Subscription Center
Feb 26, 2009 06:05 PM | 9
Remember when Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin dissed research on fruit flies? Well, the little buggers—a favorite of scientists who like studying their genome and the bane of kitchens everywhere—are back in the spotlight, this time with news that technology could one day spot olives spoiled by the flies.
Olive processors typically look for fruit fly damage by hand. But U.S. Department of Agriculture researchers testing an x-ray sorting device found that it detected undamaged olives 90 percent of the time and ruined ones 86 percent of the time, according to the agency's Agricultural Research magazine.
Since the machine uses film x-rays, it isn’t ready for prime time. But a device that utilized digital x-rays could analyze olive imagery in hundredths of a second, according to the magazine.
Take a bite out of that!
Image of Mexican fruit fly/USDA via Wikimedia Commons
Tags:
Sarah Palin,
olive,
fruit flies
More News Blog:
Next: Microsoft Vista voted tech world's top "Fiasco"
Previous: The body politic: Can we tell from pols' faces if they're competent?
See what we're tweeting about
David_Bressan Origami T-rex stalks the "Paper Age" until electric extinction http://t.co/d1z8ptDQ0V
SteveMirsky Stumbled onto a cheesecake taste test today at the @FairwayMarket in Pelham Manor, NY. Very difficult to decide. Had to do multiple trials. David_Bressan Pleistocene Mammals of the La Brea Tar Pits, a lecture http://t.co/koNWrmljvq
Deadline: Jul 15 2013
Reward: $5,000 USD
SciBX: Science-Business eXchange, a joint publication from the makers
Deadline: Jun 30 2013
Reward: $1,000,000 USD
This is a Reduction-to-Practice Challenge that requires written documentation and&
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
9 Comments
Add CommentWell, OK, we've got some new tech from the on-going (probably world wide) research using fruit flies. The real point is that Totally Blonde Sarah Palin doesn't have a clue - even about the PAST benefits of studying fruit flies. Otherwise, she'd have chosen more wisely what to criticize before her mesmerized audiences.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot that I'm a big Sarash Palin fan, but doesn't this research support her contention? Why is the USDA spending my tax dollars on x-raying olives, when they should be x-raying peanuts?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy was it important to attack Sarah Palin in this article? Government officials have to make choices every day on what is or isn't important enough to spend tax dollars on. There just isn't enough money for everything that is important and EVERYTHING is important if look at it closely enough. Maybe you should call yourself a tabloid rather than trying to pass as a science magazine.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou say that now, kOnphLikteD, but what will you be saying if people start being sickened from tainted olives? We can't just start testing peanuts and declare "mission accomplished" in our fight against tainted food - unless you are proposing we all go on an all-peanut diet.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo answer your question, AVansant, it's always important to attack Palin because the people need to be constantly reminded that she is a seriously dangerous idiot as are the majority of republicans today.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow, what a great device it only throws away 10% of the good fruit and accepts 14% of the bad fruit. Sounds like if they invest a few hundred million more they might have something that works part of the time. I think Sarah was 100% right on. Her ideas are much better than giving Acorn a few billion dollars and calling it STIMULUS. How much is going to be wasted on Global Warming? Hasn't anyone noticed that the planet has been warming since the last ice age and burning gasoline and coal has only been significant the last hundred years. You Global Warming cool aid drinkers are the major idiots.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoes Sarah Palin still think "Intelligent Design" should be taught as science? These people should be exposed for what they are and never allowed to 'run' our country again.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSadly, this article is badly written, which is about what I've come to expect from this Scientific American blog.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are confusing research on fruit flies (Drosophila) for genetics--which has been invaluable--with research on fruit flies as a pest insect.
Palin should absolutely be slammed for making fun of genetic research on Drosophila fruit flies. So much of what we know and are able to use in human health today began (and continues) with fruit fly research. Shame on her for her ignorance.
However, This research is about a different fly--Bactrocera. An important pest insect, but not the same as what Palin was talking about.
And, of course, the insect in the photo isn't an olive fruit fly, or a Drosophila, but why quibble.
The scary point here is that Sarah Palin apparently was unaware of the value of genetic research using fruit flies, which is pretty basic in terms of biological education. What is more frightening is that she was chosen as a vice-presidential candidate, as well as the number of people who supported her, despite her consummate ignorance on so many levels.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this