold people responsible...because of the child...then we must step in. I know it's a slippery slope...who decides whom gets to have kids...blah blah blah... So, let's just STOP the welfare, the food stamps, the housing, and IF they still have the energy...they can try to have kids. And then THEY can either feed there kids or not.

I hate ALL forms of perpetual welfare. I know...I'm a fucking cruel douchebag...I've heard it before. Actually, I'm just tired of seeing hoe fucked up this cou8ntry IS, how much it's lost, and what a shitty future it seems to have.

The great ponzi that is modern civilization...requires growth...all kinds, including customers...I mean people. Government surly needs growth as it's the ultimate Ponzi.

 

[guest 77721]

Actually the best way to combat overpopulation is with education. All the highly educated countries have negative birth rates.

GMO weed is a Monsanto nightmare. They have copyrighted genes. It will take a few years but if Tm genes are released into the breeding population then eventually all the genetics will carry the Tm gene.

In a dysatopian future, it will be legal to possess weed but it is a crime to possess unlicensed genetics. Monsanto owns the police who will be arresting people for copyright violations and piracy.

 

[earthwyrms]

idea, psuedo-replicate many generations, say thousands of years, of natural breeding/open pollination by randomly (or not) splicing a gene pool of cannabis strains together in odd random ways (or not).

also growing out some strain for seeds and pollen and repeating in ways that some odd combo of this with the splicing ensures no actual foriegn DNA (unless maybe theres contamination) is present.

basically just swapping out identicall parts of a pool of genes, rearranging them, putting them back in seed or something like tissue culture and seeing what grows.

i was wondering about how to replicate a cannabis migration/evolution that maybe took thousands of years and without adding foreign organism DNA, maybe it is doable and not unsafe. and as long as the original landraces are not wiped out or contaminated with hybrids, it seems fine.

preserving all the fine landraces seems to be the most important thing for cannabis longevity.

if columbians are planting hybrids, what is happening to the native buds, like the so called columbian gold?

 

[blastfrompast]

I've been trying to find the article where they discovered a type of MJ in mexico that the local authorities are being forced to pull out by the roots as they are "un-naturally" hardy and impossible to kill....ie hack to the ground..killing frost, etc. doesn't do it....

I will guess i read it somewhere around 2000'ish...

Interesting article

Anyone remember it.

 

[LEF]

Im apprehensive about gmos