Doc’s Blog

Accidental GMOs ?

A couple of scientists -- one from Rutgers here in the U.S. and one from the Max Plank Institute in Germany -- have extensively studied plant grafting.  They found that some grafted plants could exchange chloroplasts, organelles that carry out photosynthesis and also mitochondria,  energy-generating organelles – across the grafts.

grafted

They point out that farmers have been altering plants for thousands of years by grafting branches that bear delicious fruit into disease-resistant roots. They conclude that, since graåfting has been widely used for millennia, it is an unintentional form of genetic engineering and we have accidentally been eating GMO’s for centuries.

I think this is really a thinly-veiled attempt to legitimize the flawed “science’ of genetic modification.  Grafting fruiting branches of an apple tree to resistant roots is a far cry from irresponsibly mixing genetics from vastly different species.

I don’t know what these guys are ‘smokin’ but they are now trying to use grafting to create new species, such as a tomato-chilli mix - which would undoubtedly be a great boon for mankind by making it easier to make salsa. 

Who pays for this stuff?

For all the sordid details go to:  https://www.newscientist.com/article/2079813-farmers-may-have-been-accidentally-making-gmos-for-millennia/


NOTE:  The first one of my children or grand-children who lets me know that they have read this blog post will receive one troy ounce of pure silver. Offer expires 28 March 2016.   <VBG>

A PHONE CONSERVATION 

            Ring - Ring

            The receptionist answers the phone,  "XYZ Enterprises."

            Caller: "Hi, this is Sam Hill".

            "Good morning, Mr. Hill.  How can I help you today?

            "I bought some of your BAC-X product a while ago.  I feed it to a
            lot of poultry and I was wondering if you could take out the BAC
            and sell me just the premix?” 

            "Mr. Hill, we can't do that.  The BAC is the active ingredient in
            BAC-X". 

            "I know, but it isn't working like I thought is should and it's very
            expensive”.

            "Mr. Hill, are you feeding it according to directions?  Looking at
             your order history, I see you should be out of the product by now.
             Do you need to    reorder?”

            "No.  I still have plenty left. We only use it when we have a
             problem
".           

The edited dialogue above typifies a general misunderstanding that many folks have about holistic products for livestock nutrition.

The BAC-X product mentioned above is actually a biologically active product designed to support a healthy digestive tract in poultry, ruminants, horses and swine.  While it does help in problem cases, its most economical use is to stabilize and support a healthy gut on a continuous basis.

It is obvious that Mr. Hill does not understand organic principles and does not realize that prevention costs less than treatment.  He was using the product to solve a problem rather than to enhance health.

Mr. Hill also seems unaware that changing a tried-and-true feed formula is seldom warranted and may result in increased expense in the cost of tags, labels, registration, and inventory. 

Expensive is a relative term.  It is better to think in terms of “cost-effectiveness”.  A product can be expensive if it doesn't cost much but fails to do the job.     Conversely, a product could cost a lot of money but its beneficial effects could return greater production and profit.   There are two ways to evaluate cost: what does it cost to use a product and what does it cost if you don’t use it.

Bottom Line.   Select a good product from a good company and use it as directed,

rjhdvm@gmail.com