Zelia, so glad you posted this!

I read the first link and it's frightening, I urge EVERYONE to read it. Because this Dr. Ordovas is laying out the way American researchers will be motivated to study this...by getting profit motivated business sponsorship intent on MODIFYING individual foodstuffs (bioengineering, genetically modified foods, or GMO)

NO NO NO. &^%^^*(*^%$$ ***ards are going to kill us all if they don't stop this "franken-food" approach.


There are two approaches to this, one, you study the humans, and tell them how to eat what already exists to be the healthiest, or two, you study the humans and the food and figure out how to change the seedstock of crops so the food is genetically changed and you can sell it for more and have the keepers of the seedstock make a profit.


quote from your first link:
"CHA: Could the term nutrigenomics extend to the modification of crops and agricultural commodities for enhanced nutritional value?

Dr. Ordovas: Yes, and I know this type of work is underway now.

CHA: How will nutrigenomic research affect food development?

Dr. Ordovas: In Europe, there are problems with GMO food, so it will not go far. But I can foresee elsewhere the existence of bar codes for personalized nutrition products in addition to regular foods. Dietary supplement companies will customize their products as well.

CHA: Do Americans want genetically modified food that has enhanced nutritional value? What about Europeans?

Dr. Ordovas: Americans? That is difficult. I do not know. How would you sell the product? I think food companies will be reluctant. It must be done in a way that does not raise suspicions. The Europeans will not be accepting at all, in the short term, because of the strong political influence there against GMOs. (bolding is mine)

CHA: Will other countries and/or regions, such as Asia, want genetically modified food with enhanced nutritional value?

Dr. Ordovas: Asia and Africa have done without for a long time. They have a more practical attitude and will be more accepting. Perhaps the fruits of this work will appear first in these places.

CHA: How does the current regulatory and safety environment affect food development, in your view?

Dr. Ordovas: That is such a broad question; I am not sure how to answer it."


Well, of course he can't answer it. The probability of someone screwing up and tinkering with a crop that has long term undesirable health effects because some researcher didn't realize that adding more protein by tinkering with the species of the genes in the grain, for example, set off allergies or other digestive problems in susceptable individuals. He knows that, he just can't admit it.

They always love to use "Africa" as an example of how they need to modify foods being grown, because Africa is so poor. The ability to feed Africans exists right now, it is the political landscape of the world and Africans (rotten bad luck being colonized in the past) themselves that keeps them hungry. It is not going to change by having a few large corporations controlling WHAT is grown.

I was familiar with the concept of humane genome studies, the National Geographic is doing a large one, and they have pages that explain the way they are tracing back the history of human migration and human agriculture and linking certain genes (and therefore characteristics) to certain foods.

National Geographic Genographic Project article on evolution, migration, agriculture

People adapt to what is available... if you change what is available you may either change human beings long term or destroy them by modifying their crops and then selectively targeting access to those modified crops.

I saw a news commentary on this last summer by Ron Reagan junior where he was saying he was NOT going to eat peaches with identification bar codes lasered onto them, at the time it was quite funny, but he had an excellent and sobering point...there is too much food being produced and consumed to be able to keep track of it by BAR CODING IT.

We need to be the canaries in the coal mines on this, and insist our respective governments, if and when they engage in this type of research, do it for good and not evil. I am absolutely not against research, I am against the current mindset of some who insist that anything that is not "profitable" is not worth doing, and that the free market forces will fix any mistakes made.