Kamis, 23 Januari 2014

View from an Iowa farm: In choosing seeds, ‘I’m no pawn of Monsanto’ | Genetic Literacy Project

REPOSTED from Jon Entine's GLP | January 21, 2014 | 
Iowa1
Winter allows a bit of downtime for most farmers. We use it to look back on the prior year and to make plans for the next. We learn from mistakes, failures and successes and attempt to make sense of it all. Personally, I think of each growing season as a clean slate to test out theories and debunk some popular myths about how a corn or soybean plant creates maximum yield. It’s also a time when we get to make the choices about what to plant, where to plant it and what seed to use in each situation. It’s often a very personal and private decision.
I put on some Stevie Ray Vaughn, pull up a mountain of reports, yield data, my own yield maps, spreadsheets, drink lots of coffee, fire up the old adding machine and go at it. You see, our decisions are based on dollars and cents as well as market demand. Each decision must make the most sense to our bottom line and align with the goals we have for land stewardship. It’s a burdensome responsibility. The right decision assures future success for the farming business, puts food on the table for our family and hundreds more, helps ensure the land will yield its bounty for years to come and allows us the income to enjoy life as a family. The wrong decisions can be disastrous.
If you believe many of the cyber-arguments, the seed and chemical company Monsanto has control over what farmers do, say, plant, etc. I’ve been told by denizens of the online forums that Monsanto “controls” farmers. I suppose the company may have secretly adapted some sort of Vulcan mind-meld without our knowledge. Hmmm…… Nope. Maybe Monsanto has some really deep pockets and influential people working for it to tell every commercial farming operation what to do. It’s a daunting task, I’m sure, but completely baseless. No, really, spend some time on the Monsanto Facebook page and read the comments.
This Monsanto-hate is pretty funny, actually. Sometimes I think the critics mistake Monsanto for the Illuminati, a darkly secret society that has influence over every aspect of our lives and has plans for world domination by killing everyone but the chosen few.  That’s a discussion for another time. You see, we farmers are a pretty independent bunch. Just ask our wives. If you tell us to do “A”, we’ll sometimes find a way to do “B” instead, simply because you TOLD us to do “A”. It’s in our blood, our nature. I think my wife truly believes it requires a genetic anomaly to be a farmer.
Besides, Monsanto isn’t the only game in town and has less influence than many think. Some years, they are not even the biggest player. The market share shifts from time to time between several players, depending on product performance, sales programs, and to a small degree company image.. People who think Monsanto is the only game must really tick off DuPont, Syngenta, Dow, Agriliant, and the smaller regional companies. Those poor souls don’t even get an honorable mention in the seed industry from the anti-GMO crowd. I’m pretty sure they think they have some pretty good the products out there, but get no love from the anti’s. Oh well. They’re probably happy that Monsanto has the biggest target.
There are no seed company minions running around out here in the countryside telling us what to do. Sorry to disappoint some, but it simply does not happen. If someone from Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Dow, whomever would come into my office and tell me what to do, he would likely get a tongue lashing that would make a sailor blush, then summarily be told were to put that opinion, and to get the hell out or be removed. By me. Without a shadow of a doubt this would happen, and has.
So, what does influence my decision? Actually, it’s pretty simple and no great secret. You see, I’m a no-nonsense dollars and cents, ‘just the facts’ kind of guy. When the seed salesmen come around each year, we will sit down and have a conversation about what he learned, and what I knew. I’d ask for data, tons of data, then the conversation is over. On goes the Stevie Ray Vaughn, probably something from “Double Trouble” or anything live, and I fire up the coffee pot. I will occasionally call with a specific question on disease resistance or best population for a certain hybrid, but I don’t leave much room for someone “selling” me.
When the decision is made, I call the salesman and tell him the seed order is finalized. He will come in, we might have a brief discussion about supply, or if anything new has arisen that I need to know. Then I usually slide over a slip of paper. On that paper is written a list, my order, of each variety or hybrid I want to plant and how much. At that point, there is no more discussion. End of story. That’s how the decision process goes for me and most farmers that I know. We don’t want to be “sold”; we just want the information to make our own decision. Some farmers can be influenced a bit more than others, but in the end it is a personal decision to buy or not to buy from any particular company.
It’s a dollars and cents on the bottom line kind of thought process that drives the decision. Will non-GMO corn or soy add more to our bottom line in 2014, or not? The economics of it will shift from year to year with available crop premiums, chemical costs and my general willingness to scout, treat, and put in a higher level of management. I’ve never felt pressured to buy a particular type of seed, GMO or not, from Monsanto or any other seed company. I buy what’s best for my farm for this year’s circumstances. Next year it could be different.
For our operation this spring it will be the traited seed, or GMO seed, that I think will have the best impact on the bottom line and the least impact on the environment. The last time we set up a comparison of Bt corn vs non-Bt corn and measured it strictly for yield, the Bt showed a +14bu/ac advantage mainly due to corn borer damage in the non-Bt hybrid. At the current price, that’s about $60/acre. Sure the GMO seed costs more, but adjusting for that, Bt still has a significant advantage in profit per acre. It protects the yield against pests that we might have to use non-selective insecticides to control. It allows us to use more environmentally friendly herbicides and reduce the amount of tillage used to control weeds. Reduced tillage in turn reduces soil erosion and allows us to sequester more carbon in the soil. Reducing tillage saves me wear and tear on the machinery and equipment, saves labor, and saves diesel. It’s a win-win, really, and one that those in the green movement are just starting to realize–or I hope they are.
Next year, the economics of the decision may change and we could plant more non-GMO corn or soybeans. It’s a decision that we re-visit each year. It’s our decision to plant the brand of seed that we feel gives us the best chance of a financially successful season. It’s our decision to plant the brand of seed we want, the crops we choose to, GMO, non-GMO, or if we want to switch our operation to organic.
In the end, it’s a choice that we are free to make and it’s our personal choice. We are not pawns of some Illuminati-like seed and chemical company.
I’m fine with that.
Dave Walton is a full-time farmer in Cedar County Iowa, growing GM and non-GM corn, soybeans, alfalfa and pasture on about 500 acres of the worlds most productive soils.
View from an Iowa farm: In choosing seeds, ‘I’m no pawn of Monsanto’ | Genetic Literacy Project:




Arcadia Biosciences and Mahyco Achieve Key Milestone for Salt Tolerant Rice

Technology Will Increase Productivity and Improve Food Security in Southeast Asia --

DAVIS, Calif. and Jalna, INDIA, (January 22, 2014) – Arcadia Biosciences, Inc., an agricultural technology company focused on developing technologies and products that benefit the environment and human health, and Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. (Mahyco) today announced the achievement of a key milestone in the development of Salt Tolerant rice.

Arcadia's Salt Tolerance (ST) technology enables plants to produce increased yields under saline water and soil conditions, expanding the range of usable acreage for crop production and reducing requirements for fresh water.

In achieving this key milestone, Mahyco demonstrated that Arcadia’s ST technology significantly increased plant growth and yield in multiple rice lines developed by Mahyco. Rice varieties incorporating ST technology showed substantial increases in key plant performance measures.

Rice is the world’s second-largest crop, grown on 161 million hectares annually. It plays a critical role in food security for more than half of the world’s population. India, with a population of more than 1.2 billion, is the second most populous country in the world. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that 221 million people in India, or about one-fifth of the population, are undernourished. As such, there is significant pressure on Indian farmers to increase agricultural productivity.

“With the growing demands on fresh water and land resources for agriculture, the ability to maintain high crop yields in salt-impacted environments is critical,” said Eric Rey, president and CEO of Arcadia Biosciences. “This key technology is just one of a number of improvements Arcadia and Mahyco are developing together to increase farm productivity and reduce the overall environmental impact of agriculture in the region,” he added.

"With this milestone, we are closer to bringing the benefits of this technology to the farmers who are challenged with increased salinity in their farms and improving the overall productivity of the crop," said Usha Zehr, chief technology officer of Mahyco.

About Arcadia Biosciences, Inc.
Based in Davis, Calif., Arcadia Biosciences is an agricultural technology company focused on the development of agricultural products that improve the environment and enhance human health. Arcadia’s agronomic traits, including Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Water Use Efficiency, Salt Tolerance, Heat Tolerance, and Herbicide Tolerance, are all aimed at making agricultural production more economically efficient and environmentally sound. Arcadia’s health technologies and products create healthier nutritional ingredients and foods with lower production costs. For more information visit www.arcadiabio.com.

About Mahyco
Established in 1964 by Dr. Badrinarayan R. Barwale, Mahyco is a pioneer and leader in the Indian seed industry. The company strives to provide quality seeds. Since its inception it has been engaged in plant genetic research and production of quality seeds for the farming community of India. Currently, it is engaged in the research, production, processing and marketing of approximately 115 products in 30 crop species including cereals, oilseeds, fiber and vegetables. Mahyco is also developing genetically enhanced crops with the use of gene transfer technology. Mahyco has a national presence with its network across the country. For more information visit www.mahyco.com.

Arcadia Biosciences and Mahyco Achieve Key Milestone for Salt Tolerant Rice | Arcadia Biosciences:




Rabu, 22 Januari 2014

A high-energy-density sugar biobattery based on a synthetic enzymatic pathway


Biotech that could change the real technology scene:

High-energy-density, green, safe batteries are highly desirable for meeting the rapidly growing needs of portable electronics. The incomplete oxidation of sugars mediated by one or a few enzymes in enzymatic fuel cells suffers from low energy densities and slow reaction rates. Here we show that nearly 24 electrons per glucose unit of maltodextrin can be produced through a synthetic catabolic pathway that comprises 13 enzymes in an air-breathing enzymatic fuel cell. This enzymatic fuel cell is based on non-immobilized enzymes that exhibit a maximum power output of 0.8 mW cm−2 and a maximum current density of 6 mA cm−2, which are far higher than the values for systems based on immobilized enzymes. Enzymatic fuel cells containing a 15% (wt/v) maltodextrin solution have an energy-storage density of 596 Ah kg−1, which is one order of magnitude higher than that of lithium-ion batteries. Sugar-powered biobatteries could serve as next-generation green power sources, particularly for portable electronics.

More @A high-energy-density sugar biobattery based on a synthetic enzymatic pathway : Nature Communications : Nature Publishing Group:




Cultivation of Bt Brinjal begins in Bangladesh


Bangladesh formally started the cultivation of the country's first genetically modified (GM) crop--Bt Brinjal today.

As part of the initiatives, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) distributed saplings of the new crop among 20 farmers of four regions.

But, the authorities decided not to sell out the new variety in the market at present, said Jahurul Islam, chief scientific officer of BARI’s Gazipur region.

The speciality of the Bt Brinjal is that the farmers do not need to spray pesticides on it.

Usually, farmers have to spray pesticides up to 80 times in a cropping season of brinjal against a recommended dose of 25, making the vegetable highly toxic.

The new verities developed by the scientists of BARI are—BARI Bt (Uttara), BARI Bt (Kajla), BARI Bt (Nayontar) and ISD006 Bt BARI.

Agriculture Minister Matia Chowdhury today distributed the saplings among the farmers at a programme in the city’s Bangladesh Agriculture Research Centre.

“We have decided to start cultivating Bt brinjal after different necessary tests at home and abroad. We took long time to experiment all pros and cons for introducing the cultivation of this variety”, she said while addressing as the chief guest....

More @ Cultivation of Bt Brinjal begins:

H/T Mark Lynas on Twitter




Natural GMOs Part 189. Pathogenic plant virus jumps to honeybees

21-Jan-2014 American Society for Microbiology

A viral pathogen that typically infects plants has been found in honeybees and could help explain their decline. Researchers working in the U.S. and Beijing, China report their findings in mBio, the online open-access journal of the American Society for Microbiology.

The routine screening of bees for frequent and rare viruses "resulted in the serendipitous detection of Tobacco Ringspot Virus, or TRSV, and prompted an investigation into whether this plant-infecting virus could also cause systemic infection in the bees," says Yan Ping Chen from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland, an author on the study.

"The results of our study provide the first evidence that honeybees exposed to virus-contaminated pollen can also be infected and that the infection becomes widespread in their bodies," says lead author Ji Lian Li, at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science in Beijing.

"We already know that honeybees, Apis melllifera, can transmit TRSV when they move from flower to flower, likely spreading the virus from one plant to another," Chen adds.

Notably, about 5% of known plant viruses are pollen-transmitted and thus potential sources of host-jumping viruses. RNA viruses tend to be particularly dangerous because they lack the 3'-5' proofreading function which edits out errors in replicated genomes. As a result, viruses such as TRSV generate a flood of variant copies with differing infective properties.

One consequence of such high replication rates are populations of RNA viruses thought to exist as "quasispecies," clouds of genetically related variants that appear to work together to determine the pathology of their hosts. These sources of genetic diversity, coupled with large population sizes, further facilitate the adaption of RNA viruses to new selective conditions such as those imposed by novel hosts. "Thus, RNA viruses are a likely source of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases," explain these researchers.

Toxic viral cocktails appear to have a strong link with honey bee Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), a mysterious malady that abruptly wiped out entire hives across the United States and was first reported in 2006. Israel Acute Paralysis Virus (IAPV), Acute Bee Paralysis Virus (ABPV), Chronic Paralysis Virus (CPV), Kashmir Bee Virus (KBV), Deformed Wing Bee Virus (DWV), Black Queen Cell Virus (BQCV) and Sacbrood Virus (SBV) are other known causes of honeybee viral disease.

When these researchers investigated bee colonies classified as "strong" or "weak," TRSV and other viruses were more common in the weak colonies than they were in the strong ones. Bee populations with high levels of multiple viral infections began failing in late fall and perished before February, these researchers report. In contrast, those in colonies with fewer viral assaults survived the entire cold winter months.

TRSV was also detected inside the bodies of Varroa mites, a "vampire" parasite that transmits viruses between bees while feeding on their blood. However, unlike honeybees, the mite-associated TRSV was restricted to their gastric cecum indicating that the mites likely facilitate the horizontal spread of TRSV within the hive without becoming diseased themselves. The fact that infected queens lay infected eggs convinced these scientists that TRSV could also be transmitted vertically from the queen mother to her offspring.

"The increasing prevalence of TRSV in conjunction with other bee viruses is associated with a gradual decline of host populations and supports the view that viral infections have a significant negative impact on colony survival," these researchers conclude. Thus, they call for increased surveillance of potential host-jumping events as an integrated part of insect pollinator management programs.


###

mBio® is an open access online journal published by the American Society for Microbiology to make microbiology research broadly accessible. The focus of the journal is on rapid publication of cutting-edge research spanning the entire spectrum of microbiology and related fields. It can be found online at http://mbio.asm.org.

The American Society for Microbiology is the largest single life science society, composed of over 39,000 scientists and health professionals. ASM's mission is to advance the microbiological sciences as a vehicle for understanding life processes and to apply and communicate this knowledge for the improvement of health and environmental and economic well-being worldwide.

Pathogenic plant virus jumps to honeybees:

ASM Press Release
Contact: Jim Sliwa
jsliwa@asmusa.org
202-942-9297
H/T Andy Apel on Twitter



Selasa, 21 Januari 2014

What Happens When Monsanto, the Master of Genetic Modification, Decides to Take Nature's Path?

At WIRED SCIENCE:

In a windowless basement room decorated with photographs of farmers clutching freshly harvested vegetables, three polo-shirt-and-slacks-clad Monsanto execu­tives, all men, wait for a special lunch. A server arrives and sets in front of each a caprese-like salad—tomatoes, mozzarella, basil, lettuce—and one of the execs, David Stark, rolls his desk chair forward, raises a fork dramatically, and skewers a leaf. He takes a big, showy bite. The other two men, Robb Fraley and Kenny Avery, also tuck in. The room fills with loud, intent, wet chewing sounds.

Eventually, Stark looks up. “Nice crisp texture, which people like, and a pretty good taste,” he says.

“It’s probably better than what I get out of Schnucks,” Fraley responds. He’s talking about a grocery chain local to St. Louis, where Monsanto is headquartered. Avery seems happy; he just keeps eating.

The men poke, prod, and chew the next course with even more vigor: salmon with a relish of red, yellow, and orange bell pepper and a side of broccoli. “The lettuce is my favorite,” Stark says afterward. Fraley concludes that the pepper “changes the game if you think about fresh produce.”...

More @ What Happens When Monsanto, the Master of Genetic Modification, Decides to Take Nature's Path? - Wired Science:




New study documents steady increase in US public support for Biotech ctops and supports introduction of virus resistant papaya varieties

A Synopsis of US Consumer Perception of Genetically Modified (Biotech) Crops1

Edward A. Evans and Fredy H. Ballen,  University of Florida

Study Conclusions
Biotechnology has now emerged as one of the most innovative technologies of modern times; this new technology is capable of improving a range of crops, including fruits, vegetables, and plantation crops, with greater precision while dealing with global challenges such as climate change. With more than 30 commercial GM crops grown on almost 160 million hectares in 29 countries and the expectation that there will be around 120 GM crops by 2015, it is clear that agro-biotechnology is growing.



Several scientific studies have concluded that GM crops are safe, and that there is much to be gained from embracing the technology, which is fast becoming conventional in North America, South America, Asia, and Africa. Although the United States continues to remain the largest producer and consumer of biotech food and food products, followed by countries such as Brazil, Argentina, and India, it is clear that biotechnology will be of tremendous benefit to both developed and developing countries. Consumers will benefit from the assurance of available, cheap, wholesome food, while producers will benefit by engaging in viable farming operations that would be impossible without biotechnology.



While it is true that consumer attitudes toward GM foods vary widely across the world, it is also fair to note that public opinion is moving slowly toward acceptance of biotech foods. With a global population nearing 9 billion people, biotech crops offer a tremendous potential to mitigate threats of hunger and some of the adverse impacts of climate changes. Recent studies have shown that consumers are willing to accept biotech foods when provided with additional information on the safety of such products. While international trade issues related to biotech food products will arise based on individual laws and regulations, efforts are underway toward reaching a unified position regarding biotech labeling policies around the planet.



Better information about biotechnology and biotech-derived food products is needed. This bodes well for research at various institutions, including the University of Florida, on advancing genetic bioengineering. In this regard, news of the soon-to-be-released new GM papaya ringspot virus cultivar currently being developed by the University of Florida Tropical Research and Education Center in Homestead is welcome to papaya growers in South Florida. With the new cultivar comes the hope that it will provide them with the arsenal to fight PRSV with a profitable alternative, leading to increased farm income and competitiveness.


Full report @FE934/FE934: A Synopsis of US Consumer Perception of Genetically Modified (Biotech) Crops:




Senin, 20 Januari 2014

San Diego Here I Come!


I fell in love with San Diego last year when I visited for a few days. So much so that I ended up writing a book set in Encinitas. Ever since then I've been dying to go again, and this week that is happening! I'm so excited and ready for a little bit a warmth to get me through this cold Utah winter. Not to mention all the good good. And I get to bring my husband this time, which makes it even better.

Good news for you guys? I will be having a book signing while I'm down there! I really hope to see as many people as I can (since I so rarely sign out of state), so if you have time please drop by the Oceanside Barnes & Noble at 6PM on January 23rd.

I am signing with two of my favorite people: Kiersten White (Paranormaly series, Mind Games, The Chaos Of Stars) and Shannon Messenger (Let The Sky Fall and Keeper Of The Lost Cities series). If you can't quite get there by six, that's okay, too. I should be at the store for at least a couple hours. There will be copies of Transparent and Blindsided for purchase, and I'll be giving away an ARC of House Of Ivy & Sorrow at some point during the evening.

Rabu, 15 Januari 2014

Three Months To House. All The Gratitude.

So. This pretty book comes out in three little months.


Sorry for the ridiculously large image, but I can't help myself. I just love this cover so much and I can't wait to pet the final product. It'll be so fancy.

Most of the time I just can't really believe this book is coming out. That it will be A Thing People Can Pick Up And Read. Since it'll be my third published novel, you'd think I'd be used to this. But well, let's face it, a year hasn't passed since TRANSPARENT debuted. I have gone from no books to three books in less than a year.

I really don't know how this happened!

I mean, I'm the girl who has to wait forever and never gets an easy break and has to walk away from failed subs and accept that most publishers don't find my work commercial enough. Seriously, how the hell did I end up also being the girl who put out three books in her first year of being a published author?

Some of it was the dividends of my seven-year investment in trying to be an author, I guess. Some of it was pure luck and seizing an opportunity when it was given (hello, BLINDSIDED). All of it feels simultaneously overwhelming and miraculous.

By now I am mostly over debut jitters, but I think what's surprising me the most as I keep putting out novels is how much my gratitude grows each time. When I think of HOUSE OF IVY & SORROW's release, all I can feel is a deep sense of thankfulness for being able to do this. For having people who read these stories of mine.

Thank you. And I hope you love this book as much as I do. I confess I have a very special place in my heart for Jo and her story.

Jumat, 10 Januari 2014

My Formal Apology To All Self-Published Authors

Dear Self-Published Authors,

Basically, it boils down to this: I'm sorry for judging.

I know most people in "traditional" publishing try to tip toe around this, try to say they don't judge and that self-publishing is gaining credibility. But I'm sure you know differently. I'm sure you've felt the extra scrutiny you receive, and yeah maybe sometimes that leads to being a bit defensive.

So I'm saying it now. I'm sorry. For assuming you just "throw your work out there." For supposing you don't care or gave up on trying to break into the "Big 5." For thinking maybe you just want to avoid the editing process or that you can't work with other people well or that you are control freaks. I'm sorry for all the assumptions out there—some of them I admit right here and now I held myself.

You're probably thinking these apologies have everything to do with the fact that I am working to self-publish a novel right now—you would be entirely correct and I'm okay with admitting that. Sometimes you have to step into the same shoes to really get it, and I can assure you I'm beginning to see both sides so much more clearly.

The judging, I can already see it happening to me. I admit I thought because of my traditionally published books that I would be spared a little, but I'm starting to understand that is not the case. It's been a big lesson to me. A humbling one.

You guys work hard. Most all of you take this dead seriously. So it must hurt when someone says you didn't put in the effort. It must be heartbreaking when you follow every procedure, do all the edits from the editor you pay, take the time to create a good cover, learn how to market, learn how to format, learn how to take care of your cash flow and taxes, not to mention often putting out more than one book a year…

Yes, now I see why it feels like a slap in the face when someone calls you lazy. Or says you're taking the easy way out. Or claims your work is not professional.

I apologize for ever thinking any of that. Even if it was just once.

Because you are, for the most part, professionals juggling all the things my agent and publisher handle on my traditionally published books. Now that I face this, I see what an overwhelming feat that is. You guys are amazing.

And your books? They're amazing, too. Maybe they don't always fit in boxes like they're "supposed to," but that's why you do this anyway, right? Things that wouldn't fly in Big 5 Land—those are the things you're not afraid of. Sometimes you get flak for being different, but now that I'm about to put out my own very different novel I understand why you do it.

People might say this book of mine isn't right—it does things wrong, or it's weird, or whatever. They may blame it on the fact that I self-published it, instead of seeing that it's exactly what I wanted it to be and part of that is how different it is. I love different…sometimes traditional publishing does not.

I'm sorry people expect you to fit in boxes. I'm sorry the boxes exist to begin with, both for you and myself. I've never done so good with the fitting in, and the creative part of me is falling in love with the freedom I get from going hybrid.

So, again, I'm sorry. And I admire you. The hard work you do? I see it now, and I will never, ever stop seeing it.

All the best,
Natalie



Senin, 06 Januari 2014

See For Yourself

Opinions. Oh, opinions. Everyone has one. Most people love to give them.

It used to be that an opinion was somewhat of a commodity. Before the internet (oh my gosh do I sound old or what?), opinions came from "credible sources." Whether that be in a newspaper, on a news broadcast, in a magazine, an opinion in media was at least LESS rare than it is now. This made hearing opinions kind of interesting, and it also caused people to kind of trust opinions of credible critics. Some people even made their livelihoods on being a critic (and some still do).

These days, anyone with internet access and a social media account can tell the world what they think of anything and everything. There are reviews enough to drown yourself in if you feel like it. There are stars being flung back and forth faster than ninjas throw shuriken. News articles or opinion pieces get shared faster than people can fact check. Stuff goes viral, which is a rather disturbing term if you really think about it. Before you can even see an episode of your favorite show, people a few time zones ahead will be telling you how they felt about the show and possibly spoiling it for you.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm kind of on opinion overload.

Don't worry, I'm aware of the certain irony that comes in writing an opinion piece on opinions, but I just can't help myself.

Frankly, I'm a little tired of hearing people say something along the lines of, "Oh, I heard that fill-in-the-blank-with-whatever-media-you-want wasn't that great/over-hyped." If you start digging after this statement, you quickly find that they saw someone on a social media site saying this. Thus they have decided to adopt the opinion without seeing for themselves if they share it. As a creator, this makes me sad because some people may not pick up my work though they may ultimately like it. As a FAN, this makes me sad because people might be missing out on something awesome just because a friend said they didn't like it (or maybe not even a friend but an acquaintance or someone clever they follow on social media).

Here's the thing: I don't like everything my friends like.

It's true! And you know what? Not all of them like what I like. Some of my friends think I'm downright nuts for watching as much Kdrama as I do, and I can't get any of them to watch anime or not laugh when I say pro-gaming is awesome. Yes, my closest friends DO NOT share these common interests with me. And I'm not so much into some of their favorite things, either. I have a friend who loves country music, and one who buys all things Batman, and more than a few who like to run for pleasure (I mean, what?).

While I respect my friends' opinions, I'm also very aware that I might not share them. And that is OKAY. Friends all having to like the same things (and hate the same things) is something we should all put away in, like, grade school.

I'm not saying opinions are bad, just…I really encourage people to see for themselves. If you're excited about a movie, don't let other bad opinions stop you. Just because some people "weren't impressed," doesn't mean you won't enjoy it. In our ever-increasing critical society, it's hard to just ENJOY something, I know. It feels like the whole internet wants to challenge your enjoyment and tell you it's stupid.

But remember this—when it comes to consuming media, it's YOUR opinion that matters most in what you view, read, and listen to. You are allowed to love stuff other people might not. You shouldn't take a "I wasn't impressed by this book/movie/song/TV show" as the final verdict—you might feel totally different.

It's hard to erase all those opinions if you consume a lot of social media, to go into something with an open mind or even excitement, but I always end up enjoying something more when I do.

So, you know, the next time you hear an opinion, maybe decide to see for yourself anyway.

Minggu, 05 Januari 2014

When the sheeple get lost in a sea of noise about GMOs, good investigative journalists can provide a clearer view of the truth


Amy Harmon at the NYT reports the evolution of a GMO crop ban in Hawaii, and the difficulty of internet research on the issues in a sea polluted with misinformation:

...Like some others on the nine-member [Kona, Hawaii] Council, Greggor Ilagan was not even sure at the outset of the debate exactly what genetically modified organisms were: living things whose DNA has been altered, often with the addition of a gene from a distant species, to produce a desired trait. But he could see why almost all of his colleagues had been persuaded of the virtue of turning the island into what the bill’s proponents called a “G.M.O.-free oasis.”
“You just type ‘G.M.O.’ and everything you see is negative,” he told his staff. Opposing the ban also seemed likely to ruin anyone’s re-election prospects.
Yet doubts nagged at the councilman, who was serving his first two-year term. The island’s papaya farmers said that an engineered variety had saved their fruit from a devastating disease. A study reporting that a diet of G.M.O. corn caused tumors in rats, mentioned often by the ban’s supporters, turned out to have been thoroughly debunked.
And University of Hawaii biologists urged the Council to consider the global scientific consensus, which holds that existing genetically engineered crops are no riskier than others, and have provided some tangible benefits.
“Are we going to just ignore them?” Mr. Ilagan wondered.
Urged on by Margaret Wille, the ban’s sponsor, who spoke passionately of the need to “act before it’s too late,” the Council declined to form a task force to look into such questions before its November vote. But Mr. Ilagan, 27, sought answers on his own. In the process, he found himself, like so many public and business leaders worldwide, wrestling with a subject in which popular beliefs often do not reflect scientific evidence.
At stake is how to grow healthful food most efficiently, at a time when a warming world and a growing population make that goal all the more urgent.
Scientists, who have come to rely on liberals in political battles over stem-cell research, climate change and the teaching of evolution, have been dismayed to find themselves at odds with their traditional allies on this issue. Some compare the hostility to G.M.O.s to the rejection of climate-change science, except with liberal opponents instead of conservative ones.
“These are my people, they’re lefties, I’m with them on almost everything,” said Michael Shintaku, a plant pathologist at the University of Hawaii at Hilo, who testified several times against the bill. “It hurts.”...

More @ A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops - NYTimes.com:



Kamis, 02 Januari 2014

Tanzania: Tensions over Genetically Modified Crops | Pulitzer Center


Published October 17, 2013
FINNIGAN WA SIMBEYE
DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania — A typical Tanzanian family will not pass a day without eating ugali — a stiff porridge made from ground corn, somewhat like Italian polenta.

Would Tanzanians eat ugali if the flour came from genetically modified corn?

Tension over that question is tearing at the country, with scientists insisting the answer should be “yes,” while GM foes say, “No way!”
Most of Tanzania’s corn is grown by smallholder farmers who typically plant seeds from traditional varieties and rely on natural rains. But the rains have failed them. The country’s 44 million people suffered severe droughts in 2003, 2005 and 2011. Millions needed food handouts to survive.
Beyond drought, local scientists say this basic crop also is threatened by climate change, disease and pests.
Genetic modification could help overcome those problems, scientists say. The technology has been adopted by more than 17 million farmers in other countries.
Under current government regulations, though, Tanzanian scientists cannot conduct field trials with GM plants. And farmers cannot cultivate any crop developed with the new biotechnology.
Alois Kullaya is one of several local scientists who are urging the government to relax the regulations. He is principal agricultural research officer at Mikocheni Agricultural Research Institute and also Tanzanian coordinator of a research consortium called Water Efficient Maize for Africa.
“We have finished confined laboratory trials from genetically modified seeds in 2009, but until now we can’t conduct field trials because of restrictive liability regulations, which means that all this research goes to waste,” Kullaya said....

Tanzania: Tensions over Genetically Modified Crops | Pulitzer Center:

H/T Mark Lynas on Twitter

Global Poverty Rates and Economic Growth -- Growth (not Greed) is Good


Roger Pielke's blog highlights an important insight: Growth is good:
Quote:
The figure above comes from a recent, excellent paper by Martin Ravallion, The Idea of Antipoverty Policy, which shows a dramatic acceleration in the reduction of global poverty since 1950,

Ravallion makes two observations based on the graph (of which he notes, "Neither observation has been made before to my knowledge"):
The middle of the 20th century saw a marked a turning point in progress against poverty globally. Figure 2 plots two series for the $1 a day poverty rate, from Bourguignon and Morrisson (2000) and Shaohua Chen and Ravallion (2010). There is a long list of data problems in these sources and their comparability. However, these are the best estimates we have, and the comparability problems are unlikely to alter two key observations from Figure 2: First, the incidence of extreme poverty in the world is lower now than ever before. While there have been calls to end extreme poverty at various times during the last century or so, they are surely now more credible than ever. Second, the time around 1950 saw a turning point, with significantly faster progress against extreme poverty.
More @ Roger Pielke Jr.'s Blog: Global Poverty Rates and Economic Growth:


Genetically Modified Domestic Product is $350 billion in revenues, or about 2.5% of GDP-- synthesis blog

Rob Carlson is good for providing the bottom line on synbiology:
Quote
GMDP
As I announced during a Congressional Briefing in November, the total 2012 U.S. revenues from genetically modified systems, hereafter the Genetically Modified Domestic Product (GMDP), reached at least $350 billion, the equivalent of approximately 2.5% of GDP, up from $300 billion in 2010. For comparison, according to IHS iSuppli, the 2012 globalrevenues for the semiconductor industry amounted to $322 billion. Remarkably, assuming a 2011-12 GDP annual growth rate of 2.5%, the two year, $50 billion increase in GMDP accounted for almost 7% of total U.S. GDP growth.
Due to differences in regulatory structure, financing, and, consequently, pace of development and commercialization across the industry, the GMDP naturally breaks down into the sub-sectors of biotech drugs (biologics), GM crops, and industrial biotechnology...

More @ The U.S. Bioeconomy in 2012 reached $350 billion in revenues, or about 2.5% of GDP. - synthesis:


Natural GMOs Part 188. Red Queen Redux. Jungle Chemical Warfare Battle for Survival May Yield the Rain Forest’s Diversity

Image, Tenial, Copyright expired.
Carl Zimmer explains the jungle chemical warfare story:
...Plants are not helpless victims, however. They have evolved a staggering variety of defenses. Some grow cups of nectar on their leaves to attract sugar-hungry ants, which also attack insects feeding on the leaves. Some plants defend themselves by sprouting hairs. “To us they seem soft and fuzzy,” Dr. Coley said, “but to a small caterpillar with a soft belly, they can be more like meat hooks.”
The most impressive defenses in tropical plants are invisible, however. A plant may pack each of its leaves with hundreds of kinds of insect poisons. Those toxins can make up half the dry weight of a tropical plant leaf.
As farmers know all too well, insects can evolve resistance to pesticides. A similar evolution plays out in tropical forests, where insects can disarm many of the chemicals that plants use against them.
Of course, plants in temperate regions face attacks from insects, too. But Dr. Coley and Dr. Kursar argue that those plants are more adapted to the bigger threats they face, from the bitter cold of winter and other environmental challenges. In the tropics, plants enjoy a balmy climate year-round. While the physical environment poses less of a threat to tropical plants, it makes insects a bigger danger. They can grow faster in the warm, moist climate; without killing frosts, they can produce more generations each year.
The tropics have thus become host to an arms race. Each species of plant is evolving defenses against its enemies, which evolve counterdefenses in turn. This arms race would explain why tropical plants have become so loaded with toxic compounds...
More @ Battle for Survival May Yield the Rain Forest’s Diversity - NYTimes.com:

About On Tropical Forests and Their Pests
Phyllis D. Coley, Thomas A. Kursar
Science 3 January 2014: Vol. 343 no. 6166 pp. 35-36 DOI: 10.1126/science.1248110

Key Quote
"Evidence from several lineages of tropical trees and shrubs shows that closely related species have diverged in defenses while differing little in nondefense traits (9–12). This supports the Red Queen hypothesis (13), which states that antagonistic interactions between hosts and their pests lead to natural selection for beneficial adaptations and counter-adaptations in both groups. Because herbivores are continually evolving counter-adaptations to plant defenses, plant defensive traits should evolve faster than adaptations to a more static abiotic environment."

References and Notes

1. S. J. Wright, Oecologia 130, 1 (2002).
2. C. Baralotoet al., J. Ecol. 100, 690 (2012).
3. D. T. Palowet al., Funct. Ecol. 26, 1144 (2012).
4. B. E. Sedioet al., J. Ecol. 100, 1183 (2012).
5. X. Liuet al., Funct. Ecol. 27, 264 (2013).
6. E. G. Leighet al., Biotropica 36, 447 (2004).
7. D. W. Schemskeet al., Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40, 245 (2009).
8. J. X. Becerra, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 7483 (2007). The impact of herbivore–plant coevolution on plant community structure
9. T. A. Kursaret al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 18073 (2009). The evolution of antiherbivore defenses and their contribution to species coexistence in the tropical tree genus Inga
10. B. E. Sedio, thesis, University of Michigan (2013)
11.  J. X. Becerra, K. Noge, D. L. Venable, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 18062 (2009). Macroevolutionary chemical escalation in an ancient plant–herbivore arms race
12. P. V. A. Fineet al., Ecology 94, 1764 (2013).
13. L. Van Valen, Evol. Theory 1, 1 (1973).
14. M. R. Servedioet al., Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 389 (2011).

See also previous GMO Pundit posts: 






BLINDSIDED is OUT!

Today is the day! I officially have two novels out in the world and a series published (okay, a duology) and all that stuff. I'm quite excited for TRANSPARENT fans to be able to read the rest of Fiona's story, and I hope they enjoy it.

Ever since Hot Key Books approached me last January and asked me to write this sequel, I've felt incredibly lucky. By then I had accepted that, even if I'd always felt like there was more to Fiona's journey, I wouldn't get a chance to write it. I had made peace with that. So to suddenly be told that I'd get to finish what I started felt like a gift. A difficult gift, but a gift nonetheless.

Since BLINDSIDED was kind of a "surprise" in my career, I have to admit this day is much less stressful than my debut in May 2013. It feels like icing on the cake in a lot of ways. And how can you be worried about some extra frosting?

Maybe it's also that second books are less pressure—at least for an author who is not a bestseller or even close and has no expectations to be so (it's probably different if you're the author of a very popular series). I wrote this book for the people who already love TRANSPARENT, you know? And since there were no ARCs and little publicity in the US (different in the UK), I admit it has been blissfully low-key, with few early reviews to derail my confidence like with my debut.

BLINDSIDED has lived up to its title at almost every stage. Surprises around every corner! So I don't quite know what to expect now that it's out in the world, but by now I'm assuming it won't be anything predictable. That's kind of exciting.

***

You can order BLINDSIDED though these venues:

Amazon
Book Depository
IndieBound
The King's English (If you order online or call 801-484-9100 today, I can sign and personalize your book at my signing tonight and they will ship it to you!)


There will be TWO signings in January for BLINDSIDED: 
BLINDSIDED Launch Party:
January 2, 2014
The King's English
Salt Lake City, UT.
7PM
(If you want to pre-order a signed copy—or you can't get there and want a signed copy—call the store at or.)

Southern California Signing—With Kiersten White and Shannon Messenger!
January 23, 2014
Oceanside Barnes & Noble
Oceanside, CA
6PM

Rabu, 01 Januari 2014

20 GMO questions: Animal, vegetable, controversy?

A journalist doing honest research. Nathanael Johnson at Grist does a good summary :

This is a slightly unusual end-of-the-year list. Instead of a selection of the best or worst news over the year, this is simply a bullet-point summation of what I’ve learned about GMOs in 2013.

When I started this series, I proposed to cut through the debate by finding the facts that both sides agree upon. I also proposed to do this (back in July) “over the next few weeks.” Ha. Not only has this taken me much longer, I’ve also learned that this controversy has turned into something resembling trench warfare, where the two sides refuse to agree on anything, lest they give up an inch of their hard-won position. So I don’t expect everyone to agree with the list below, but I do expect that reasonable people on both sides will concede (if only under their breath) that the bulk of the evidence leads to these conclusions.

As I’ve dug into this over the past six months, I know I’ve provided more detail than all but the most fascinated readers really wanted. In this list, therefore, I’ve aimed for brevity. If you want more nuance I’ll include links to the longer stories, which, in turn, contain links to even more technical scholarly articles, not to mention a detailed dissection of my every sentence in the comments.

Regulation

I’ve heard that GMOs are totally unregulated, is that true?

Nope. In the United States, GM food is regulated by the USDA, the FDA, and the EPA. The FDA process is technically voluntary, but every creator of GM food has opted to jump through those hoops, so it’s voluntary in name only. Genetically engineered foods are regulated much more heavily than many other new technologies, including other modes of genetically modifying crops, like mutagenesis.

Caveats: The regulatory process is not transparent — you can’t just go on the web and look up the tests that have been performed. And non-food plants may escape regulation, as was the case in this instance.

More nuance here.

Academic freedom

Do the big seed companies prevent scientists from doing research on their patented plants?

They used to. Not anymore. I’ve been asking university scientists if they’ve run into restrictions, but the system seems to be working.

More nuance here.

Are there dangers for scientists working on genetically engineered plants?

Yes. Anyone who challenges an accepted paradigm — like the consensus that genetic engineering is basically safe – will come under attack (see Copernicus, Galileo, and Thomas Kuhn). On the other hand, there are huge rewards for anyone who is able to overturn a paradigm...

Continues @ 20 GMO questions: Animal, vegetable, controversy? | Grist: