Day: November 8, 2012

Is organic agriculture “affluent narcissism?”

by
corn husks
Some of the devotion from consumers attains almost cult-like status, which is why a recent article by Stanford University researchers that was dismissive of especial health or nutritional benefits of organic foods created such a furor. Perhaps the most illogical tenet of organic farming is the exclusion of “genetically engineered” plants – but only if they were modified with the newest, best, most precise and predictable techniques.  Except for wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the fruits, vegetables and grains in our diet have been genetically improved by one technique or another – often as a result of seeds being irradiated or genes being moved from one species or genus to another in ways that do not occur in nature.
 

Soldier beetle’s genes may hold key for synthesizing antibiotic, anti-cancer chemicals

by

New antibiotic and anti-cancer chemicals may one day be synthesised using biotechnology, following CSIRO’s discovery of the three genes that combine to provide soldier beetles with their potent predator defence system.

Soldier beetles exude a white viscous fluid from their glands to repel potential attacks from predators, as well as in a wax form to protect against infection. The team found this fluid contains an exotic fatty acid called dihydromatricaria acid, or DHMA, which is one of a group called polyynes that have known anti-microbial and anti-cancer properties. 

While DHMA and similar polyyne fatty acids are found in a wide variety of plants, fungi, liverworts, mosses, marine sponges and algae, these compounds have proved very difficult to manufacture using conventional chemical processes. However, Dr Haritos and her team have developed a way to achieve this. “We have outlined a method for reproducing these polyyne chemicals in living organisms like yeast, using mild conditions” Dr Haritos said.

View the original article here: Gene discovery turns soldier beetle defence into biotech opportunity

Is organic agriculture “affluent narcissism?”

by
corn husks
Some of the devotion from consumers attains almost cult-like status, which is why a recent article by Stanford University researchers that was dismissive of especial health or nutritional benefits of organic foods created such a furor. Perhaps the most illogical tenet of organic farming is the exclusion of “genetically engineered” plants – but only if they were modified with the newest, best, most precise and predictable techniques.  Except for wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the fruits, vegetables and grains in our diet have been genetically improved by one technique or another – often as a result of seeds being irradiated or genes being moved from one species or genus to another in ways that do not occur in nature.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is here to stay

by

On a Thursday night in October 2007, I sat with hundreds of geneticists at theAmerican Society of Human Genetics annual meeting in San Diego, so stunned that we ignored the free dessert. At a table in front of the crowd were several very nicely-dressed physicians and genetic counselors representing a trio of companies gearing up to offer, in the coming year, direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing.

Yes, ordinary people would be able to send samples of themselves – spit, it would turn out – to companies that would charge fees to return results right to them, circumventing health care professionals. The companies had names much catchier than those of the biotech companies of the past two decades:23andme , Navigenics Inc. , (absorbed into Life Technologies Corp last summer), and deCODE Genetics,  part of Icelandic biobank fame.

With consumers on board, scientists seeming to have accepted DTC testing, and doctors having to keep up with their patients who come in with test results, I think DTC genetic testing is here to stay – and poised to explode with exome and genome sequencing.

Science versus values in personal genomics for children

by

When it comes to what a child should know I tend to disagree with the consensus among genetic counselors. It seems that the implication from the current guidelines is that children shouldn’t be tested for adult onset disease until they can give consent. I can’t go along with this. I would caution, and probably try to dissuade, any friend who wanted their son circumcised as an infant. It’s a body part you can’t get back. But at the end of the day I believe that this is something parents should be allowed to decide without fiat outside interference (I am in favor of dropping insurance coverage for the practice, but not in favor of banning it). If so, then I certainly think that testing of children should be allowed, with at minimum a neutral take from the counseling industry.

The rights of minors are sharply demarcated, and society tends to give a great deal of latitude to parents in terms of what they can do to their children.The point it is that society achieves certain understandings of the boundaries of parental control, and enforces those boundaries with force. This isn’t a science. You can disagree with the social consensus, but no matter what, it will impact you.

View the original article here: It takes a village, and guidelines

Genetic counseling and medical ethics in the age of personal genomics

by

On October 25th, Time Magazine ran an article about genetic testing of children with the provocative title, “What Your Doctor Isn’t Telling You About Your DNA.”  The piece begins by describing a dilemma in the cytogenomics lab at Children’ s Hospital of Philadelphia: a mutation for early-onset dementia is picked up through what the article describes as ‘genome analysis’ (it was microarray, actually) of a sick baby.  The doctors at CHOP, absent any notion of the family’s  preferences, decide that it is not in their best interest to have this information forced upon them – a choice that has drawn the ire of a number of prominent voices in the blogosphere.  “Nice to know that two physicians in Philadelphia not only have medical degrees, but specialize in mind-reading”, says Razib Khan in a post for Discover Magazine.

Bam!  That noise you hear is the sound of a thousand genetic counselors smacking their foreheads in unison. Really?  Why are they struggling with this after the fact?  Where was the pre-test counseling?

View the original article here: Time Magazine is Raising Questions about Genetic Testing for Minors– Do Genetic Counselors Have Any Answers to Give Them?

Proposition 37.1: let’s start this conversation

by

In the shadow of Proposition 37’s defeat maybe we can have a real conversation.  Angry, uninformed discussion based on fear mongering from both sides detracted from a real issue– how do we provide complete information about food in a manner consistent with science? Throughout the discussion scientists and some corporate officials stated repeatedly that labeling is not the problem– Proposition 37 was the problem.  A potentially complex and expensive bureaucratic web would be created to police foodstuffs that have no inherent dangers.  That’s just nuts.

View the original article here: Let’s Talk Proposition 37.1 — No Ballots Required 

Gene therapy offers “revolution” in prostate cancer treatment

by

Scientists have discovered new way of slowing the growth of prostate cancer. For the first time experiments have successfully targeted the activity of non-cancerous cells which encourage the tumour to grow. In changing the way these fibroblast cells behave, by manipulating their gene expression, scientists were able to slow down the growth of prostate cancer in mice.

Experts say it could form the basis of ‘a revolution’ in the treatment of the disease.

View the original article here: ‘Revolution’ in prostate cancer treatment as scientists find new way to slow the disease

Despite defeat, Prop 37 proponents will keep fighting

by

Despite losing the popular vote by six percentage points, the Proposition 37 campaign, which fought to require California labeling of genetically engineered food, hailed its defeat as a victory Wednesday. “We came up a little short and that’s obviously disappointing,” said Dave Murphy, co-chair of the Yes campaign and founder of Food Democracy Now, a group of farmers and citizens dedicated to changing food policy nationally. “But Prop. 37 put GMO labeling on the map.

View the original article here: Prop. 37 lost, but backers keep fighting

Mapping the chocolate genome: hope of improved cacao plants

by

Mark Guiltinan is a professor of plant molecular biology in the Department of Horticulture in the College of Agricultural Sciences at Penn State. He currently runs the Guiltinan Lab, where he studies crop improvement and sustainable farming methods. Guiltinan was a key player in The International Cocoa Genome Sequencing Consortium, a worldwide effort to sequence and analyze the genome of the Criollo variety of the Theobromo cacao plant, the key ingredient in high-quality chocolate. Using genome sequencing programs and computer clusters at Penn State and abroad, Guiltinan and his colleagues have mapped the cacao genome and are working to breed better, more disease-resistant cacao plants.

View the original article here: Chocolate genome research good for farmers, environment, sweet lovers

 

Genetics at center of several “battlegrounds” in next 4 years

by
e x

In the wake of Obama’s victory, Wired takes a look at the battles to come in the next four years. Three of the seven major issues they identify revolve around genetics: ethical and legal issues surrounding genomic data, the future of agriculture and food security, and the what the next generation of genetically modified organisms will look like.

View the original article here: The Next 4 Years: Battlegrounds in Science, Medicine and Environment

glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists