{"id":96026,"date":"2016-09-27T10:12:23","date_gmt":"2016-09-27T14:12:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/countingpips.com\/?p=96026"},"modified":"2016-09-27T07:15:04","modified_gmt":"2016-09-27T11:15:04","slug":"genetically-optimized-vs-genetically-modified-organisms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/2016\/09\/genetically-optimized-vs-genetically-modified-organisms\/","title":{"rendered":"Genetically Optimized vs. Genetically Modified Organisms"},"content":{"rendered":"
September 27, 2016<\/div>
\r\n<\/div><\/div>

By WallStreetDaily.com<\/u><\/a> \"SPEC-0926_DNA\"<\/p>\n

It sounds like the tagline of an action-thriller: What could be born of a union between The World\u2019s Most Evil Corporation, Monsanto Co.<\/b> (MON), and The World\u2019s Most Powerful Gene-Editing Tool, CRISPR\/Cas9?<\/p>\n

Well, what it won\u2019t<\/i> be is a genetically modified organism, or GMO, The World\u2019s Most Notorious Acronym. That\u2019s according to responses from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to a pair of \u201cRegulated Article Letters of Inquiry\u201d made public in April 2016.<\/p>\n

Monsanto and E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.<\/b> (DD) are hoping CRISPR\/Cas9 \u2014 which uses a naturally occurring enzyme to edit DNA \u2014 puts the period to a long-running agricultural controversy.<\/p>\n

The USDA has chosen not to designate crops created by DuPont and Caribou Biosciences using their own CRISPR techniques as GMOs. CRISPR results in genetically optimized<\/i>, rather than modified, organisms, because there\u2019s no foreign DNA introduced to the original organism.<\/p>\n

This is because the process does not involve transgenics \u2014 the act of removing genetic material from one species and placing it in another to give the destination organism a trait or traits not ordinarily found in that species.<\/p>

\r\n
\r\n

Free Reports:<\/p><\/div>\r\n

\r\n

<\/a>\r\n\t Get Our Free Metatrader 4 Indicators<\/u><\/b><\/a> - Put Our Free MetaTrader 4 Custom Indicators on your charts when you join our Weekly Newsletter<\/p>

\r\n
\r\n
\r\n

<\/a>\r\n\t Get our Weekly Commitment of Traders Reports<\/u><\/b><\/a> - See where the biggest traders (Hedge Funds and Commercial Hedgers) are positioned in the futures markets on a weekly basis.<\/p>

\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n
<\/div>\n

Monsanto and E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. are hoping CRISPR\/Cas9 \u2014 which uses a naturally occurring enzyme to edit DNA \u2014 puts the period to a long-running agricultural controversy.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

This alphabet soup will also eventually include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration \u2014 also known as the EPA and the FDA.<\/p>\n

Penn State researcher Yinong Yang recently used the CRISPR\/Cas9 science to grow anti-browning mushrooms. Of the project, Yang explained that the \u201cgenome-edited mushroom has small deletions in a specific gene but contains no foreign DNA integration in its genome.\u201d<\/p>\n

Though this development initially renders it exempt from USDA regulatory review, the Administration did write in a letter to Yang: \u201cPlease be advised that your white button mushroom variety described in your letter may still be subject to other regulatory authorities such as FDA or EPA.\u201d<\/p>\n

So it\u2019s too soon to say with absolute certainty that a CRISPR\/Cas9 organism is not, from a regulatory perspective, \u201cgenetically modified.\u201d<\/p>\n

And there are plenty of folks out there ready to argue the case, in the U.S. and in Europe, where the war on GMOs originated.<\/p>\n

For now, however, Monsanto \u2014 whose $66 billion merger with Bayer AG<\/b> (BAYRY) has raised plenty of opposition from \u201cfood safety\u201d advocates around the world \u2014 has inked a global licensing agreement for the use of the CRISPR\/Cas9 genome-editing technology in agriculture with MIT\u2019s and Harvard\u2019s Broad Institute.<\/p>\n

As Monsanto explains in its September 22 press release announcing the partnership: \u201cGenome-editing technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas, offer a way for scientists to promote site-directed integration of specific genes as well as the opportunity to enhance beneficial or remove undesired plant characteristics. These techniques will enable plant breeders to deliver better hybrids and varieties more efficiently.\u201d<\/p>\n

Terms of the agreement strictly limit Monsanto\u2019s use of the technique to seed development, an area where the agribusiness giant has generated a lot of consternation among Europeans and Americans fearful of \u201cFrankenfoods.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s too soon to say with absolute certainty that a CRISPR\/Cas9 organism is not, from a regulatory perspective, \u201cgenetically modified.\u201d<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

What CRISPR\/Cas9 will help Monsanto do is, ultimately, develop even more crops that are drought resistant and create cooking oils with more desirable nutritional profiles.<\/p>\n

It is critically important, however, that Monsanto is not permitted to use CRISPR\/Cas9 for so-called gene drive, a technique that attempts to force a specific gene to be inherited by a species\u2019 offspring. This kind of \u201ccellular machinery\u201d has its upsides. But there are enormous unknowns as well.<\/p>\n

According to Issi Rozen, chief business officer of the Broad Institute, \u201cGenome-editing techniques present precise ways to dramatically improve the scale and discovery efficiency of new research that can improve human health and global agriculture.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are encouraged to see these tools being used to help deliver responsible solutions to help farmers meet the demands of our growing population.\u201d<\/p>\n

The concern about out-of-control propagation \u2014 in addition to lack of understanding about how GMOs impact humans who consume crops generated from such seeds \u2014 is what drives anti-GMO activists around the world.<\/p>\n

So will Monsanto be the force to \u201cweaponize\u201d CRISPR\/Cas9?<\/p>\n

That\u2019s one of those ponderable imponderables \u2014 within the realm of \u201cpossibility\u201d but still a low-probability outcome.<\/p>\n

Rather, what we\u2019re more likely to see is a greater concentrated effort to develop drought-resistant strains of key staple crops such as corn, rice, soybeans, and wheat.<\/p>\n

Monsanto\u2019s stated game is \u201cyield.\u201d And yield is all about producing an increasing supply of staple crops from a shrinking supply of arable farmland around the world.<\/p>\n

So will Monsanto be the force to \u201cweaponize\u201d CRISPR\/Cas9?<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

And climate change is only exacerbating that problem.<\/p>\n

According to a recent study published by the journal Nature Communications<\/i>:<\/p>\n

\n

Strong reductions in attainable yields of major cereal crops are found across a large fraction of current cropland by 2050. These areas are vulnerable to climate change and have greatly reduced opportunity for agricultural intensification. However, the total land area, including regions not currently used for crops, climatically suitable for high attainable yields of maize, wheat, and rice is similar by 2050 to the present day. Large shifts in land-use patterns and crop choice will likely be necessary to sustain production growth rates and keep pace with demand.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In this kind of context, with shrinking farmland and rising temperatures, it\u2019s imperative that we find new ways to increase staple yields. One way to do that is by developing new strains of corn, rice, soybeans, and wheat.<\/p>\n

Food security is a complex dilemma.<\/p>\n

Are we talking GMO \u201cFrankenfood\u201d or genetically optimized staple crops?<\/p>\n

At the same time, even as we\u2019re finding better ways to do things, this whole campaign against GMOs has been dismissed as \u201cfull of fearmongering and fraud.\u201d<\/p>\n

Indeed, a Harvard geneticist recently told Business Insider that CRISPR\/Cas9\u2019s agricultural applications are \u201ca beautiful thing.\u201d<\/p>\n

Man, after all, must eat. It may not be a thing of beauty, but it sure is a necessity.<\/p>\n

\n

This Week In\u2026<\/h2>\n

Prudence<\/a>, via Shane Parrish of Farnam Street:<\/p>\n

\n

Think of how many policies, procedures and systems of organization which forget this basic truth; systems of political control, price control, social control and behavioral control \u2014 from bad workplaces to bad governments \u2014 which\u00a0have failed so miserably because they refused to account for\u00a0the underlying motivations of the people in the system, and failed to do a second-step analysis<\/a> of the consequences of their policies.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s just as true in personal relations: How often do we fail to treat others correctly because we haven\u2019t taken their point of view, motivations, aspirations, and desires properly into account? How often is our own \u201csystem of relations\u201d built on faulty assumptions that don\u2019t actually work for us<\/a>? (The old marriage advice \u201cYou can either be right, or be happy\u201d is pure gold\u00a0wisdom in this sense.)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Smart investing,<\/p>\n

David Dittman<\/p>\n

The post Genetically Optimized vs. Genetically Modified Organisms<\/a> appeared first on Wall Street Daily<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By WallStreetDaily.com It sounds like the tagline of an action-thriller: What could be born of a union between The World\u2019s Most Evil Corporation, Monsanto Co. (MON), and The World\u2019s Most Powerful Gene-Editing Tool, CRISPR\/Cas9? Well, what it won\u2019t be is a genetically modified organism, or GMO, The World\u2019s Most Notorious Acronym. That\u2019s according to responses […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-96026","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","no-post-thumbnail"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96026","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=96026"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96026\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":96035,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96026\/revisions\/96035"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=96026"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=96026"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investmacro.com\/forex\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=96026"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}