How Driscoll’s Is Hacking the Strawberry of the Future

Re:How Driscoll’s Is Hacking the Strawberry of the Future by crististm on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @02:55PM (#9970790)

I'd like natural strawberries, thank you very much!!!

Edit: The downvoters are free to be subjects for future genetic engineering projects themselves.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Driscoll’s Is Hacking the Strawberry of the Future by trcollinson on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @03:19PM (#9970953)

All of the down voters are already subjects of genetic engineering projects. Two specimens were brought together. Their dna was shared and 23 chromosomes were combined from each of the specimens to create a new experimental offspring.

I imagine that many of the down voters also are creating future genetic engineering projects in much the same way. Attempting to, and occasionally succeeding in, combining their dna with another specimen to create offspring.

If only we had more natural human creation as opposed to this GMO human combination that seems to be popping up in the marketplace...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Driscoll’s Is Hacking the Strawberry of the Future by cwal37 on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @03:50PM (#9971148)

The really hilarious thing is that this article is entirely about traditional breeding. Genetic engineering or modification isn't mentioned even once. Your bias is kind of amusing in how reactionary it is.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Driscoll’s Is Hacking the Strawberry of the Future by searine on Wednesday July 29, 2015 @05:02PM (#9971543)

>Edit: The downvoters are free to be subjects for future genetic engineering projects themselves.

Where do you think food came from in the first place?

Do you seriously think strawberries are in any way a product of a natural process?

[ Parent | on HN ]