CRISPR Gene Editing

[Senior Sea Kayaker]

I recently listened to an interview concerning the use of CRISPR gene editing technology to change either a flavour or physical attribute of produce.

Examples discussed were pit-less cherries or non-bitter (bland) kale or mustard greens to appeal to picky eaters.

I personally find this really annoying as I like bitter greens. 

Here is a link to the interview (about 13 minutes).

Gene-editing could make some vegetables tastier. But should it? | The Current with Matt Galloway | Live Radio | CBC Listen

 

[eugenep]

I often heard about producing meat and veg based not on quantity but flavor. 

 

I'm glad they might actually start doing it or at least discussing it. 

 

I would be kinda afraid of side effects - like cancer etc. - and would like to know it is safe before I try. 

[gfweb]

22 minutes ago, eugenep said:

 

I would be kinda afraid of side effects - like cancer etc. - and would like to know it is safe before I try. 

 

 

No reason to think an plant with a gene added or removed would cause cancer in someone who ate it.  We aren't afraid to eat hybrid corn etc etc.

 

But we haven't got this cleared up with GMO in the public mind so ...

 

 

[C. sapidus]

37 minutes ago, gfweb said:

 

No reason to think an plant with a gene added or removed would cause cancer in someone who ate it.  We aren't afraid to eat hybrid corn etc etc.

 

But we haven't got this cleared up with GMO in the public mind so ...

 

Agreed. Whether the plant genome changes through modern science or through ages-old plant breeding, the end result should not be much, if any, different.

 

My issue is with the tendency to make vegetables more bland. Bitter things should have some bitterness. Poblano chilies should not taste like green bell peppers. Etc.

[Senior Sea Kayaker]

The technology does not add genetic sequences, such as fish genes to a tomato, but rather deletes sequences that are deemed 'unfavourable'.

As @C. sapidus has pointed out the tendency is to produce a product that is blander, sweeter or with less heat.

I want my kale bitter, my peppers hot and my grapefruit sour with some bitterness (that ship has already sailed).

 

[gfweb]

I agree with @C. sapidus and @Senior Sea Kayaker.   Peppers without heat are Bell peppers, sweet grapefruit are just big oranges and kale that's not bitter is a weed

[Margaret Pilgrim]

I dunno.   I find Ruby Star red grapefruit quite distinctive, and the only grapefruit I buy.

[Duvel]

On 5/15/2023 at 2:19 PM, eugenep said:

would be kinda afraid of side effects - like cancer etc. - and would like to know it is safe before I try. 

Yeah … that’s not how it works 🙄

[eugenep]

7 hours ago, Duvel said:

Yeah … that’s not how it works 🙄

Like..when a new product is released into the consumer market, it's not really clear what the side effects are. 

 

I don't work at Space X or Tesla but I always thought even the best scientists don't know if facts match theory and they have to test it. 

 

LIke..I'm trying to say that it takes a lot of intelligence to admit we don't know what's going to happen when a new thing is released

 

and you might not see the real side effects for decades 

 

But yeah dood - u go first and I'll observe 

[gfweb]

17 minutes ago, eugenep said:

Like..when a new product is released into the consumer market, it's not really clear what the side effects are. 

 

I don't work at Space X or Tesla but I always thought even the best scientists don't know if facts match theory and they have to test it. 

 

LIke..I'm trying to say that it takes a lot of intelligence to admit we don't know what's going to happen when a new thing is released

 

and you might not see the real side effects for decades 

 

But yeah dood - u go first and I'll observe 

 

Its not as unknown as you imagine.  Firstly, the testing occurs before it gets to the public...so its not "unknown". Really rare adverse effects might not show up in testing, but  they are really rare.

 

RE CRISPR

Remember, CRISPR removes genes.

If anything a CRISPR plant ought to be safer... one less gene to worry about, right?

[heidih]

And as one of my favorite biology professors used to stress - basic research provides the building blocks for advances - what became evident during the pandemic and the unprecedented speed of developing a vaccine, But don't take away my bitter ;.)'

[Duvel]

8 hours ago, eugenep said:

Like..when a new product is released into the consumer market, it's not really clear what the side effects are. 

 

I don't work at Space X or Tesla but I always thought even the best scientists don't know if facts match theory and they have to test it. 

 

LIke..I'm trying to say that it takes a lot of intelligence to admit we don't know what's going to happen when a new thing is released

 

and you might not see the real side effects for decades 

 

But yeah dood - u go first and I'll observe 

 

It might sound a bit harsh, but the line of argumentation here is (unfortunately) far too common: 

 

1) I do not understand the underlying concept.

2) I have a diffuse fear of something associated in the public "wordcloud" associated with the keyword ("CRISPR").

3) I do not trust science/cooperations/authorities.

4) I therefore refuse the concept in its manifestations.

5) Despite 1) I propagate my views.

 

While I definitely can't change 1-4 on a larger scale, I will always try to counteract 5 ...

 

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by Duvel (log)

[Senior Sea Kayaker]

The conversation has gotten interesting. 

The mistrust of science and technology, as pointed out, is rooted in a lack of understanding leading to refutation.

I do feel the money could be much better spent on a worthy project rather than dumbing down products for picky eaters.

Have a read of Chris van Tulleken's 'Ultra Processed People: Why We Can't Stop Eating Food that isn't Food' of what people 

consume without a second thought.

[Honkman]

11 hours ago, eugenep said:

Like..when a new product is released into the consumer market, it's not really clear what the side effects are. 

You don’t really understand the concept or CRISPR and how it works ?

Edited May 17, 2023 by Honkman (log)

[Senior Sea Kayaker]

12 hours ago, eugenep said:

 

 

I......but I always thought even the best scientists don't know if facts match theory and they have to test it. 

 

 

I really don't think you understand how research is conducted and what scientists do.

 

[eugenep]

2 hours ago, Senior Sea Kayaker said:

 

I really don't think you understand how research is conducted and what scientists do.

 

Hmmm...like I'm not a scientist but I do watch TV. 
 

 

I saw on TV those scientist at Space X tried to put a rocket in space but it exploded. 

 

Like..it seems that they have a theory and prediction but they don't know for sure if it's true or not until it's tested. 

 

That's how I understand all that science stuff. 

 

But you..seemd to imply there's something super deeper that laymen don't know. 

 

If you could share..like the process and how it's valid and stuff. Maybe your knowledge. I am curious. 

[Duvel]

9 minutes ago, eugenep said:

Hmmm...like I'm not a scientist but I do watch TV. 
 

 

I saw on TV those scientist at Space X tried to put a rocket in space but it exploded. 

 

Like..it seems that they have a theory and prediction but they don't know for sure if it's true or not until it's tested. 

 

That's how I understand all that science stuff. 

 

But you..seemd to imply there's something super deeper that laymen don't know. 

 

If you could share..like the process and how it's valid and stuff. Maybe your knowledge. I am curious. 

As English is not my native language and on occasion I fail to recognize satire, I need to ask: is this a serious post ?!

 

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by Duvel (log)

[Senior Sea Kayaker]

13 minutes ago, Duvel said:

As English is not my native language and on occasion I fail to recognize satire, I need to ask: is this a serious post ?!

 

 

 

I think the poster is serious (shaking my head in disbelief).

 

[Mjx]

My objection to this particular form of gene editing is essentially the one that was discussed earlier: it seems kind of pointless. If someone dislikes some quality of some kind of produce, why eat it? There are so many varieties of produce, pick one you like, instead. I mean, I find bananas revolting, so I just don't eat them. If someone offered me bananas that had the texture/flavour of strawberries, I still wouldn't eat them, because actual strawberries exist.

Then again, I also think decaffeinated coffee is silly; if I want something without caffeine, I have water or madeira or something, not a sad version of coffee.

[Anna N]

1 hour ago, Duvel said:

As English is not my native language and on occasion I fail to recognize satire, I need to ask: is this a serious post ?!

 

 

Why wouldn't it be a serious post? A bunch of scientists theorize that they can build a rocket that will take a payload into space. They build the rocket. They ignite the fuel and the rocket explodes. So much for that theory. Doesn't every theory have to be tested? 

Edited May 17, 2023 by Anna N
Typo. (log)

[Duvel]

1 minute ago, Anna N said:

Why wouldn't it be a serious post? A bunch of scientists theorize that they can build a rocket that will take a payload into space. They build the rocket. They ignite the fuel on the rocket explodes. So much for that theory. Doesn't every theory have to be tested? 

See … that I get 🤗

[blue_dolphin]

In general, the use of technology to modify food plants to taste better is interesting to me, as it's a potential benefit to the consumer in comparison to benefits on the production side - farmers and agribusiness, including shippers and retail.

 

I agree that it seems like there are already lots of taste options to pick and choose from to assemble a healthy diet.  I can't imagine someone with a Doritos habit switching to non-bitter mustard greens!  

The coffee that @Mjx mentions is an interesting one though. If the caffeine was knocked out via CRISPR, it might well be possible to produce a much better tasting decaf coffee bean that didn't have to be processed with solvents or steam to remove the caffeine and there's clearly a market for decaf already.  

Edited to add that allergen-free peanuts could be a good thing, too, though that's not a taste thing.

 

Here's an article on the CRISPR mustard greens, headed to restaurants now and perhaps coming to a store near us later this year!  Pairwise Rolls Out First CRISPR-Edited Produce to U.S. Restaurants

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by blue_dolphin
to add peanut comment (log)

[Duvel]

3 minutes ago, blue_dolphin said:

If the caffeine was knocked out via CRISPR, it might well be possible to produce a much better tasting decaf coffee bean that didn't have to be processed with solvents or steam to remove the caffeine and there's clearly a market for decaf already.  

That is a very interesting idea. I like it …

The first two commercial applications on the market were in Japan: the first was to increase the size of certain fish species by selectively crippling the endogenic production of myostatine (which inhibits muscle growth) or inhibiting the production of leptins (which signals satiety in the presence of food). Both modifications led to fishes being able to outgrow their normal species boundaries.

The second one was a bit more controversial: a species of tomatoes was introduced to the market with up to five times the natural amount of gamma butyric acid (GABA), a potential relaxation-inducing substance. Nevertheless, both products seem to have caught on, albeit in a market tradionally open to innovative products.

 

[Duvel]

How do you propose to lead a meaningful discussion on the dangers of CRISPR gene editing, when you have absolutely no idea about the concept or the underlying scientific foundation.

 

2 hours ago, eugenep said:

Hmmm...like I'm not a scientist but I do watch TV. 
 

See - we are all different. I am a scientist, and I don’t watch TV. That doesn’t mean I am right and you are wrong, but is means it will be very difficult to find a common ground to discuss the topic. 
 

If you are interested in the topic, read the Wikipedia entry, which is pretty decent. There is a Simple English version, too, that avoids having a preknowledge of quite a few concepts, but doesn’t really convey the magnitude or the impact this technology has. 
 

Once you have gotten the general concept and also realized the scope how far this technology is already employed in thousands of labs on a daily basis we can start to discuss pros and cons, and adress your concerns. Because what you are asking for here …

 

2 hours ago, eugenep said:

But you..seemd to imply there's something super deeper that laymen don't know. 

… is simply called knowledge.

 

[heidih]

The Space X explosion was almost funny because not unexpected. It was data gathering. No creatures harmed. https://www.google.com/search?q=spaceX+explosion+not+surpriseBut in general I understand that scientists conduct experiments, record data, make adjustments. Clinical trials on animals including humans are closely monitored and need to be done before exposing general population. Two different populations 

As to FOOD - the originally brought up gene editing - money making drives all kinds of somewhat odd research to promote product appeal.  

The CRISPR technology has vast possible uses.https://www.npr.org/transcripts/974751834

Edited May 17, 2023 by heidih (log)