General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Neil deGrasse Tyson Tells GMO Critics to "Chill Out" [View all]mike_c
(36,281 posts)I will grant you that genetic transformation was beyond the means of nomadic tribes when they settled down to invent agriculture. However, I'd also say that it's a difference in method only, not results. The result in either case is transference of information about the solutions to phenotypic problems from one organism to another.
The barriers between corn and cyanobacteria are not genetic barriers. Corn is perfectly content with genes from cyanobacteria, etc in its cells. The real barriers are reproductive incompatibilities, and those evolved for completely different reasons that are not very relevant to discussions about GMOs unless we veer into certifiably woo territory where genetic identity is somehow sacred (and that's VERY thin ice). Modern genetic engineering does little more than simply circumvent those reproductive barriers to allow transfer of information over a much wider range of source material than reproductive hybridization would allow. Reproductive hybridization is therefore a subset of the genetic recombination possible with genetic engineering in the broader sense.
I think most of the problems with GMOs are social and economic, and should be solved with social and economic solutions, e.g. reign in the business practices of big ag.