[dohboi]

"far more good minimizing their ... GMO crop consumption"

A bit hard to do when it's not labeled!

[PrestonSturges]

This anti-vaxxer quack physician told a mother whose daughter died of chicken pox that it was the mothers fault for letting the kid eat GMO food and gluten, and that she would not have died if she'd been taken to a chiropractor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... notoriety/
Well that was enough to convince me!

[Pops]

Pew research says
"A majority of the general public (57%) says that genetically modified (GM) foods are generally unsafe to eat, while 37% says such foods are safe; by contrast, 88% of AAAS scientists say GM foods are generally safe."
http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/p ... d-society/

Those of course are all industry shills.

[PrestonSturges]

I'd love to see a fresh approach to food safety, where we list the toxicity of all foods. Practically every vegetable we eat has significant toxicity. Eat a couple pounds of nothing but organic carrots or beets or celery or figs or soy a day (with the appropriate supplements for balanced nutrition) and in couple weeks you will be sick from the natural toxins accumulating in your body.

[dinopello]

It's more the concept of genetic engineering that I'm concerned about rather than any particular creation. Being an engineer myself, I know that our creations often have early versions that are defective or have latent issues that only come to fore after deployment. When dealing with self-replicating, mutating things that can be a little scary.

[dohboi]

+1

[dohboi]

pstarr, once again, totally misses the point.

[Shaved Monkey]

Corporations owning patents on food to control people and economies

The US embassy in Paris advised Washington to start a military-style trade war against any Euroxpean Union country which opposed genetically modified (GM) crops, newly released WikiLeaks cables show.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/j ... u-gm-crops

[dissident]

Corporations owning patents on food to control people and economies

The US embassy in Paris advised Washington to start a military-style trade war against any Euroxpean Union country which opposed genetically modified (GM) crops, newly released WikiLeaks cables show.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/j ... u-gm-crops

And I am supposed to give these maggots the benefit of the doubt. Nope. I prefer results from researchers who understand the biochemistry and from farmers who see the crop "perform". The GM crop + glyphosate concoction is poison. It is a corner-cutting, non-sustainable opportunist business racket.

[dinopello]

It's more the concept of genetic engineering that I'm concerned about rather than any particular creation. Being an engineer myself, I know that our creations often have early versions that are defective or have latent issues that only come to fore after deployment.

Like many engineers you are highly trained in your field (a thoroughbred among donkeys ) but may know less about other specialized fields.

Well, you're correct about not knowing. The level of complexity in today's technology precludes me from even knowing everything about the systems I work on, much less all biological and chemical systems.

Is there any line in this field that concerns you ? Are you just as OK with genetically modified animals for consumption ? I admit that for whatever reason the plant GMO would concern me less than animal. But genetically modifying apples so they don't look bad when they rot just seems like an unnecessary risk to me.

[PrestonSturges]

--terminator genes are self-limiting
.

Terminator genes were never marketed, even though many activists are convinced they are fighting a heroic battle against them. If they were, we would not be hearing the hysteria about cross contamination, which is the result of the kerfuffle about terminator genes 25 years ago.

But they are in fact they are used routinely in plant breeding, and these traits have not escaped to create the GMO apocalypse.

Arguing these points is like bickering with antivaxxers.

[PrestonSturges]

Arguing these points is like bickering with antivaxxers.

True that. We need to revisit the terminator gene thing with the anti-GMO folks.

Here is a question to you anti-GMO folks: how would terminator gene be a threat if it self-terminates?

Because the sterility will spread! It's just like if you have a vasectomy, your kids won't have kids either, and neither will their kids until the whole planet is sterile, and the human race is extinct!!!!!!

[dohboi]

What have the wonderful benefits of this technology been and who has benefited? Is there now no more hunger in the world?

It yet another powerful tool put in the hands of the psycho/sociopaths that run the corporations.

In this case it has mainly served to allow farmers to put more roundup on their crop (when the crops themselves aren't exuding the stuff), making already quite sterile fields even more so. So we are even more dependent on fossil input to keep soil nutrients up. So when things crash we will be even more f'd.

Thanks for your support of this wonderful system.

[careinke]

I'd love to see a fresh approach to food safety, where we list the toxicity of all foods. Practically every vegetable we eat has significant toxicity. Eat a couple pounds of nothing but organic carrots or beets or celery or figs or soy a day (with the appropriate supplements for balanced nutrition) and in couple weeks you will be sick from the natural toxins accumulating in your body.

Yet we raise meat animals using exactly this method, and still believe the meat is healthy. Present day large scale meat production brings sick meat to the table.

To bring this post back around to the topic......

I believe all GMO crops today are used in a manner that is harmful to the Earth and I challenge anyone to show me a GMO crop that enhances the soil or provides any other benefit directly to the earth.

As my first ethic is: "Care of the earth," I would prefer not to eat GMO foods. Unfortunately, the commercial producers do not have to disclose if they are using Genetically Modified Organisms in their products. Their claim is GMO corn is the same as non GMO corn so it does not need to be listed. My question is, if it's the same, how can you patent it (don't even get me started about patented life)?

My other objection is we are just not smart enough to safely employ transgenetic engineering. The risk is too high.

On the bright side, it is eventually going to disappear, along with todays current large scale agriculture, because it's simply not sustainable. In the meantime, there is a growing number of us experimenting with better ways of doing things.

[PrestonSturges]

I'd love to see a fresh approach to food safety, where we list the toxicity of all foods. Practically every vegetable we eat has significant toxicity. Eat a couple pounds of nothing but organic carrots or beets or celery or figs or soy a day (with the appropriate supplements for balanced nutrition) and in couple weeks you will be sick from the natural toxins accumulating in your body.

Yet we raise meat animals using exactly this method, and still believe the meat is healthy. Present day large scale meat production brings sick meat to the table.

And yet soy has a variety of toxic compounds and is a potent cause of allergies, while meat is not. Where's the petitions to ban soy?

Imagine if Monsanto had just invented onions and said "It tastes great but it might kill your dog." Imagine the outrage and the world wide campaign to ban onions. Well onions can kill your dog. So where's the petitions to ban onions?

[careinke]

And yet soy has a variety of toxic compounds and is a potent cause of allergies, while meat is not. Where's the petitions to ban soy?

Imagine if Monsanto had just invented onions and said "It tastes great but it might kill your dog." Imagine the outrage and the world wide campaign to ban onions. Well onions can kill your dog. So where's the petitions to ban onions?

A lot of people refuse to eat soy as 95% of it is GMO.

Monsanto would only invent an onion that required the use of it's chemicals. Monsanto is primarily a chemical company.

[Pops]

I think the survey I linked makes sense and is proved right here, the overwhelming proof is that GOMs are not harmful but we still think they ought to be - I personally still FEEL they ought to be bad or may be bad someday or could be bad - even though I argue they aren't proved to be bad. Partly because of the stories about Evil Monsanto, and partly because of some vestigial religious taboo I suppose about tinkering with life - or maybe it's just my Luddite showing. I'm sure folks thought the same about Mendel and his wrinkly peas back when as the do about RR corn today.

Here is the key point that is never mentioned:
there is no proof GMO crops and glyphosate are harmful and
there are mountains of proof that the herbicides and diesel fuel they replace are.


Glyphosate is losing effectiveness. 1st gen RR Seed is off patent and the 2nd has nothing new. Gene splicing itself probably reduces yield but the trade for the farmer is reduced labor (trips through the field) and fuel - the benefit for everyone else it reduces known bad chemical use - including diesel.

It's nice to dream we'll all be pastoralists or hunter gatherers but urban cliff dweller* seem to be the bigger trend
.

(newfie's coinage I think)

---
ETA, a couple of articles - this one about planting non-GMO
http://modernfarmer.com/2013/12/post-gmo-economy/

RR Alfalfa
http://hayandforage.com/alfalfa/what-gr ... dy-alfalfa

And this one that looks like science but probably not:
http://www.independentsciencenews.org/c ... -soybeans/