Frank N. Foode at Maize Genetics

Hi, Frank N. Foode here. Last week I went on a special trip. I was invited to the 51st annual International Maize Genetics Conference in St. Charles...

Frank N. Foode at Maize Genetics

Transposons, Browsers, and Annotation, oh my!

Friday was the first full day of the 51st Maize Genetics Conference, and it was filled with all kinds of genetic fun. When I saw the...

Transposons, Browsers, and Annotation, oh my!

Breeding Tetanus Vaccines into Plants

This is a painting done by Sir Charles Bell in 1809 of a soldier dying of tetanus.  Doesn’t look too comfortable, hmm?  Tetanus is...

Breeding Tetanus Vaccines into Plants

Obama will (probably) not label GE foods

Last week, Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. It was a monumental inauguration for many reasons. Never...

Obama will (probably) not label GE foods

Is opposition to GE crops in Europe a Scientific Flip-Flop?

Just out today, Seed Magazine has assembled a “Scientific Flip Flop” about Genetically Engineered crops. The article begins with an introduction into the curious case of European nations who embrace scientific conclusions in other areas of science, but not in this area.

Most Europeans don’t consider themselves to be anti-science or particularly technophobic. In fact, Europe’s full embrace of the scientific consensus on another environmental issue, global warming, has enabled the continent to take the clear lead on climate change, with the most ambitious emissions targets, the first carbon trading market, and the greenest urban infrastructure plans on the planet.

Europe’s scientific disconnect is more broadly true of eco-minded citizens worldwide: They laud the likes of James Hansen and Rajendra Pachauri but shrink in horror at the scientist who offers up a Bt corn plant (even though numerous studies indicate that Bt crops—by dramatically curbing pesticide use—conserve biodiversity on farms and reduce chemical-related sickness among farmers).

So why the disconnect? Why do many environmentalists trust science when it comes to climate change but not when it comes to genetic engineering? Is the fear really about the technology itself or is it a mistrust of big agribusiness?

Contributing their views (in order) are Pam Ronald, Raj Patel, Nina Fedoroff, and Noel Kingsbury. Read the article, I’ll offer a few opinions about it after the jump. Read more »

Popularity: 22% [?]

Corn from multiple angles

I’ve recently written two posts about corn (aka maize) and how it is treated by a variety of groups: In defense of corn and Rotten corn. On the one hand, corn is misaligned as being a terrible scourge on society, when really it is an incredibly useful source of raw materials that will replace petroleum and synthetic chemicals if we let it. On the other hand, some groups are too corn happy, and are willing to twist science to avoid admitting to its flaws. I hope you’ll check out my posts, feel free to comment here or at Genetic Maize. Poor Frank N. Foode to be so pulled in multiple directions!

Popularity: 14% [?]

Tuesday at BIO

Although half of my day was spent traveling to the BIO convention There was still plenty for me to see starting at lunchtime. During Tuesday’s lunch, they gave awards to high school students for biotech-related research, and the Governor of Georgia, Sonny Perdue gave a speech positioning Georgia as a future center for biotech research.

It was his state of Georgia, however where those infamous stickers disparaging evolution could be found - Cobb County to be precise. In 2004, his statement for a “balanced” approach to teaching evolution - where it is not taught as “fact.” Apparently he wants the benefits of a thriving biotechnology industry in his state without supporting the bedrock of modern biology in his state’s high school science classrooms. It seems that Florida is not the only state where the living is contradictory!

The star of the lunchtime diversion from our food, however, was Elton John. Read more »

Popularity: 48% [?]

Blogging the BIO Convention

Hello everybody. This morning I caught a red eye flight to Atlanta, Georgia. Although this trip has been almost three months in the making, I’ve been so busy getting ready that I have not had the time to give everyone the heads-up with a blog post. (Busy making time in my research, that is. Packing took one evening.) Today through Friday, I will be at the Biotechnology Industry Organization’s 2009 International Convention, representing Biofortified and blogging about it. Let me give you a few more details. Read more »

Popularity: 53% [?]

Chlorofilms!

Earlier this year, I heard about a plant science video contest called Chlorofilms. Supported by a grant from the American Society of Plant Biologists, (ASPB) they wanted to encourage people to produce informative and entertaining plant science videos and organize the best of them on one website. Their deadline was in early March, and I was busy getting some of my videos ready to be entered when they extended the deadline to April 15th. This was good, because up until they announced the extension, there were very few videos entered in the contest. As a result, over 60 videos were entered for their first contest!

This morning, I received a press release from Chlorofilms - They have chosen their winners and I’m counted among them! Read more »

Popularity: 54% [?]

ACLU and gene patents

Although this is not related to plants, this certainly has implications for plant genetics. I have just received notice that th ACLU has filed a lawsuit against Myriad Genetics, the company that owns the patents on the BCRA1 and BCRA2 breast and ovarian cancer genes in humans.

According to this press release, the ACLU charges “that the patenting of two human genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer will inhibit medical research. The organization also claims that the patents are invalid and unconstitutional.”

It continues:

“This is going to turn into one of the watershed events in the evolution of the bioindustry,” says John Sterling, Editor in Chief of GEN. “The pros and cons of patenting genes have been an ongoing, and often acrimonious series of debates, since the in re Chakrabarty decision in 1980. But this particular case seems to have taken on a life of its own with over fifteen plaintiffs. For while the lawsuit specifically centers on the patentability of two cancer-related genes, the ACLU says it plans to challenge the entire concept of patenting genes. What we have here is one group, the ACLU and its allies, contending that gene patents stifle life science research and potentially harm the health of thousands of patients. On the other side are biotech companies who maintain that without gene patents research incentives are seriously diminished and innovation is smothered.” Read more »

Popularity: 54% [?]

Oprah and Science

So much for the idea that Oprah would embrace science-based decision making. A few months ago, on my nature networks blog I suggested that we start a movement to lobby Oprah to place a non-fiction science book on her list every few months. The idea was to create a forum in the mass media to discuss real science in front of millions.

I thought she would go for the idea. After all, she supported Obama and likes to read. Sadly it seems that may be all she has in common with scientists.

In their weekly recap, ScienceBlogs now reports that:

Oprah Winfrey and notorious anti-vaccination supporter Jenny McCarthy sealed a contractual deal that will enable McCarthy to spread her belief across several platforms that vaccines cause autism. These claims are vehemently opposed in the scientific community, as they remain virtually unsupported after years of rigorous scientific investigation and, if heeded as true, have lethal consequences in the form of diseases like measles, mumps and rubella. With support from Oprah, McCarthy is slated to host a syndicated talk show and maintain a blog. According to ScienceBlogger PZ Myers, this is “proof that there is no god.”

It may be time for PZ to start his own talk TV show

Popularity: 51% [?]

Philip Alcabes on fear

(via onegoodmove)

Philip Alcabes was just on the Daily Show, and talked about how our fear gets the better of us. We fear things that are less real than the real dangers that we are exposed to every day. Here is the interview:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart M - Th 11p / 10c
Philip Alcabes
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Economic Crisis First 100 Days

His book is Dread: How fear and Fantasy have Fueled Epidemics from the Black Death to the Avian Flu. Here is the description.

The average individual is far more likely to die in a car accident than from a communicable disease…yet we are still much more fearful of the epidemic. Even at our most level-headed, the thought of an epidemic can inspire terror. Read more »

Popularity: 71% [?]

Scientific Consensus on Climate Change and GE Crops

A story today by Andrew Revkin in the New York Times reveals that for more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

“Some environmentalists have compared the tactic to that once used by tobacco companies, which for decades insisted that the science linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer was uncertain. By questioning the science on global warming, these environmentalists say, groups like the Global Climate Coalition were able to sow enough doubt to blunt public concern about a consequential issue and delay government action.

George Monbiot, a British environmental activist and writer, said that by promoting doubt, industry had taken advantage of news media norms requiring neutral coverage of issues, just as the tobacco industry once had.
‘They didn’t have to win the argument to succeed,” Mr. Monbiot said, “only to cause as much confusion as possible.’ ”

Why does this sound so familiar?

The debate on GE crops has gone a similar route, although this time the concerted campaign to mislead the public on the scientific consensus about a critical environmental issue of our time has come from a coalition from the progressive left rather than the right using nearly identical tactics. As is clear from numerous scientific reports from leading scientific agencies such as the National Academy of Sciences, the broad scientific consensus is that the GE crops on the market are safe to eat and have clear environmental benefits.

Is there a philosophical conversation to be had on whether or not we want bacterial genes in our crops? Certainly.

Do we need to integrate ecologically-based farming practices into your production food system? Absolutely

Can we say that ALL GE crops in the future will be safe to eat? No.

But if we are going to move to a more sustainable agriculture, feed the growing population and protect our environment, then we’ve got to start by being honest about the science.

Popularity: 83% [?]

The Earth Guy and the Science Guy

The New York Times Sunday magazine “Green Mind” special featured interviews with two exceptional individuals who are leaders of the modern green movement.

Steven Chu is a Nobel-prize winning physicist. Stewart Brand founded one of the most beloved “catalogs” of all time, “The Whole Earth Catalog“.

Clearly, these accomplishments reflect their creativity, perseverance and love of the natural world. But what I find most inspirational about these two men is that they have been consistently proactive, not reactive, throughout their careers. They are not against things, they are for a green future.

Both Chu and Brand advocate practical solutions to particularly difficult-to-solve problems. “The most important thing is making sure that your home is properly insulated, that your leaky doors and windows are fixed” says Chu. They clearly enjoy implementing new ideas and technology that have environmental benefits. They do not ask if a technology is good or bad, cool or not but whether or not it is appropriate for the task at hand. “The romantic nature-is-perfect approach is just horse exhaust”, says Brand, choosing his words carefully.

These are thoughtful men that we are fortunate to have as leaders of a community-based, science-based movement. They are not reluctant to engage with established institutions (for example, the government of the United States of America) to move the world’s people forward. It is through their efforts and those like them that we finally will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, make our cities more efficient and establish a more ecological way of farming.

(Full disclosure: I am associated with the Joint Bioenergy Institute, a DOE-funded Bioenergy Research Center that Secretary Chu supported when he was director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. I also have had the pleasure of meeting Stewart and reading a few advance chapters of his new book “Whole Earth Discipline”, which I highly recommend.)

Popularity: 77% [?]