How do we know GMOs are not harmful?
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2021 7:05 pm
Here is the discussion Red and I were having on YouTube recently:
teo123 wrote:Great video! About GMOs, I think there is an excellent argument how they are safe: "You realize mutations happen all the time in nature, right? So, is not it better that they happen in a controlled environment than in an uncontrolled one? When a scientist modifies genes of some plant, he knows something about what he is doing. When random chance modifies genes of some plant, it by definition does not know what it is doing.".
Red wrote:That's a great point, people tend to make the appeal to nature fallacy here yet are completely unaware of what nature actually does.
Where do we draw the line here? I suppose it is reasonable to believe scientists know enough about genetics to be able to modify genes of simple organisms such as bacteria and be reasonably sure what they are doing is safe. But is it reasonable to believe they are able to manipulate genes of complicated organisms such as plants? Aren't we quite in the position of medieval physicians if we try to do that?teo123 wrote:Though, it is a bit complicated, when does this rhetoric apply? How do you know when you are in the position of a scientist usefully modifying a DNA of some bacteria (not understanding everything, but still enough to be overwhelmingly likely to do more good than harm) and when you are in the position of a medieval physician (full of misconceptions and more likely to hurt than to help)? I suppose it has to do with whether the system you are dealing with has its own regulation. Human body does regulate the amount of blood in itself (excess hemoglobin is converted to bilirubin and excreted via stool), therefore bloodletting is overwhelmingly likely to hurt rather than to help. A bacteria has no way of dealing with harmful genes in its DNA (it does not even have chromosomes so that the Mendelian genetics can apply to it), and thus, if you think some gene in bacteria is harmful to what you are trying to achieve, it quite probably is.