Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Neil deGrasse Tyson clarifies his remarks, re: GMOs. [View all]bananas
(27,509 posts)55. No, "transgenic", "genetically engineered", and "genetically modified" are synonymous.
That's the terminology, and if you didn't understand that, you've misunderstood everything you've read about it.
Every field has terminology specific to that field.
Here are two examples showing how the terminology is used:
1) If you go to Monsanto's website http://discover.monsanto.com/sustainability/
and scroll down a little more than halfway down, you'll see this table:
Currently, there are 8 commercially available GMO crops:
Corn
Soybeans
Cotton
Alfalfa
Sugar Beets
Canola
Papaya
Squash
These crops are not genetically modified:
Honeycrisp Apple
Seedless Watermelon
No Tear Onions
Grape Tomatoes
Wheat
Broccoli
Baby Carrots
I can't make a screenshot right now, the actual page has little green drawings of the various foods above their names,
the gmo foods have light green drawings, the non-gmo foods have dark green drawings.
2) An example of the terminology in published peer-reviewed scientific papers:
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v9/n4/full/4001457a.html
Feature Review
Molecular Psychiatry (2004) 9, 326357. doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001457 Published online 13 January 2004
In search of a depressed mouse: utility of models for studying depression-related behavior in genetically modified mice
J F Cryan1 and C Mombereau1
1Neuroscience Research, The Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
Correspondence: JF Cryan, PhD, Psychiatry Program, Neuroscience Research, The Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, WSJ 386.344, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel CH-4002, Switzerland. E-mail: john_f.cryan@pharma.novartis.com
Received 23 July 2003; Revised 15 September 2003; Accepted 15 September 2003; Published online 13 January 2004.
Abstract
The ability to modify mice genetically has been one of the major breakthroughs in modern medical science affecting every discipline including psychiatry. It is hoped that the application of such technologies will result in the identification of novel targets for the treatment of diseases such as depression and to gain a better understanding of the molecular pathophysiological mechanisms that are regulated by current clinically effective antidepressant medications. The advent of these tools has resulted in the need to adopt, refine and develop mouse-specific models for analyses of depression-like behavior or behavioral patterns modulated by antidepressants. In this review, we will focus on the utility of current models (eg forced swim test, tail suspension test, olfactory bulbectomy, learned helplessness, chronic mild stress, drug-withdrawal-induced anhedonia) and research strategies aimed at investigating novel targets relevant to depression in the mouse. We will focus on key questions that are considered relevant for examining the utility of such models. Further, we describe other avenues of research that may give clues as to whether indeed a genetically modified animal has alterations relevant to clinical depression. We suggest that it is prudent and most appropriate to use convergent tests that draw on different antidepressant-related endophenotypes, and complimentary physiological analyses in order to provide a program of information concerning whether a given phenotype is functionally relevant to depression-related pathology.
<snip>
Using genetically modified mice to study depression
Depression: still an unmet medical need
Depression is one of the most serious disorder in today's society.1 The World Health Organization predicts that unipolar depression will be the second most prevalent cause of illness-induced disability by 2020,2 and recently published data suggest that the current lifetime prevalence for depression is as high as 16.2% in the US adult population.3 Further, ... <snip>
<snip>
Molecular Psychiatry (2004) 9, 326357. doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001457 Published online 13 January 2004
In search of a depressed mouse: utility of models for studying depression-related behavior in genetically modified mice
J F Cryan1 and C Mombereau1
1Neuroscience Research, The Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
Correspondence: JF Cryan, PhD, Psychiatry Program, Neuroscience Research, The Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, WSJ 386.344, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel CH-4002, Switzerland. E-mail: john_f.cryan@pharma.novartis.com
Received 23 July 2003; Revised 15 September 2003; Accepted 15 September 2003; Published online 13 January 2004.
Abstract
The ability to modify mice genetically has been one of the major breakthroughs in modern medical science affecting every discipline including psychiatry. It is hoped that the application of such technologies will result in the identification of novel targets for the treatment of diseases such as depression and to gain a better understanding of the molecular pathophysiological mechanisms that are regulated by current clinically effective antidepressant medications. The advent of these tools has resulted in the need to adopt, refine and develop mouse-specific models for analyses of depression-like behavior or behavioral patterns modulated by antidepressants. In this review, we will focus on the utility of current models (eg forced swim test, tail suspension test, olfactory bulbectomy, learned helplessness, chronic mild stress, drug-withdrawal-induced anhedonia) and research strategies aimed at investigating novel targets relevant to depression in the mouse. We will focus on key questions that are considered relevant for examining the utility of such models. Further, we describe other avenues of research that may give clues as to whether indeed a genetically modified animal has alterations relevant to clinical depression. We suggest that it is prudent and most appropriate to use convergent tests that draw on different antidepressant-related endophenotypes, and complimentary physiological analyses in order to provide a program of information concerning whether a given phenotype is functionally relevant to depression-related pathology.
<snip>
Using genetically modified mice to study depression
Depression: still an unmet medical need
Depression is one of the most serious disorder in today's society.1 The World Health Organization predicts that unipolar depression will be the second most prevalent cause of illness-induced disability by 2020,2 and recently published data suggest that the current lifetime prevalence for depression is as high as 16.2% in the US adult population.3 Further, ... <snip>
<snip>
If you think they're talking about cross-breeding, you'll completely misunderstand the paper.
They are talking about technologies which allow direct manipulation of the genome.
These methods are very different than cross-breeding.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
119 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
If it's genetic code has been changed, then it is genetically modified...
Dr Hobbitstein
Aug 2014
#35
No, "transgenic", "genetically engineered", and "genetically modified" are synonymous.
bananas
Aug 2014
#55
I note the good Doctor Neil says both that ALL food is GMO and that SOME food can be patented
Bluenorthwest
Aug 2014
#41
Uhm, GMO-Agriculture is basically all food we eat from before the advent of modern genetic...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2014
#99
DDT, Love Canal, Lead gasoline and paint, Asbestos insulation.....brought to us by SCIENCE!
Dems to Win
Aug 2014
#6
Anti-GMO'ers, like most other woo believers, mostly belong to one of three groups...
Archae
Aug 2014
#21
The repurposing of the word "organic" is itself nothing more than a marketing tool...
Dr Hobbitstein
Aug 2014
#23
There are legitimate concerns about GMO. However, the woo collective ruins it for everyone.
chrisa
Aug 2014
#31
The purpose of GMO is for corporate shitstains to sue people like Percy Schmeiser
eridani
Aug 2014
#38
If research is really needed, then don't we need activism to prevent premature market entry?
BillZBubb
Aug 2014
#43
Saying all food comes from GMOs is pretty disingenuous. Tyson's either ignorant or dishonest here.
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#27
I said "either ignorant or dishonest". My guess is the later. He either doesn't know the meaning of
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#34
I do think the good doctor stepped out of his field of expertise into a mine field.
BillZBubb
Aug 2014
#45
He's "ignorant" (a) because they think they know more than this brilliant man. They fucking don't,
Liberal_Stalwart71
Aug 2014
#63
I'm kinda of surprised at all this shite coming from him. I'd read about how he was suppose to
Cha
Aug 2014
#48
I don't get how for someone so intelligent that he fully trusts the FDA
PuraVidaDreamin
Aug 2014
#54
On conflating intentional breeding with genetically modified organisms
Warren Stupidity
Aug 2014
#56
Climate change deniers have been pushing the same garbage - "The climate is always changing!"
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#92