It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Human Genes in our Food

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 10:01 PM
I did not know if you have seen this or not ,I have had awhile copied on my computer .I hope the link still works.

Human genes in your food?
By SEAN POULTER - More by this author » Last updated at 22:25pm on 5th March 2007

The first GM food crop containing human genes is set to be approved for commercial production.

The laboratory-created rice produces some of the human proteins found in breast milk and saliva.

Its U.S. developers say they could be used to treat children with diarrhoea, a major killer in the Third World.

The rice is a major step in so-called Frankenstein Foods, the first mingling of human-origin genes and those from plants. But the U.S. Department of Agriculture has already signalled it plans to allow commercial cultivation.

The rice's producers, California-based Ventria Bioscience, have been given preliminary approval to grow it on more than 3,000 acres in Kansas. The company plans to harvest the proteins and use them in drinks, desserts, yoghurts and muesli bars.

The news provoked horror among GM critics and consumer groups on both sides of the Atlantic.

GeneWatch UK, which monitors new GM foods, described it as "very disturbing". Researcher Becky Price warned: "There are huge, huge health risks and people should rightly be concerned about this."

Friends of the Earth campaigner Clare Oxborrow said: "Using food crops and fields as glorified drug factories is a very worrying development.

"If these pharmaceutical crops end up on consumers' plates, the consequences for our health could be devastating.

"The biotech industry has already failed to prevent experimental GM rice contaminating the food chain.

"The Government must urge the U.S. to ban the production of drugs in food crops. It must also introduce tough measures to prevent illegal GM crops contaminating our food and ensure that biotech companies are liable for any damage their products cause."

In the U.S., the Union of Concerned Scientists, a policy advocacy group, warned: "It is unwise to produce drugs in plants outdoors.

"There would be little control over the doses people might get exposed to, and some might be allergic to the proteins."

The American Consumers Union and the Washingtonbased Centre for Food Safety also oppose Ventria's plans.

As well as the contamination fears there are serious ethical concerns about such a fundamental interference with the building blocks of life.

Yet there is no legal means for Britain and Europe to ban such products on ethical grounds.

Imports would have to be accepted once they had gone through a scientific safety assessment.

The development is what may people feared when, ten years ago, food scientists showed what was possible by inserting copies of fish genes from the flounder into tomatoes, to help them withstand frost.

Ventria has produced three varieties of the rice, each with a different human-origin gene that makes the plants produce one of three human proteins.

Two - lactoferrin and lysozyme - are bacteria-fighting compounds found in breast milk and saliva. The genes, cultivated and copied in a laboratory to produce a synthetic version, are carried into embryonic rice plants inside bacteria.

Until now, plants with human-origin genes have been restricted to small test plots.

Ventria originally planned to grow the rice in southern Missouri but the brewer Anheuser-Busch, a huge buyer of rice, threatened to boycott the state amid concern over contamination and consumer reaction.

Now the USDA, saying the rice poses "virtually no risk". has given preliminary approval for it to be grown in Kansas, which has no commercial rice farms.

Ventria will also use dedicated equipment, storage and processing facilities supposed to prevent seeds from mixing with other crops.

The company says food products using the rice proteins could help save many of the two million children a year who die from diarrhoea and the resulting dehydration and complications. A recent study in Peru, sponsored by Ventria, showed that children with severe diarrhoea recovered a day and a half faster if the salty fluids they were prescribed included the proteins.

The rice could also be a huge money-spinner in the Western world, with parents being told it will help their children get over unpleasant stomach bugs more quickly.

Ventria chief executive Scott Deeter said last night: "We have a product here that can help children get better faster."

He said any concerns about safety and contamination were "based on perception, not reality" given all the precautions the company was taking.

Mr Deeter said production in plants was far cheaper than other methods, which should help make the therapy affordable in the developing world.

He said: "Plants are phenomenal factories. Our raw materials are the sun, soil and water."

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 10:05 PM
Wow. I can't say I fully understand the negatives specific to human genes in our food, but I love how the guy says, "The product will help kids get better faster." Product. It is no longer food. * and flag.


[edit on 4-9-2008 by ColoradoJens]

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 10:54 PM
When you think about this and the nano stuff in our foods
What will we end up as (as far as what beings will we be then ?)
Doesnt this sort of thing like mixing Dna with different Dna change dna ?like drastically?Like viruses do by mutating ?
Are the fallen ones multiplying themselves through these experiments with our foods making their own offspring once again as they did before the flood ?

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 11:01 PM
That's just strange. Why can't our food and water just be food and water?

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 11:18 PM
Because, if you believe in conspiracies, food and water are the ultimate control weapons. If you don't believe that it's because Monsanto is a money grubbing mega-corporation that is similar to most US companies in that they would rather watch you die than do the right thing have ethical guidelines...since when can we determine outcomes \20-30 years down the road on our bodies, environement, etc? Isn't this like a perscription company testing for a year, releasing a product and 15years later we find out the drug is responsible for brain tumors? Isn't this simple common sense?


posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 11:33 PM
Here is another article(dont know if you have seen it or not)

Published: April 28, 2008 6:00 a.m.
Interspecies blends walk razor's edge
Science and technology continue to stretch the conventionally acceptable boundaries for research, especially in genetic engineering. Bioethicists sometimes allude to the “yuck factor,” wherein the description of a research study lying at – or beyond – these boundaries may generate revulsion or disgust among the public.

Researchers at Newcastle University in England recently announced they had successfully replaced the original DNA in eggs taken from cow ovaries with human DNA, producing human-cow embryos that survived for three days. Electrical impulses were used to stimulate division of the cells in the embryos, and these stem cells then were harvested.

The long-term objective of this research is to develop a method to supply human embryonic stem cells that can be used in the development of drug therapies and for the treatment of such diseases as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s but without the need to rely upon the relatively scarce human eggs that are gathered from fertility treatments.

The chimera of Greek mythology, as described in Homer’s “Iliad,” was a creature with the head of a lion, the tail of a serpent and the body of a goat. By blending cells and embryos from two animals, interspecies chimeras have been artificially produced, such as the geep spawned in 1984 by uniting the embryos of a sheep and a goat. Such an animal has four parents, because each of its individual cells retains the characteristics of either one species or the other, with two distinct sets of these cells forming the organism.

A truly hybrid animal, such as the offspring from the mating of a goat and a sheep, has only two parents with a combined cell structure; however, such offspring may be unlikely to survive because of the difference in the number of chromosomes in each parent.

There have been rapid developments in human-animal hybrid research during the last five years. In 2003, investigators at the Shanghai Second Medical University fused human cells with rabbit eggs, allowed the resulting embryos to develop for a few days, and then destroyed them to harvest the stem cells. In 2004, the Mayo Clinic produced pigs with human-type blood coursing through their veins.

Research at Stanford University led to the infusion of human neurons into the brains of mice embryos that were later destroyed before birth. More recently, investigators at the Salk Institute in San Diego introduced human embryonic stem cells into the brains of 14-day-old mice embryos and then returned the embryos to their mothers’ wombs, resulting in the birth of young pups with brain tissues that included 0.1 percent human cells and allowing the researchers to study the functionality and development of these cells in the animals.

The combination of human stem cells and animal embryos could lead to the production of new species and a broad range of ethical issues that will need to be resolved. For the moment, the production of human-animal hybrids has been banned in Australia, Canada and the United States.

However, these bans often are under threat of reversal by those who believe that the potential benefits of such research should outweigh abstract moral arguments and who are confident that they can remain within the ethical boundaries of scientific investigation.

The potential of such research is that with hybrid creations, new drugs might be safely tested, the development of diseased cells in the body might become better understood and the production of organs for transplants for those in need might be possible, all without placing humans in jeopardy.

The challenge is to recognize the dangers of walking so near the razor’s edge of ethical practice, where a small misstep might take an investigator over the line and where one might fall victim to the false belief that the ends always justify the means – a belief that has led many well-intentioned people to ruin.
Gerard Voland is the dean of the School of Engineering, Technology and Computer Science at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne. Send questions and comments to him at or 481-6839.

posted on Sep, 4 2008 @ 11:58 PM
I think it is playing with fire and it is just for money and is reckless to say the least. I do not approve personally.

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:11 AM
Since when are starving infants heavy consumers of granola bars and desserts?

This may sound cold hearted but it is a reasonable question if you want to play god. When the 2 million starving kids live and have children, who will feed them all, How about the next generation and the next.

The world is already overpopulated with generations we already carried too far. If we cannot control the world's birth rate, we have no business regulating the worlds death rate.

We drive native populations out of the culture which has sustained human life for aeons, and when we can no longer support this mistake, they are unable to support themselves. Enough madness. Learn self control and humility and maybe we can learn to actually help instead of destroying.

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:15 AM
Well then you wont like this one either .
Whos hungry now ? sheeshh

Yeah the FDA is our friend NOT!

By Byron J. Richards, CCN

August 24, 2006

On Friday, August 18, 2006, the FDA approved a viral cocktail to be sprayed on foods we eat. This is the first time viruses have been approved for use as food additives. The FDA wants you to believe it will be safe to consume these viruses every day for the rest of your life with no adverse health effects. This is a monumental announcement by the FDA, indicating they are throwing all caution to the wind regarding the safety of our food supply.

Now add all that with Chemtrails that busts down everythings immune systems ,then add all the chemicals and medications (that do not get filtered they do not dissolve completely they CRYSTIALIZE) and everyone ends up drinking someones pills that they peed out.

What are they up to ?

[edit on 5-9-2008 by Simplynoone]

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 11:16 AM
Again, wow. I realize it is all over ATS, but have you looked into CODEX ALEMENTARIUS? It's a coming! I am curious, because I am uneducated and ignorant on the subject - yet also very interested; the inter-mixing/splicing of human genes into our food as related to reptilian conspiracy...can you tell me your personal beliefs on what ultimately this may lead to? I am trying to get a foundation of understanding - my limited thoughts have only gone so far as to realize ET presence is real...Thanks again and keep up the threads!


posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Nerds
That's just strange. Why can't our food and water just be food and water?

well, if a corporation owns the rights to the GM crop then they have the commercial rights to sell at any price.
Basically Gods crop becomes corp crop

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:04 PM
What concerns me on GM crops is tat they mostly test for adverse effects on humans. What about wildlife that will eat this? A lot of animals have better immune systems than we do and boosting them is a great way to mutate diseases farther than ever before. As an earlier post stated in this thread, we have to be concerned about the long term results of playing God.

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:04 PM
[yet also very interested; the inter-mixing/splicing of human genes into our food as related to reptilian conspiracy...can you tell me your personal beliefs on what ultimately this may lead to?]

Ewww I hate that subject more than any subject ...mainly because I am really not sure I believe the reptillion stuff ...It is also pretty scary to me so I try to avoid things that scare me like that ..Not to mention I am b negative blood and I am also from the direct line from Robert the Bruce and I sure dont want to find out I may be one ..if they are indeed real ...
I dont think I can give you any details on that subject sorry ...because I am not sure yet myself about any of that ..

I wish I knew more though about dna and mixing of dna I could get a better view on all of this .....I just dont have that much time in the day lol ..
And it scares me so much I am avoiding the issue ....

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:05 PM
[What concerns me on GM crops is tat they mostly test for adverse effects on humans. What about wildlife that will eat this? A lot of animals have better immune systems than we do and boosting them is a great way to mutate diseases farther than ever before. As an earlier post stated in this thread, we have to be concerned about the long term results of playing God.]

I absolutely agree with you on that .

I know one thing I have sure lost my appetite .

[edit on 5-9-2008 by Simplynoone]

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:20 PM
Ok I thought about it and I do think I may have an opinion ..but it is religious in nature so bare with me .

Possibly since the angels that fell prior to flood were sent to the abyss in chains for awhile ...maybe after the flood when men began to multiply again they played with fire again by speaking to the dead which opens up doors for demonic spirits to speak to people ..(Like Channelors) they may have dreamed up this new way to produce offspring and told it to those men and women who are open to these demonic spirits .Angels can speak to people and tell them stuff so I would imagine that demons can do that too ... and instead of mateing with man (as they supposedly did before the flood) now they have come up with this new way of mixing their seed with man....through the athiest scientists doing these experiments as another way to produce through genetically altering dna ..I mean I do not see how that stuff can be God ...(God created and man is not supposed to mess with that creation ..not in my opinion) so that only leaves it as a purpose of the devil and something he is trying to do ...
So yeah that sounds weird
This is just a guess by me and may or may not have any truth to it....

I just cant figure it all out in my mind yet .....about aliens,fallen angels,demons,man and whats going on right now in our world ..

[edit on 5-9-2008 by Simplynoone]

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 12:43 PM
Thank you. I too am attempting to understand and it is difficult to communicate my personal thougts on the matter. Again, I am trying to learn more before saying anything that I may regret 10 minutes later. I also want to say I agree with the idea that the ecosystem devistation is still unknown - how can any responsible human do this prior to the most strict, long term study ever introudced by mankind? $$$


posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 11:10 PM
Anyone care for a LAB STEAK
(Notice it was printed in 2005
I have noticed meat not looking the same ..not tasting the same ..and not even smelling the same ..

Saturday, 13 August 2005, 11:52 GMT 12:52 UK
Scientists aim for lab-grown meat

A pork vendor prepares produce at a Hong Kong market
Pork cuts could come fresh from the lab
An international research team has proposed new techniques that may lead to the mass production of meat reared not on the farm, but in the laboratory.

Developments in tissue engineering mean that cells taken from animals could be grown directly into meat in a laboratory, the researchers say.

Scientists believe the technology already exists to directly grow processed meat like a chicken nugget.

The technology could benefit both humans and the environment.

"With a single cell, you could theoretically produce the world's annual meat supply. And you could do it in a way that's better for the environment and human health.

"In the long term, this is a very feasible idea," said Jason Matheny of the University of Maryland, part of the team whose research has been published in the Tissue Engineering journal.

Growing the meat without the animal could reduce the need to keep millions of animals in cramped conditions and would lessen the damage caused by the meat production to the environment.

Laboratory-grown meat could also be healthier, proponents say.

Eating 'mush'

Tissue engineering techniques were first developed for medical use and small amounts of edible fish tissue have been grown in research conducted by Nasa.

Japanese Black beef bull and four clones (Yang/PNAS)
Concerns have been raised about eating meat from cloned animals.
To industrialise the process, researchers suggest the cells could be grown on large sheets that would need to be stretched to provide the 'exercise' for the growing muscles.

"If you didn't stretch them, it would be like eating mush," said Mr Methany.

Whilst the technology to produce processed meat is here now, producing a steak or chicken breast is still quite a way off, the researchers say.


The new techniques could also provide a dilemma for vegetarians.

Some may feel able to eat meat that has been grown without an animal being harmed.

Others feel that question marks remain about the way the cells would be taken from animals.

"It won't appeal to someone who gave up meat because they think it's morally wrong to eat flesh or someone who doesn't want to eat anything unnatural," Kerry Bennett of the UK Vegetarian Society told the Guardian newspaper.

How regulators might react is also unclear.

The US Food and Drug Administration has asked companies not to market any products that involve cloned animals until their safety has been evaluated.

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 11:13 PM
Test Tube Meat’s Mixed Future
Posted on Apr 23, 2008 - 09:01 AM

Test tube meat. To many people, the idea is utterly repulsive and it conjures up bad memories of eating the processed slabs of “mystery meat” they were served in their school cafeteria many years ago. To others, the idea is nothing less than the most environmentally-friendly, politically correct answer to the world’s growing food shortage problem.

There is a picture at the link ...looks disgusting ..

posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:30 AM
Human Genes in Food. So What?

If you eat meat, you eat animal genes all the time. Every single cell of meat you eat has a nucleus. Unless it's been destroyed by cooking, the animal's DNA is in the nucleus. It contains the animal's entire genome. That's right. All its genes.

You gobble them down along with the proteins, fats and the other juicy yummy biochemicals - all food is chemicals, by the way - that constitute the meat. Your digestive system breaks them all down, the DNA along with everything else, converting them into simpler chemicals. These simpler chemicals are the building blocks your own cells use to assemble the proteins, fats and - yes - DNA (your DNA this time, not pig or chicken DNA) they need to sustain themselves and reproduce.

Any human DNA you ingest will undergo precisely the same process. The chemical factory inside you doesn't know the difference between human tissue and animal tissue; it treats all food it gets the same way.

Eating human genetic material will do no-one any harm, so calm down all of you. Try and learn a bit about the science of these things, then they won't scare you so much. It's shameful to see civilized modern human beings behaving like superstitious country folk from the Middle Ages.

posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 03:22 AM
Gross. I cannot believe what food has and is becoming. I was in the grocery not long ago and an elderly lady, a little county woman, was coming up behind me in the meat isle, she leaned in and said to me "that ain't meat honey, I don't know what it is, but it ain't meat, it ain't been real for about a year now'. I have to wonder if she isn't right!

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in