Just curious- any of you ever tried Broccosprouts? I went to buy my regular sprouts (I like ’em on salads and on sandwiches), and they were out, so I picked these up, and wow, are they zesty. Have a radish-like tang to them.
The only reason I bring this up is because this is the only food I remember ever buying that has been patented by a University, as these were created by Johns Hopkins. How will the anti-GM foods crowds handle stuff like this? Are these, in their eyes, bad?
*** Update ***
I should probably add that I REALLY liked them.
Another Jeff
YOU’RE JUST POSTING ABOUT FOOD BECAUSE YOU’RE TRYING TO DRAW ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE CORRUPTION OF CHIMPY MCHITLERBURTON, AND ALL YOU’RE DOING IS SPEWING THE TALKING POINTS OF RUSH LIMPBALLS AND SEAN FATITTY!
BROCCOSPROUTS ARE YOUR NEW CINDY SHEEHAN!
Marcus Wellby
Mmmmmmmm, patented food….
You think Broccosprouts are good? Damn, you should try the Porkiflower(patent pending)
Steve
I don’t think broccosprouts are genetically modified.
John S.
Broccosprouts are rather tasty. Definitely have more zip than alfalfa sprouts.
A friend of mine grows them himself at home, and they are fantastic (and easy to grow).
Lines
Hey Jeff, Michael Moore is fat because he doesn’t eat enough broccosprouts.
Horshu
If I can find ’em, I’ll try them. But I wanted to try broccoflower, too, and I never saw them (supposedly invented about 10 years ago) For some reason, I’ve always like high-fiber/water foods like celery and bean sprouts (even the taste).
Steve S
GM food?
From the website it sounds like they are nothing but Broccoli sprouts. That is, they picked a certain type of Broccoli, planted the seeds… and then yank them off of the roots just as they are sprouting.
TallDave
I love how the Europeans simultaneously deride Bush as anti-intellectual while banning GM food as too scary.
Socialism is their religion. Faith-based food only, please!
Lines
Yes Dave, your hero, George W. Bush, created GM foods..
Now run along, wrap yourself in a flag and set yourself on fire in observation of his greatness.
Jesse
I have tried that brand of Broccosprouts. They are good. I don’t believe they are GM. Broccosprouts are extraordinarily good for you. I have heard that they have a hundred times the amount of anti-oxidants as broccoli.
Mr Furious
Yeah, failing to take the word of the genetics/bio mega industry at their word that the food is safe. Actually thinking for themselves instead of being sheep.
Those fucking idiots.
Your mindset really worked out for Libby, Montana.
Jackass.
Tim F
I think Another Jeff needs a hug. But in a manly, non-masculinity-threatening sort of way.
TallDave
failing to take the word of the genetics/bio mega industry at their word that the food is safe.
You mean, ignoring all scientific evidence.
The god of socialism has spoken: thou shalt not tamper with the DNA of food! Especially not if it helps feed starving Africans.
TallDave
Oh, was Libby, Montana overrun by GMO food that ate the people? I must have missed that on the news.
TallDave
Oh, and Bush isn’t exactly my hero. I just find it amusing the Euros are anti-intellectual and anti-science the minute it suits their agenda.
Digital Amish
TallDave, you didn’t really mean to say that did you? (Hint: Google can be your friend. e.g here)
Bob In Pacifica
I really hope that GM broccosprouts take off, because sales of their trucks and SUVs have gone stone cold since the oil crisis.
Do broccosprouts GIVE you gas? Hey, there’s hope for America!
TallDave
Great link Amish.
Hmmm, no mention of medical degrees or scientific credentials. But he’s “natural!” I guess that’s good enough for me to believe him over hundreds of scientists.
God has spoken! Do not question His messenger! Burn the heretics at the stake!
Jane Finch
Obviously you haven’t seen the “Sprout Wall” at the relentlessly organic Whole Foods store in Berkeley…if it can be sprouted, it’s there. Try sunflower sprouts if you can find them….great in salads.
TallDave
Here’s the link in text, since the site seems to be chewing the a tags.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/703440.stm
TallDave
More science
http://www.euractiv.com/Article?tcmuri=tcm:29-116481-16&type=News
A spokesman for his Cabinet Office said there was nothing to suggest that GM foods available might be harmful to human health.
“GM foods that are on sale in the UK have been approved only after rigorous scientific assessment in accordance with European law,” he said.
beloml
Texas A&M has put several ultra-healthy food products on the market, incuding the Betasweet maroon carrot.
http://vic.tamu.edu/
joe public
If you like radishy, try radish sprouts. Maybe not as nutritious as the broccoli, but mighty tasty.
Digital Amish
TallDave, yeah that Jonathan Campbell might just be a quack… too bad he didn’t write the article I linked to.
metalgrid
Personally, I can’t wait till they can profitably grow meat in vats.
mmmm vat beef.
space
Sorry, TallDave, it seems that you are a tad sensitive about being lumped in with the anti-science crowd. Unfortunately, your argument holds no water.
Opposition to GM food isn’t based on a mystical belief the GM food is evil. It is based on the practical concern GM food is more likely to present unexpected problems and that neither the government nor private industry are likely to do the rigorous testing to insure that a major (and possibly irreversible) public health problem does not arise. Moreover opponents recognize that the problem of people starving throughout the world has little to nothing to do with a lack of GM food.
Clearly many people — apparently yourself included — are incapable of evaluating whether adequate research has been done. You just cited a study that, while not finding explicit problems with GM foods, concluded that additional research needed to be done into the areas of “allergenicity, soil ecology, farmland biodiversity and consequences of gene flow” and emphasized that “applications need to be considered on a case-by case basis” as proof that GM food is “safe”. Brilliant.
GM opponents wisely recognize that because it may be impossible to force industry to properly consider every application on a case-by-case basis it makes more sense to have a blanket ban. This does NOT mean that opponents believe that GM food is always, or even often, harmful. It just means that the potential for irreversibly introducing a new allergin into the food supply is too great a risk. There was a time when conservatives understood the concept of cost-benefit analysis. That was before they “proved” Terry Schiavo could see.
jg
I can’t believe a post about salad food ( ican’t believe there is a post about salad here either) and its spiralling towards a partisan political argument. All political talk should have been halted at the first post. Well said AJ.
In other news I just bought a new (to me ) car. :) 2001 BMW 330Ci. I love it I love it I love it and yes I plan to marry it.
Krista
Congrats! I’m sure it’s lovely.
I’m a bit funny, though…flash cars have never done it for me.
Mr Furious
Yeah, what space said.
Oh, and do you seriously not know what I meant by Libby, Montana, TallDouche?
“They told us this asbestos was perfectly safe!”
jg
Damn. I was hoping I’d get ya to move to Phoenix just by saying I bought it too. LOL.
Mr Furious
I just bought new tires for my ten year old POS Jetta! I had them throw the hubcaps in the trunk, ’cause it looks slightly tougher with the black wheels and all…
Hmm. New tires or new lenses for my glasses? This month, tires. This economy rocks!
Krista
LOL – Sorry hon. To me, a car is just a way to get from point A to point B. I would consider moving if you’d said you’d just bought a Piper Tomahawk, though…
Tim F
The problem with GM food isn’t necessarily what’s on the market today. The problem is if the trend takes off, and the technology becomes ubiquitous, and cheap, which it already more or less is, disreputable actors can start doing very bad things. Add a Republican administration manic for deregulating any industry that can afford a lobbyist and you will have dozens of fly-by-night firms doing god-knows-what and selling it with advertising and labeling just as deceptive as what we already have in every other corner of the food business.
“Nutritional supplements” serve as a good example. Fine idea in theory, as long as you buy a prominent name brand like Centrum. Problem is that it’s practically an unregulated industry, so the smaller brands are just as likely to sell you sawdust and paint flakes, often with so many heavy metals that you wonder whether they put it there on purpose. Or “frozen yogurt,” which went unregulated with the consequence that most of the crap sold under that label was considerably worse for you than ice cream in the first place.
How about “margarine?” Seemed like a great idea until we discovered that trans-fats are poison.
That’s not to say that GM foods as a whole are a bad idea. They’re not. Only that in the absence of regulation, and given the law of unintended consequences, a sneering triumphalist attitude is a pretty idiotic stance to take.
Krista
Yeah, I’m in the same boat as you, my friend. I had to borrow from the small amount I have set aside for retirement in order to pay for my new contact lenses. But, other than the constant strain of trying to make ends meet, I’m actually pretty happy with my life. The leaves are gorgeous right now, and the weekend is supposed to have nice weather, and I’ll be hiking up the side of a mountain, and will then settle back on my couch with my dog and a wee nip of Glen Breton single-malt. What could be better?
Tim F
BTW, I should add that I don’t think that “a sneering, triumphalist attitude” describes John at all. TallDave, perhaps.
Rick
Are these supposed to be eaten with a spork?
Cordially…
Mr Furious
Good one, Cordial Rick.
Krista, you’re too damn upbeat and easy-going… don’t grow up into a cynical ass like me.
Stormy70
Peace the spork out. If these smell, taste or look like broccoli, then EWWWWW!!!
Very pansy of you, John.
TallDave
MrFuriouslyMakingNoSense:
Ah yes, thank you for clarifying. The giant picture of Jonathon next to the article threw me.
Hmmm, Nathan B. Batalion, the actual author of the article, who claims biotech is “death science” and compares it to the Nazis, also appears to lack any credentials. So I’m not sure how that bolsters your point.
Asbestos is not genetically modified food. Science says asbestos is bad for you. Science says GM food is not bad for you. See how that works? I hope this was helpful.
TallDave
space,
Sorry, TallDave, it seems that you are a tad sensitive about being lumped in with the anti-science crowd.
Actually, it seems YOU are a tad sensitive about being “lumped in with the anti-science” crowd, since you’re the one objecting to it, not me. This is called “projection.”
Opposition to GM food isn’t based on a mystical belief the GM food is evil.
That’s exactly what it’s based on.
It is based on the practical concern GM food is more likely to present unexpected problems and that neither the government nor private industry are likely to do the rigorous testing to insure that a major (and possibly irreversible) public health problem does not arise.
Baloney. All GM foods are thoroughly tested before entering the food supply.
Clearly many people—apparently yourself included—are incapable of evaluating whether adequate research has been done.
Again, projection. Adequate research is done for all GM foods introduced into the food supply.
concluded that additional research needed to be done into the areas of “allergenicity, soil ecology, farmland biodiversity and consequences of gene flow” and emphasized that “applications need to be considered on a case-by case basis” as proof that GM food is “safe”. Brilliant.
Hey genius, what do you think they do after evaluating each application case? They say whether it’s “safe.” This has already been done for all GM food in the food supply.
GM opponents wisely recognize that because it may be impossible to force industry to properly consider every application on a case-by-case basis
That’s the stupidest thing in your whole comment, which is saying a lot. Why would it be impossible? We have things called “regulations” to do that.
TallDave
I love this thread. It’s so amusing to see green lefties resorting to the same crap arguments that fundy righties use to against stem cell research and for intelligent design.
The problem both sides have is that pretty much all the responsible scientists are on the record saying their arguments are crap.
But of course their faith is immune to rational argument. We shall prevail over logic and reason!
Krista
I just figure that life is way too damned short to get worked up over petty stuff that won’t matter in a year anyway. Either that, or the genetically modified food has altered my brain. (Or maybe it was all the weed I smoked in university.) As far as Franken-foods go, maybe I’m weird, but I don’t get too upset over it. Everything on earth is reputed to give you some form of cancer these days, so just nourish your body the best that you can, treat it occasionally with good wine, good cheese and good chocolate, and stop fretting so much.
TallDave
Oh, and I should point out that opposition to GM food is in fact causing more people to go blind in Africa. There is a variety of bioengineered crops that contain more Vitamin A, the deficiency of which causes millions to go blind.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=305572005
TallDave
OK one last blockquote:
John S.
Irony: She comes in many guises.
Tim F
‘Golden Rice’ won’t work for the same reason that brown rice, which has an even greater overall health benefit, doesn’t work: the cultural premium attached to pure, white rice.
And yet he votes Republican. The mind boggles.
Cassidy
Did Jane Finch just comment? I thought you had gone the way of Dukakis. I really miss your side over at Jay’s.
Hehehehehe…Mr. Cole comes closer to being a lefty everyday. Now it’s rabbit food. Pretty soon it will be a prius and an ACLU card. :)
TallDave
John S.,
Indeed, but all the facts seem to be on my side.
We have things called “regulations” to do that.
And yet he votes Republican. The mind boggles.
Yes, because Republicans oppose all regulations, no matter how sensible. The mind boggles, indeed.
I’ll happily vote Democrat the minute they start making more sense than the GOP.
‘Golden Rice’ won’t work for the same reason that brown rice, which has an even greater overall health benefit, doesn’t work: the cultural premium attached to pure, white rice
Blindness has a major cultural anti-premium attached to it. Besides, both those concerns are addresed.
Why not eat unmilled (brown) rice?
The natural lipid-rich cover of rice grains—called the aleurone layer—and which becomes visible after dehusking, is rich in some important nutrients, like vitamin B and yet rice is generally consumed in its milled form, ie with the outer layer removed. If not removed, the oils in the aleurone undergo natural oxidation processes that in turn makes the grain taste rancid very rapidly, particularly in tropical and sub-tropical climates. Milling improves the long-term storability of rice without loss of taste.
Most people prefer to eat white rice
White rice is the most commonly consumed form of rice. Golden Rice will be more like white rice in that it will be consumed as milled or polished rice, while it will deliver all of its benefits as brown rice also.
John S.
An interesting hypothesis.
Another fascinating postulate.
One question. Were you against regulations before you were for them?
demimondian
You know, I hate to ever do something as vile as agree with T.D. — but, John, he’s right.
The carotene-enhanced golden rice would, indeed, remain golden after being hulled. As T.D. says, brown rice is less sought-after in most cultures which use rice as a staple. Not only does brown rice spoil quickly, but it’s far more tedious to cook, and does not keep well once cooked.
That said, some GM foods are dangerous or toxic; we’ve just learned how to avoid the problems. We know how to reprocess potatoes to get rid of the alkaloids in their skins, for instance, and we know to remove the leaves from rhubarb and not eat them. Of course, we don’t think of demesticated varietals as being GM…but they are.
Tim F
TallDave,
You largely make perfect sense, at least with regards to products that have reached market today. You didn’t respond to my post about potential risks but that’s fine, arguing about hypotheticals entails more than a little navel-gazing. Suffice to say that aguing that what-is equals what-always-will-be is an unsafe position to take.
This, however, made me chortle:
There might be a “sensible” Republican who believes in “sensible” regulations, but he or she hasn’t been elected recently and he or she definitely won’t ever have a shot at the party leadership.
Tim F
BTW Dave, link to direct quotes. It’s ok if you’re not an agricultural scientist.
Tim F
Third post. Sue me.
A guy who uses ‘Democrat’ as an adjective will never vote Democratic. You can bet money on it.
Veeshir
Tall Dave is my hero. While Darren usually makes you guys look like nitwits for attacking him instead of his arguments, Tall Dave makes you look like nitwits when you try to attack his arguments. It’s really pretty funny to watch.
There might be a “sensible” Republican who believes in “sensible” regulations, but he or she hasn’t been elected recently and he or she definitely won’t ever have a shot at the party leadership.
Yeah, you remember all those Republicans voting to get rid of the FDA and USDA. And nobody, but nobody would ever suspect a Republican party leader would actually want more regulations in schooling, right?
Veeshir
Ummm, Sorry Darrell.
Veeshir
I should also comment on-topic.
Ewwwwwwww.
But I guess at least this way I get to avoid two foods I hate at one sitting. That’s efficiency.
I didn’t get a BMW this week, but I did get a new (used) IAI M1-carbine with collapsible stock. I walked into the gun shop saying, “I’m not getting a gun today, I’m not getting a gun today.” Then I saw it on the wall and was smitten. Love at first sight.
If it had a bigger bore we would be having sex right now.
Shygetz
TallDave (and others):
As a biochemist who seriously flirted with Big Agra before deciding to stay where I am, let me tell you that there is serious scientific concern about GM crops. It generally has little to do with human health (which is normally tested extensively before the food is brought to market), and has more to do with long-term environmental impact. I think that the biggest question is, how likely is it that the genes put into the crop will stay in that crop, and not spread to other vegetation through a process called horizontal gene transfer. The fear is that such horizontal gene transfer could lead to unintended consequences that would be impossible to reverse. There are a few studies (I think most are industry-led) looking into this phenomenon, but it’s a very tough question. The scientific anti-GM crowd generally wants to be conservative about releasing genetically-modified organisms into the environment without knowing how they will affect the current populations. Personally, I am pro-GM crops in most instances, but I can completely sympathize with the desire for caution.
Shygetz
And we would have an excellent entry for the annual Darwin Awards. Alas, it was not to be…
Tim F
You would accomplish the same thing by nominating dingbat hacks to run those departments.
demimondian
I know you’re snarking, but that approach has certainly worked wonders in the attempt to neuter the NIH, anyway.
demimondian
This is the appropriate stance. Horizontal transfer is well-established as a mechanism. The problem we have is that it’s very hard to quantify how much — or even if — horizontally transferred genes would actually contribute to the overall fitness of wild plants.
The issue is that the mechanism itself (horizontal transfer via recombination) is not new, and the genes that are _currently_ being inserted into plants are also not new. Thus, it’s impossible to determine how likely it is that the apparently novel recombinatants aren’t already in the ecosystem in other forms. If they are — and that’s the more probable case, in the absence of any evidence — then the marginal risk occasioned by HTVR is pretty small. However, if thay aren’t, that could be bad news.
As a result, caution is warranted. I don’t think we’ll have a conclusive answer for a couple of decades.
John S.
Everyone has to have one, I suppose…
Tim F
Am not.
Krista
Damn, man…if you actually have to have that conversation with yourself, you know you own way too many guns.
John S.
And now I understand why Veeshir posts what he does.
Kitty
well, have you ever tried broccollini?
“Broccolini is one of those relatively new hybrid vegetables, a cross between
broccoli and Chinese kale or gai lan. It was developed by a Japanese seed
company, the Sakata Seed Co. of America in Morgan Hill, Calif., and took about
eight years to perfect. Broccolini is also known as asparation – probably
intended to hint at an association with asparagus because the vegetable has a small
floret at the end of an asparagus-like stalk. This is in a way related to
rapini but it is not the same thing. Rapini does not produce the nice slim stalks
but rather produces a very, very slim stalk with bunches of leafy material.
With rapini, leafy material is cooked with flower stalks whereas brocolini only
the stalks are cooked.
I do not know if the seed is available yet as seed was only being distributed
to a few select growers in CA.”
Gray
Lead, Asbestos, Chromium VI, Radium based color, DDT, plasticizers, a lot of pharmaceuticals. There are lots of products who were once considered safe. For many of them, it took a long time, scientific research and controversy and reluctant political action to ban them from public use. In most cases the industries producing or using them fought hard against the mounting evidence, using every possible means to keep them in circulation. In the meantime, the use of those products resulted in countless people suffering.
It took even more time to uncover negative aspects of products to the environment and the food chain. Think of the story of Love Canal. And as an example of unintentional, but yet hazardous effects of human enterprise for the environment, think of the spreading of algaes because of shipping traffic or of the rabbit plague in Australia.
History tells us that it’s rational to be cautious with new products and releasing new plants and animals into an existing ecosphere, and that it may take several decades until negative consequences may be known. OK, tell us europeans overcautious, but we don’t gamble with our health and the well-being of future generations.
Veeshir
And now I understand why Veeshir posts what he does.
Yeah, my guns give me strength. Without my guns I’m just another guy, but with them I’m fucking Rambo baby!
Mentioning guns to liberals always cracks me up. One thinks I own too many without knowing how many I own. How many is too many? 1?
Another compassionate lefty wishes for me to kill myself.
Another thinks my guns affect the way I post online.
I have guns. Booo!
I even have, depending on your definition, two assault rifles. Booo!
Krista
Um…I said that because you mentioned walking into a gun store, and having to tell yourself over and over that you weren’t going to get a gun today, and you got one anyway. That tends to indicate that you have a very hard time resisting buying them, which would lead me to infer that you have a lot of them. Not unlike a shoe addiction, as it were. And just to throw your simplistic worldview into a complete loop-de-loop, I may be what you call a “lefty liberal”, but I’m not anti-gun. They’re a tool, and can be an extremely useful tool in the hands of a responsible person. Most people in my boyfriend’s family hunt, and I have no problem with that, as long as they’re not wasteful or cruel about it, and don’t hunt more than they will use. What I have a problem with is people who will go and purchase guns without taking even one safety course. What I have a problem with is idiots who are irresponsible enough to leave a loaded handgun in their nightstand when they have kids.
It’s two sides of the same coin, really. Most pro-gun people state the adage, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Whereas the unofficial adage of the gun-control movement is, “Guns allow idiots, who would normally just beat the snot out of each other, to shoot each other and innocent bystanders instead.” That’s the problem that a lot of people have with guns, and I can’t completely disagree — there are a lot of hotheaded people in the world, and adding a gun to the equation can turn what would be a brawl, into a crime scene.
Another Jeff
From broccosprouts to firearms. It’s always fascinating to see the twists and turns of the comments on any given subject.
Veeshir
Krista, the problem is that you can’t put the genie back in the bottle. It’s well over 500 years too late for gun control to do anything except keep guns out of law-abiding folks hands.
Krista
Veeshir – so just because the genie is out of the bottle, as it were, that’s a reason for anybody and their dog to be able to get a gun with no waiting period for criminal checks, no safety courses, and no instruction on how to store the things? Maybe I’m weird, but I think that anybody who has a legitimate reason to want a gun should not mind any of those conditions.
bago
How do you go from broccosprouts to guns? Seriously.
At any rate, I can’t wait for GE meats. Vat-grown meats in any texture you want. Food limited not by nature, but by your imagination. A steak you can spread like caviar. A chicken breast with a uniform grain. So many possibilities.