Once a Rose - Forever a Rose ? or at least 2 weeks

Ddid not check if this already was discussed here but anyways, “anti-wilt patent” courtesy of Monsanto? Note in MIT Technology newsletter. RNA manipulation.

"… Starting two years ago, Monsanto scientists Jill Deikman and Nicholas Wagner attempted to use RNA to interfere with the ability of cut flowers to make ethylene, an odorless gas known to plant scientists as “the aging hormone. … Monsanto claims in its patent document that it had some success blocking the hormone by doping vase water with RNA designed to block ethylene production. Plants got ratings after two weeks: “ideal open bloom,” “slight curling,” and “fully dessicated.””

That sounds kind of scary…imagine “produce” that won’t decay. And, what effects might the stray RNA have when loosed in the environment?

Kinda like the GMO apples that do not turn brown to show how much they have oxidized? And then you can eat them and nutritionally they are next to worthless. Some advocates say they are nutritionally equivalent whereas a laboratory study shows that they contain at least 15% less nutrition. And who knows what else?

They definitely don’t TASTE like “real” produce. One of our stores had a “deal” GMO pineapples. It looked and felt ripe, but even sauteing it so the heat would caramelize the sugars, it was NOT sweet at all. It won’t GET sweet. So much for “feeding the masses” with engineering.

We are surrounded by bits of RNA and DNA all the time. Plants produce interfering RNA to defend against viruses that their ancestors have “seen”. Usually the RNA pieces are very specific for a particular virus species. This is the plant’s immune system. So Dr Deikman is inducing an autoimmune response so to speak, by making the plant block one of its own normal enzymes. The naked RNA has a half-life generally in the range of minutes within a cell, or in water that has bacteria in it. It will last some few seconds in a stomach, unless it is cleverly packaged. A colleague of mine is a packager.

I don’t know of any GMO apples in a store yet; lots of controlled atmosphere storage ones, but not GMO. Papayas and some summer squash are the only fruits I could find listed anywhere that are regularly marketed. I see there have been focus groups in S.F. and a couple other places for the non-browning apples. They get a pass on the GMO argument because what was done was to insert extra copies of the gene that is normally present. Then the plant thinks “Oh, this must be a virus to make so much messenger RNA” and the plant turns on its chopper system to destroy that mRNA, in turn preventing the plant from making the enzyme that causes browning. Some cultivars are naturally low in browning and can sit out cut for a day without changing color much. Other fine old varieties like Lodi, turn brown within 2-3 minutes. So the argument is we’re just improving a normal system. Can’t comment on nutrients. I know controlled-atmosphere storage doesn’t improve flavor, and only some varieties respond well to C-A.

Food quality does tend to degrade with age, especially in the case of fruits and vegetables. It is my personal belief that any tampering with produce in an attempt to disguise age and quality is doing the public a great disservice. Big Ag has degraded the quality of the nutrients that soil had been capable of supporting in foodcrops with the use of the big 3 (N P K) by way of petro based fertilizers. There are many quite harmless, advantageous, and sometimes only cosmetic uses for GMO’s that often get bashed along with the more harmful GMO’s. For example: I am a Celiac–I cannot eat most glutens, gliadins, glutinins, and many lectins. I used to buy a product made by Nature Valley that was a gluten free oat based bar. I can no longer eat this bar without becoming ill (takes about 10 days to clear this from my system-I do not use some of the enzymes made especially for accidental gluten consumption–I just try my best to eat real food without the above proteins) and I believe it might be because Nature Valley uses oats that have been sprayed with Glysophate to enhance and speed up its’ drying so it can be processed faster. Supposedly they have not made any other changes to their formula that should be harmful to my digestive system. But you would not want to be me after eating these bars now. I do not have an across the board objection to tinkering with plant genetics. Just when they contain edible, not easily tested contents that are very questionable and are even banned in countries that are far better at protecting consumers over corporate interests. I for one would welcome the development of a true blue rose and even if it was only used for cut flowers, would see no harm in this. Edibles should be held to a much higher standard.

do believe it does get sorted out in the end what is acceptable - however the GMO is still a mystery to me - I do remember Kauai locals seem to have a strong issue with it.

… but I would get annoyed when I would purchase yellow “Safeway” roses and swore i prep’d right and they would droop / wilt - some before opening - in a day or two.

Okay so I am a bit off here, but Jackie do you ever “test” if “Starbucks” oatbar unsettling (cross contam)? … it is a morning staple but I searched and could not find GF designation and get no violent reaction - I am one who was late diagnosed with stage 3A and 4 but declared self-repaired (no cure) by biopsy

I’m no apologist for Big Ag, just letting you know what’s up with RNA or DNA. What we engineer is in some ways totally independent of Big Ag. But the regulatory mess drives things into their arms. Only a really wealthy team can afford to go through all the hoops. that’s why a couple thousand really good traits are languishing in freezers somewhere.

Gluten-free is defined as a limiting amount of gluten by some specific assay. You can look up numbers. I was reading them for my sister-in-law a couple weeks ago but don’t keep them in my head. It’s about impossible to assure a true 0 given all the wheat in the world and how things are shipped and processed, starting with the farmer’s grain truck.

Some brands will be better than others; likely particular seasons will vary. Certainly different processing locations for a single brand will vary some. It’s similar to the challenge of microbial contamination to track down. Obviously it is possible, but expensive.

There is already a good antiethylene compound available to add to cut flowers. I’m not sure why Monsanto would bother with RNA for that. I expect it is a marketing thing and the real targets are something that doesn’t have a good inhibitor available. Maybe they want to assure pollen sterility? (I seriously doubt there are enough breeders wanting pollen from cut flowers to justify that notion.)

Thanks Larry for the info, there has been great progress in the number of products available (at a higher price) for those with the intolerance (more likely as a result of the “Wheat Belly” fad). Based on the premise the GF really is GF … I need to check if the GF is backed by corporate trust or an ISO 9000 equivalent “certification requirements” board … though only one I trust at the moment is the Canadian celiac association branding. It allowed its name to “brand as acceptable” one product so far that i noticed … market limited to 35,000 individuals +/- in Canada excluding the Wheat Belly fad.

BTW I I keep saying every year this year has been an unbelievably good growing year for my roses building on about 5 years in a row - rebloom has been 20 to 45% of spring’s density - must be confirming my area really has moved to 4A from 3A (Canadian). Though lets see if El Nina rebirth balances out the stats database out this coming winter … back looking at Geschwind’s and “centifolia” again.