Comments on: No 'dead babies' in my beer? Oh my...

No 'dead babies' in my beer? Oh my...

vhsiv — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:52:04 -0800

In a surprise move, Anheuser-Busch has gone up against some of the biotech firms that would like to grow genetically-modified (GM) rice containing human DNA. The biotech firm that grows it says that their rice contains synthetic human genes which the company hopes to harvest and refine for use in medicines to fight diarrhea and dehydration.

Anheuser-Busch's concerns are not with the science of biotech, but rather the risk of crop-contamination, as has happened with farmers not only in the U.S. and Canada, but all over the world. The USDA has issued rice-tweakers Ventria Bioscience and 300 other biopharmers permission to plant various augmented plants around the country since 1995, but Anheuser-Busch is the first large corporation to threaten a boycott - unusual, because poultry and beef stock (PDF) are fed this kind of thing every day, and have been for the past 20 years. I guess the Budweiser brewers just don't want to see 'dead people' in their suds...

On the flip-side of this occurrence, the response of the anti-stem cell activists has been nothing short of sensory-deprivation. Shouldn't six-packs, cornfields and Porky be given the same human rights as the unborn?

Also related: Contaminated: The New Science of Food (quicktime movie)

By: jsavimbi

jsavimbi — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:04:20 -0800

vhsiv, nice post.

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:04:52 -0800

What is being ignored here is that rice is not an ingredient of beer. I can't believe when you look at the Budweiser can they actually advertise how they use rice.

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:06:12 -0800

It was a nice post up until the gratuitous strawman in the third paragraph.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:08:15 -0800

mmmm synthetic human genes. The two major problems I have with GMO food, at this point, is I am not convinced enough is know about the long term effects this may have on people. And crop drift, it is near impossible to keep plants from cross pollinating, and as has been pointed out elsewhere some corporations have tried to sue farmers when unauthorized plants have shown up in their field. Then there is the whole idea of making the plants sterile so farmers are forced to buy all of each years new seed. I am not 100% against bio engineering, but I believe we are being too sloppy with implementation.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:10:09 -0800

Pardon, I think my post may have mixed a few ideas togeather that are actually seperate ideas on the same topic.

By: BigLankyBastard

BigLankyBastard — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:10:25 -0800

Allow me to be the first to say, "I, for one welcome our new ricey overlords..." Also, CoolTim is dead right about rice in beer - it's unnatural, I tell you.

By: schyler523

schyler523 — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:17:49 -0800

As much as I dislike Budweiser (even though it's my hometown brew), I dislike Monsanto et. al. more. Now if Anheuser-Busch starts funding Organic farmers, and/or anti-GMO activist groups, I would at least extend an olive branch. OTOH, Anheuser-Busch is one of the largest contributors to lobbying against marijuana reform, so i might just keep the olive branch to myself. TheOnlyCoolTim has a point though...rice in beer = teh suck.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:23:28 -0800

Anheuser-Busch Cos., the nation's No. 1 buyer of rice as well as its largest brewer, says it won't buy rice from Missouri if genetically-modified medicinal crops are allowed to be grown in the state. Who is Bud feeding rice to? My guess, CNN made a type...burrrrrrrrrrb!

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:24:37 -0800

typo,typo, typo -- call me: cnn.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:28:56 -0800

Rice provides Budweiser with its characteristic lightness, crispness and refreshing taste. Many brewers use only four ingredients in beer – water, barley malt, hops and yeast. The additional step of brewing Budweiser with rice provides the balance necessary to create its trademark refreshing taste, "drinkability" and crispness. While "extra," this step is critical to the unique taste of Budweiser. Anheuser-Busch is the largest purchaser of rice in the United States, accounting for more than 8 percent of all domestic rice consumption. The company owns rice mills in Arkansas and California. from thier site For not knowing, do I have to switch my beer to wine?

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:31:59 -0800

Anheuser-Busch is one of the largest contributors to lobbying against marijuana reform, so i might just keep the olive branch to myself. Thought that was Coors? I have heard Coors for 15 years now. Anyone want to fill us in with the actual truth since the commenting is becoming slurring drunk.

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:34:08 -0800

For not knowing, do I have to switch my beer to wine? Just buy some good beer instead.

By: schyler523

schyler523 — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:36:52 -0800

trademark refreshing taste, "drinkability" and crispness. Oh, you must mean that refreshing, drinkable, crisp watery taste? I prefer not to be able to see through my beer, and/or being able to tell the difference between my beer and urine by sight. Not to mention preferring not to have people in my beer. What next? Soylent Bud? That kid from the 6th Sense saying "Bud Ice, ICY Dead People!" On Preview: thomcatspike, I'm not privvy to the actual numbers, i assume that Coors is up there as well. Please note that i said "one of the largest."

By: lagavulin

lagavulin — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:41:12 -0800

Try the real Budweiser. It contains neither rice nor 'dead babies'.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:43:36 -0800

hey ... i don't want just ANYONE to be my bud

By: Divine_Wino

Divine_Wino — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:46:47 -0800

The additional step of brewing Budweiser with rice provides the balance necessary to create its trademark refreshing taste, "drinkability" and crispness. It might be all the above or it might be that rice provides budweiser trademark shittyness, morning after spicy ass and thundering deathwish headaches that even the most debased of KKK produced 99 cent tall cans of malt liquor cannot equal. This post makes me thirsty for beers. I like bud, btw. In spite of or because of itself. Slushy cold in a bar bottle with a shot of Wild Turkey on the side. Oh lordy.

By: Divine_Wino

Divine_Wino — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:03:50 -0800

From the CNN link: Ventria is seeking USDA approval to grow rice genetically enhanced with synthetic human genes to produce the proteins lactoferrin and lysozyme, which the company hopes to harvest and refine for use in medicines to fight diarrhea and dehydration. I guess in other words, Budweiser wants to maintain its stature as Americas largest enabler of diarrhea and dehydration. Also: "The St. Louis-based beer giant", fucking trite ass Journalists, that article is the platonic ideal of information and analysis free filler, the American press is doomed. Also: What, can we speculate, is the actual reason that A-B doesn't want this? My sense is that they can't really care about genetic drift in crops all that much(Pace market above all dudes, it might be pure altruism)? Where is the threat?

By: nofundy

nofundy — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:27:20 -0800

Mmmm... FrankenBeer! To wash down all my FrankenFood!

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:40:14 -0800

There are too many issues mixed up in this post; it's very confused. Let's just start by making a distinction between this rice, which will be harvested for the enzymes it produces and used to make medicine, with general GMO crops, which are modified by recombinant genetic engineering technology and used as food. Cross-contamination is certainly a concern in both cases, but Ventria is apparently taking steps (using a closed system) to prevent it. Since Ventria is not marketing their rice as a food crop, there won't be the kind of widespread adoption that we've seen with GMO corn and soybeans. This minimizes the chances of cross-contamination. I'm with Divine_Wino: it's weird that A-B would choose this to get up in arms about. Also, "dead babies": what the fuck, vhsiv!? And, rice beer: what the fuck, Anheuser-Busch!?

By: vhsiv

vhsiv — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:50:40 -0800

That kid from the 6th Sense saying "Bud Ice, ICY Dead People!" posted by schyler523 OMFG - ROFLMAO. It's sure ~~not~~ to appear in Budweiser's next ad campaign. Then again, a bottle of Bud might have saved Mischa Barton's Mom a bottle of toilet bowl cleaner...

By: vhsiv

vhsiv — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:57:49 -0800

Also, "dead babies": what the fuck, vhsiv!? posted by mr_roboto at 2:40 PM EST on April 14 Frankenfood - it's what's for dinner. In all seriousness, this is an issue that all of the right-to-lifers ought to be getting behind, moreso than stem-cell research. But that's just MHO.

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:09:16 -0800

In all seriousness, this is an issue that all of the right-to-lifers ought to be getting behind, moreso than stem-cell research. Do you mean right-to-lifers should be getting behind it moreso than your average concerned citizen? I don't see how that follows from the right-to-life position. Inserting human genes into non-human organisms can be and is done without destroying anything the right-to-lifers consider a human being, so I don't see why they'd have a problem with it. (That is, more of a problem with it by virtue of being pro-life than anyone else would.)

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:17:28 -0800

In all seriousness, this is an issue that all of the right-to-lifers ought to be getting behind, more so than stem-cell research. But that's just MHO. All due respect, but that seems like a pretty uninformed opinion, both theologically and scientifically. Some (most?) strains of Christian theology hold that an embryo is imbued with a soul at the moment of conception: when the sperm enters the egg. From this point forth, the fertilized embryo is, in spiritual terms, a human being. To abort such an embryo once it is implanted--or to destroy it to obtain stem cells--would be to kill a human being. This is why these Christians oppose abortion and stem cell research. Recombinant human proteins are produced by inserting a human gene into an "expression vector": these vectors can be bacteria, yeast cells, insect cell cultures, or, in the case we're discussing here, plants. The human genes are obtained either completely synthetically or by amplifying genes obtained from tissue samples in a laboratory process. No one is killed in the process. No conception takes place. No embryos are destroyed. There's nothing whatsoever in the process that has any overlap with the Christian theological concerns inherent in embryotic stem cell research. Nothing. Frankenfood - it's what's for dinner. Have you even read the article you've linked to? We're not talking about a food crop!

By: vhsiv

vhsiv — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:20:33 -0800

Meant to add: The recent Bush Admin. disclosures about the GM corn that shipped to Europe is a cautionary tale in its own right. I don't care about party affiliations here, but THREE MONTHS!! Puh-leeze... And here's another story about GM rice sold in China. What the fuck, indeed. And on preview, DevilsAdvocate, not just left-Dem-Satan Worshippers, but EVERYBODY. Since this is a hot-button issue, the people who lead the charge against stem-cell research should be similarly interested in this variety of genetic manipulation, even if it DOES make a lot of money for Republican campaign contributors.

By: vhsiv

vhsiv — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:32:36 -0800

repeat, ^above:BEIJING (Reuters) - Wed Apr 13, 5:40 AM ET - Genetically modified rice is being sold in markets in the central Chinese province of Hubei, even though the authorities have not yet approved its sale in China, Greenpeace charged Wednesday. link

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:40:11 -0800

Since this is a hot-button issue, the people who lead the charge against stem-cell research should be similarly interested in this variety of genetic manipulation, You have failed to understand why those who lead the charge against stem-cell research do so. It is not merely because stem cell research is "genetic manipulation," as mr_roboto explained. You might wish that the reason pro-lifers were opposed to stem cell research was a blanket opposition to all genetic engineering, but that is not the case.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:44:10 -0800

Some (most?) strains of Christian theology hold that an embryo is imbued with a soul I'd stay with "some." Most is like saying; the majority in the USA voted for Bush.

By: togdon

togdon — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:26:29 -0800

I find it far more disturbing that they're using rice as an adjunct at all. The Germans really had something with that whole Rheinheitsgebot. Water, Malt, Hops, Yeast... that's all you should really need.

By: euphorb

euphorb — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:16:59 -0800

This question isn't directly related but at what point would a vegetarian, say a devout Hindu, be unable to eat genetically modified rice that contained animal genes?

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:27:48 -0800

GREAT thread and post. Thanks.

By: nofundy

nofundy — Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:34:52 -0800

The blastocyst Americans are also opposed to FrankenFoods, just ask their representative Randall Terry.