GMO Tobacco/No Nicotine

[sardonicus87]

Some of the gluten stuff isn't real. Yes, celiac disease is real and they can't have gluten and yes, some people can have a gluten sensitivity/intolerance much like people can have lactose intolerance or how I have poultry protein intolerance... but the intolerance/sensitivity isn't deadly like it is for people with celiac (just results in gassiness, bloating and running to the bathroom faster than "drinking the water in Mexico").

The problem in part is a lot of people claim gluten intolerance that they don't have and they are self-diagnosed, and some of them have psychosomatic symptoms because they've fear mongered themselves into it. And some claimed an allergy rather than sensitivity because with so many bandwagoning on the trend, people didn't trust you when you said you have a sensitivity. And then part of it too was a motivation for some to have an excuse as to why they are overweight that isn't their own fault ("it's not my fault I am fat, it's gluten intolerance and gluten is in everything! I swear I don't eat large sized McDonald's meals 5 times a week and never exercise!").

So, I don't think nearly as many people are sensitive/intolerant to gluten as what's claimed. It was a diet trend/fad in part, and in part a greater awareness that it's a thing (kind of like how rates of autism aren't greater, it's just correctly diagnosed more often and there's more awareness now, which artificially makes it look like there's more people with it). All combined to inflated numbers relative to the past.

So, I don't necessarily buy that gluten sensitivity has increased over time.

 

[Olkofri]

I was "diagnosed" with "celiac disease" by a full fledged, licensed doctor, after lab tests. Was told to stay away from anything even remotely containing gluten by a full fledged, licensed dietitian. Was threatened with cancer if I trangressed their dictates.

For a while I tried the special diet. Very. Expensive. Diet.
Very. Miserable. Diet.
Especially for a natural born sweet roll eater who grew up on buns, bread, pasta, sweet rolls, and myriad of gluten-containing foodstuffs. No ale either (though at the time I wasn't much of an ale drinker, and I could drink liquour no problem).

Eventually, I turned around and said, "fuck it!" Went back to eating what I want when I want; became the killer of a daily pint; and never bought their "gluten-free" pseudo-food again.

Almost 20 years later: here I am.

Granted: I might still die of gut cancer if that's God's will, but at least I'll die well dined and wined. Life's long enough and miserable enough as it is. Why make it longer and worser?

 

[jpmcwjr]

Now too much to reply to, and I have to go out for several hours. Maybe sayonara to this thread. No bad feelings, cosmic!

 

[depriest1022]

I see no difference here...?
Never said that some don't have true issues.
Just pointed out that for many, there seems to be something different in the wheat "here" vs "there". Some would really like to figure out what that is.

You could be right but I fear that Americans have become a bunch of whiners.

The design of that study would be difficult but it’s not impossible.

 

[Briarcutter]

Just pointed out that for many, there seems to be something different in the wheat "here" vs "there". Some would really like to figure out what that is.

Monsanto???

 

[stearmandriver]

BS & BS.

Natural selection and hybridization are definitively NOT GMO. And GMO is still very much a "shotgun" approach and not nearly as "specific" as some would think.

No, relatively few whole foods have been GMO'd, but almost all processed products that pretend to be food, contain GMO ingredients. Big difference.

And, nearly NOTHING I eat has been genetically modified. It may have been hybridized over centuries, but the food I CHOOSE, almost exclusively, is not GMO.

And I have NOT counseled anyone to make specific choices. This simply came about because I was sharing to answer the "half serious" pondering of GMO products.

Almost nothing you eat has been developed via natural selection. Almost everything you eat has instead been modified by humans over time, via multiple techniques that select for desirable characteristics. (Obviously even natural selection is a form of genetic modification, but the point is that humans have intentionally done this to their entire food supply.)

These characteristics are encoded genetically. The characteristics of an organism cannot be modified, without modifying its genetics. What else would you propose changing?

You eat almost nothing that hasn't been genetically modified by human manipulation. That's literally reality.

 

[warren]

Even sausage? No! Not bologna!

 

[stearmandriver]

Plus, we could never make corn that will kill a mouse without being able to go in and modify chemical reactions within the plant. How long would that be able to happen naturally? Probably never.

??? Natural selection has created a LOT of really highly poisonous organisms. Obviously if a trait can be developed naturally, it can be developed via intentional manipulation - whether that's hybridization or transgenic processes. One just takes a lot longer...

Also remember that the "dead mouse" study was inconclusive and many methodological issues were raised during peer review; it was not a high quality or particularly reliable study, being funded by an organization with an agenda against both transgenic tech and Roundup.

 

[FLDRD]

Almost nothing you eat has been developed via natural selection. Almost everything you eat has instead been modified by humans over time, via multiple techniques that select for desirable characteristics. (Obviously even natural selection is a form of genetic modification, but the point is that humans have intentionally done this to their entire food supply.)

These characteristics are encoded genetically. The characteristics of an organism cannot be modified, without modifying its genetics. What else would you propose changing?

You eat almost nothing that hasn't been genetically modified by human manipulation. That's literally reality.

I'm sorry but you're simply incorrect.

 

[burleybreath]

Now too much to reply to, and I have to go out for several hours. Maybe sayonara to this thread. No bad feelings, cosmic!

Wait a minute! We haven't discussed GMO pipes. Would you buy and smoke a pipe made of genetically modified erica arborea? And in the same vein, how about the corn used in corncob pipes? Hasn't that been dicked around with? I've frightened myself now, and may give up smoking. (Joke. I don't give half a rat's ass.)

Almost nothing you eat has been developed via natural selection. Almost everything you eat has instead been modified by humans over time, via multiple techniques that select for desirable characteristics. (Obviously even natural selection is a form of genetic modification, but the point is that humans have intentionally done this to their entire food supply.)

These characteristics are encoded genetically. The characteristics of an organism cannot be modified, without modifying its genetics. What else would you propose changing?

You eat almost nothing that hasn't been genetically modified by human manipulation. That's literally reality.

I'm sorry but you're simply incorrect.

Arbitrary assertion. The former post is my understanding of how these things work. Some guy named Darwin caused an associated kerfuffle about it over a century ago.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Some guy named Darwin caused an associated kerfuffle about it over a century ago.

Mendel and the peas is what came to mind when I first heard of GMOs. But, there is difference between breading specific traits from a wolf over 100's of years to get a cocker spaniel, and altering chromosomes in a lab to get wheat that grows twice as fast on a drop of water. They are even growing chicken in petri dishes. Where would you draw the line? Corn poisonous to mice? Lab grown hot wings? Bringing back Wooly Mammoths? Velociraptors? Tomatoes that scream when you cut them?

Sure, science can do some things, but should they?

 

[Bub]

It’s a scary time, isn’t it: Artificial intelligence, gene manipulation, melting glaciers, hypersonic weapons, over population, political unrest.

I think I’ll go smoke my pipe.

 

[fireground_piper]

Wait a minute! We haven't discussed GMO pipes. Would you buy and smoke a pipe made of genetically modified erica arborea?

I don’t know………we did create Brylon after all.

 

[Old_Newby]

Does anyone grow organic tobacco anymore?

 

[woodsroad]

Does anyone grow organic tobacco anymore?

I hope so, because the inorganic tobacco tastes like a mouth full of rocks (non-sedimentary, of course).

 

[khiddy]

I hope so, because the inorganic tobacco tastes like a mouth full of rocks (non-sedimentary, of course).

Igneous, obviously.

 

[woodsroad]

Igneous, obviously.

Who you callin' igneous?

 

[anotherbob]

I wouldn't be surprised if someone somewhere had already created a nicotine free tobacco using Luther Burbank's methods.

What's the big fear of GMO plants? Does it not merely speed up what can be done with selection and natural breeding?

Two things in my opinion. One is shady business practices (debatably) from Monsanto. And people just picking something to be scared of.
My favorite thing someone said about GMOs some are bad, some very bad, some good, and some extremely good. Just like natural plants.

I suspect there's something else -- can someone please say what it is?

 

[mpxstyle]

to the people who ask what's wrong with GMO, for starters, for some reason, triggers some weir fear on people, like they are only products from mad scientist.
Aside from that, I will give my inside as an Agronomist, but a lazy one, I will not quote or give source, this is a pipe forum, not a peer review, anything I will say is easy to check.
There is GMOs obtained by traditional methods, crossing and selecting, are with us from the very beginning when humans started to grow food, and pretty much everything we consume is crazy far from the wild ancestors. Just look from corn o watermelon ancestors, or the food painted in the 1800s vs now, the wolf vs the chiguagua, or chicken breeds and the red jungle fowl. Sometimes this could be really bad, specially when people use inbreeding, or selects the fruits for the shelf life and nothing more, but besides the bad taste for the food or the health problems for your dog, there is no harm reported to us.
There is GMOs obtained with modern technics, like genetic engineering, we just dont bother selecting the offpring with the characteristics we want, we directly modify the gens, remove, add or change characteristics, this human made mutations can be obtain directly from other organism or be entire synthetic. Yes you can put the gene of a fish into a fruit plant and make fluorescent so it glows in the dark, no, the fish gen is not absorbed by our code just like we don't aqcuire corn gens by eating corn. Some technics involve plants virus or bacterias that carry the new gen, and no, it cannot affect us just like we don't get infected by this organism in the first place (probably is not a good idea to use this kind of mechanism with animals and virus that can affect us). Some examples of modern GMOs are, apples that don't get brown when we cut it, not because the apple now is indestructible and oxygen proof, bu because the browning is caused by an enzyme in the apple, so the gen for that enzyme is damaged and there is not browning. Also, already listed, other popular GMOs are the Roudup ready crops, like corn rescistent to glyphosate, so now when you grow this corn, there is no worry with the other plants growing in the field taking the nutrients and water from your corn, cause the glyphosate will kill everything but the engineered corn.
So far, we need GMOs to keep the food cheap with a good regular supply with less work, so, what's the problem with them?, I think the real problem with them are all the greedy ass companies, that will lobby, lie, and destroy everything for the money. May be there is a safe way to use glyphosate, but with the modified crops farmers just spray a shitload cause is easy, so now, no just the food is full os pesticides, also the soil, the trophic chain, the water supplies, sea life....so the problem here is not the modded soybean, but the shitload of pesticides. Also, after all work you put in creating your new plat, it can be protected by intelectual propeity laws, and the problem with that is, other crops can be contaminated with the new varietal, and I can get sued if your modification is found in my crops. I'm from Chile, and here is forbidden to grow GMOs for human consumption, is only allow to produce seeds and export under very hard regulations to protect our seeds.
Life is full of GMOs, microplastics, pesticides and other contaminants, embrace it, no way to avoid it, is just part of human activity. Also, don't blame gluten or GMO wheat, the industrial bread in USA is just garbage for your body, bleached, full of chemical, sometimes even a lot of sugar and salt, people get problems with super processed food in general.

As for the original question, I'm not into pipe only for the nicotine, there are easier and cheaper ways to get it, and the health risk don't go away with the nicotine, so, is like all the risks, with less pleasure to me. Same for alcohol, beer without alcohol has a lot more to offer, can be still tasty and refreshing, but now they are making stuff like alcohol free whisky, so, wood juice?, if for any reason you can not drink or smoke, just don't, plenty other activities to do instead.

 

[Richmond B. Funkenhouser]

GMO, non-GMO, whatever...

Tobacco with no nicotine is dumb.

I wish yall would leave these people along when they make our food or cigarettes. If the chemicals make the products taste good then they're fine with me.

Just don't mess up my food with virture signaling trends....