It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

March Against Monsanto Explodes Globally

page: 11
65
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
They've seen too many sci-fi films. Unfortunately genetics and DNA are thoroughly understood by only a few people. It seems like to most, GMOs are something they're being "infected" with. All that foreign plant and animal DNA that you eat every day is digested into the simple components which are identical to your own.
a reply to: Metallicus




posted on May, 26 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Parthin
They've seen too many sci-fi films. Unfortunately genetics and DNA are thoroughly understood by only a few people. It seems like to most, GMOs are something they're being "infected" with. All that foreign plant and animal DNA that you eat every day is digested into the simple components which are identical to your own.
a reply to: Metallicus






So messing with DNA can cause no problems....Could you provide some proof of this claim? And you also make the claim genetics and DNA are thoroughly understood......YA RIGHT. If this was the case they would not need to study it right...........
edit on 26-5-2015 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 02:19 PM
link   
A lack of understanding of what is specialty science is the root cause of the protests. Of course genetics research is ongoing, as is research in every branch of science. The mechanisms of gene expression are thoroughly understood.
Every GMO must undergo FDA testing before it is released.
a reply to: SubTruth



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
This is the science of Roundup-ready crop plants. Read it if you want; it's not a big secret. To sum it up, Roundup renders an essential plant enzyme inoperable, causing plants to die. A very similar version of the enzyme was found in some bacteria. This version worked, but was not affected by Roundup. The DNA segment that made this enzyme replaces the normal DNA segment in the GMO plants. The recombinant DNA enzyme has no effect on humans, and is simply digested.

www.pnas.org...



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Parthin

You know what else has DNA identical to our own? Cancer cells. The fact is no one knows the long term effects of consuming recombinant DNA on humans because we are just now getting to the end of the first generation. Just being exposed to certain chemicals- not even ingesting them- can cause mutation which can lead to cancer and other illnesses. Hell, even too much sunlight can cause genetic mutation.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, GMOs could be completely harmless. I just don't want to look back in 20 years and go "Doh! I shouldn't have been eating that." So if you want to think I'm some paranoid conspiracy nut, fine. Just label them so I can avoid them. And you can eat them all day every day.

Some other things deemed 'harmless' by the scientific community: asbestos, nuclear power, cigarettes, thalidomide, red m & m's...

PS I studied pre-med at UNT, which included several upper level genetics and biochemistry classes. I don't just get all my information from sci-fi.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Parthin

Just read through your link. Not one word about how the human digestive system handles GMO food produce. Here is the conclusion statement:



Conclusions
The data presented herein explain the agricultural success of Roundup Ready crops at the molecular level. In particular, a single residue in the active site (Ala-100) renders the CP4 EPSP synthase insensitive to glyphosate, whereas a highly conserved Gly residue is found at this position in known natural plant and bacterial enzymes. The continued presence of glyphosate is likely to favor mutations that reduce glyphosate sensitivity while still maintaining catalytic efficiency. It is therefore not surprising that the gene coding for CP4 EPSP synthase was isolated from a microorganism found in an extremely glyphosate-rich environment (refs. 1 and 10 and p. 632 of ref. 22). The speed at which glyphosate resistance develops depends on the organisms’ generation time and fidelity of gene replication. The current low rate of appearance of plants with naturally acquired resistance to glyphosate may be attributed to the relatively high-fidelity replication and long generation times of most plants. However, extensive use of glyphosate increases the likelihood that more glyphosate-resistant organisms will emerge on a large scale. It is conceivable that a single Ala for Gly substitution in the active site of other class II EPSP synthases will confer resistance to glyphosate.

It appears that the confined space of the active site of EPSP synthase prohibits even slight alterations of the glyphosate molecule. From our structural studies, it is evident that even conformational changes within the glyphosate molecule result in loss of inhibitory activity, which is in accordance with extensive structure–activity relationship studies on glyphosate that have been conducted in the past. More than 1,000 analogs of glyphosate have been produced and tested for inhibition of EPSP synthase, but minor structural alterations typically resulted in dramatically reduced potency, and no compound superior to glyphosate was identified (ref. 22, pp. 441–519 and 569–578). Additionally, although EPSP synthase is considered a promising target for the treatment of diseases caused by pathogenic bacteria or eukaryotic parasites (23–25), glyphosate displays little antimicrobial activity. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the pressing need for the development of entirely new inhibitors that target sites different from the PEP/glyphosate binding site of this agriculturally and medicinally important enzyme.



Basically they're explaining the molecular reasons for glyphosate resistance, aka Roundup Ready. In their own words "Although widely used, the molecular basis for this glyphosate-resistance has remained obscure." So basically up until NOW they weren't really sure how it worked, they just knew it did. The paper goes on to explain that changes to the glyphosate structure render it pretty much ineffective, therefore when 'weeds' develop a resistance there's not much they can do about it. And extensive use of glyphosate PROMOTES mutation in the very plants they are trying to kill. It concludes by saying glyphosate doesn't do much for pathogenic bacteria, so they're going to keep working on yet ANOTHER genetic/chemical intervention to add ON TOP OF glyphosate to deal with those 'pests'.

Yes folks, lets just keep throwing chemicals at our growing produce and playing God with their DNA. What could possibly go wrong???




posted on May, 26 2015 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie
Okay so because they claim the carpet is great, you fear their food. They have other products that would be harmful if eaten so everything is bad that comes into contact with it. Got it. *eyeroll*

Clearly they are motivated by GREED. Answer me this; How much money are they going to make if they kill everyone?

The biggest thing that ATS has taught me is that people fear what they don't understand.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
a reply to: superman2012

Plants growing up through cracks in concrete??? OH THE HORROR!!!!! *sarcasm font, again*

Yes. The horror. Clearly you don't understand that plants can cause cracks and even push up through pavement. In case you aren't aware, re-paving a street isn't cheap and this must be done when the pavement degrades.

Try to learn that there might be other reasons than the only ones you can think of and you'll go far sport.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   
When that many people notice there's a media blackout they'll start waking up to the fascist corporatocracy in droves.

Great news. Monsanto as a legal person should be executed and the leadership jailed. All of their assets should be seized, turn the psychopathic corporation into a responsible eco-friendly and moral philanthropic corporation. All across the board. Then all of a sudden we've got dozens of obscenely rich corporations the size of nation states working for the betterment of humanity.

There's probably dozens of ways that could go wrong, just throwing out an idea. We need radical ideas and solutions, we need bold think tanks looking into these things. We need a totally new political paradigm on this planet.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: superman2012

I'm saying I want food that's produced by farmers who respect nature. Who take pride in the animals they raise and the plants they grow. NOT a corporation like Monsanto...or Exxon or DuPont or BP or Pfizer. My point about the ad is that just a few short decades ago they were developing synthetic carpets that would last generations, now all the sudden they're all up in the food industry.

My family and I raise our own goats for milk and cheese, chickens for eggs and several varieties of vegetables...and amazingly without the use of chemicals or antibiotics. Believe it or not, it's possible.

They are certainly motivated by greed, and they don't care who gets hurt in the long run. It's already happened in the past. You think they felt bad about that? Or took any steps to clean up their act? No. They just declared bankruptcy and changed their name.

People have the right to know what's in their food. Fair enough, sport?

Do you seriously trust Monsanto to keep your personal health a priority?

Weeds on a sidewalk? Pull them up by the roots and reseal the crack. Once again a solution that doesn't involve carcinogenic chemicals.


edit on 26-5-2015 by ladyvalkyrie because: formatting



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Back in 1970, Monsanto chemist John Franz invented a herbicide called glyphosate. In the half-century that has since passed, the substance has been heralded as a "once-in-a-century herbicide," leading to substantially higher crop yields without damaging the environment. Scrutiny over the years has revealed the herbicide to be less acutely toxic than Tylenol and to degrade quickly in the soil. In order for farmers to make full use of the herbicide, Monsanto engineered strains of various crops to be immune to glyphosate. Now, American farmers average 160 bushels of corn per acre each year, up from 109.5 in 1979.


Monsanto has also been key to the development of golden rice, a genetically modified strain which provides a significant amount of Vitamin A per serving. Vitamin A deficiency plagues many parts of the developing world, resulting in as many as one million deaths and 500,000 cases of irreversible blindness annually (PDF). If widely planted, golden rice could very well abate this tragedy.


Monsanto's noble efforts have garnered the adoration of numerous, notable do-gooders, including philanthropist Bill Gates and agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug, the Nobel Peace Prize winner whose dwarf wheat revolutionized agriculture, saving an estimated one billion lives from starvation. Before he died in 2009, Borlaug extolled Monsanto's use of genetic modification, believing science to be the best hope for feeding a growing world population.


Let's be honest, Monsanto is simply the "evil corporation du jour." Microsoft, Nike, Wal-Mart, and McDonalds have all taken turns.

Link
Band wagon jumpers are just waiting for the next evil corporation...



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie




I'm saying I want food that's produced by farmers who respect nature. Who take pride in the animals they raise and the plants they grow. NOT a corporation like Monsanto...or Exxon or DuPont or BP or Pfizer.


Do any of those companies actually farm? I thought those companies made products that farmers have personally chosen to purchase.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie


I'm saying I want food that's produced by farmers who respect nature. Who take pride in the animals they raise and the plants they grow. NOT a corporation like Monsanto...or Exxon or DuPont or BP or Pfizer. My point about the ad is that just a few short decades ago they were developing synthetic carpets that would last generations, now all the sudden they're all up in the food industry.

Everyone is entitled to do what they want. I'm sure you can go out and find this food that you want. Farmers nowadays have bills to pay like everyone else so doesn't it make sense that they plant crops where they can get the most yield?
They started out in 1901 producing food additives and only started messing with GMOs in the early 80s. There is nothing sudden about this.


My family and I raise our own goats for milk and cheese, chickens for eggs and several varieties of vegetables...and amazingly without the use of chemicals or antibiotics. Believe it or not, it's possible.

That is fantastic and admirable! I do believe it is possible.


They are certainly motivated by greed, and they don't care who gets hurt in the long run. It's already happened in the past. You think they felt bad about that? Or took any steps to clean up their act? No. They just declared bankruptcy and changed their name.

I don't believe a rich man/woman in charge of a corporation making millions feels bad for the average citizen. That doesn't mean that they are trying to kill everyone and the land though.


People have the right to know what's in their food. Fair enough, sport?

They sure do kiddo. I'm just sick of know nothings that regurgitate the fear they read on the internet without knowing how many companies use GMOs nor how long they've been ingesting them.


Do you seriously trust Monsanto to keep your personal health a priority?

No. I trust them to want to run a profitable company by selling products that won't kill its customers. Kind of back asswards don't you think?

Weeds on a sidewalk? Did you misread what I was saying?
edit on 26-5-2015 by superman2012 because: spelling

Edit: Maybe I wasn't making myself clear enough. If you have a town/city that has weeds growing in the cracks, between the pavement and gutter, etc., are you going to be okay if they hire a team of people to pull weeds out as they grow everyday so as not to have to repave the road, or would you be okay with paying for the repaving every couple years? I hope you can understand the logistics of your "just pull them out" idea...
edit on 26-5-2015 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

No they don't farm, they just keep creating chemicals and completely unnatural strains of plants in labs.

I'm talking about heirloom seeds and good old fashioned selective breeding. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough about that.




posted on May, 26 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Everyone is entitled to do what they want. I'm sure you can go out and find this food that you want. Farmers nowadays have bills to pay like everyone else so doesn't it make sense that they plant crops where they can get the most yield?
They started out in 1901 producing food additives and only started messing with GMOs in the early 80s. There is nothing sudden about this.

GMOs hit store shelves in the early 90s. A generation is roughly 20 years. We are just now at the end of the first generation. If there are long term problems we will just now be seeing them. (autism? spikes in cancer?)



I don't believe a rich man/woman in charge of a corporation making millions feels bad for the average citizen. That doesn't mean that they are trying to kill everyone and the land though.

Honestly I don't know how it goes down or what goes through these people's heads. I've wondered about it. Do the CEOs flat out tell their research scientists to overlook questionable results? Do the scientists report honest findings, then the upper echelon just sweeps it under the rug? Or more likely they know about the possibility of harm, but it falls within 'acceptable levels'. Collateral damage and all that. *shrug* IDK I would like to hope they aren't actually sitting in a board room, rubbing their hands together, laughing maniacally and plotting to give everyone cancer and slowly kill them off.



They sure do kiddo. I'm just sick of know nothings that regurgitate the fear they read on the internet without knowing how many companies use GMOs nor how long they've been ingesting them.

Woa woa woa, kiddo. I wouldn't consider myself a 'know nothing' nor am I regurgitating anything. If you would read my previous posts you would see that I'm not necessarily against GMOs, I'm just wary. Now I think we can all agree Monsanto in particular has displayed some pretty shady business dealings in the past, and that fact just adds to my wariness. Then add the media blackouts of the March Against Monsanto...which I personally observed...and wariness gives way to straight up red flag waving.



No. I trust them to want to run a profitable company by selling products that won't kill its customers. Kind of back asswards don't you think?

Just like cigarette companies, right?



are you going to be okay if they hire a team of people to pull weeds out as they grow everyday so as not to have to repave the road, or would you be okay with paying for the repaving every couple years? I hope you can understand the logistics of your "just pull them out" idea...

Community service= publicly sanctioned slave labor
Concrete to fill the cracks= couldn't possibly be more expensive than chemicals and without the possibility of cancer as a side effect
Besides, small amounts of herbicides probably aren't too harmful. But dumping gallons and gallons onto fields which subsequently runs off into the surrounding land and into the water table, residue getting into plants that we eat, plants eaten by animals that we eat...snowball effect. THAT is when it becomes problematic.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie


GMOs hit store shelves in the early 90s. A generation is roughly 20 years. We are just now at the end of the first generation. If there are long term problems we will just now be seeing them. (autism? spikes in cancer?)

GMOs have been used far longer than that, there just wasn't a corporation or white lab coats. Selective breeding (in use since 12,000 BC) is a form of genetically modifying a strain for desired traits while not breeding a strain with undesired traits. Unless we are talking about synthetic modification as in biotechnology. Then really, what is the problem in doing something faster than we have been doing for centuries?



Honestly I don't know how it goes down or what goes through these people's heads. I've wondered about it. Do the CEOs flat out tell their research scientists to overlook questionable results? Do the scientists report honest findings, then the upper echelon just sweeps it under the rug? Or more likely they know about the possibility of harm, but it falls within 'acceptable levels'. Collateral damage and all that. *shrug* IDK I would like to hope they aren't actually sitting in a board room, rubbing their hands together, laughing maniacally and plotting to give everyone cancer and slowly kill them off.

I'd like to think it is compartmentalized and no one actually does work that they believe to be hurting anyone.


Woa woa woa, kiddo. I wouldn't consider myself a 'know nothing' nor am I regurgitating anything. If you would read my previous posts you would see that I'm not necessarily against GMOs, I'm just wary. Now I think we can all agree Monsanto in particular has displayed some pretty shady business dealings in the past, and that fact just adds to my wariness. Then add the media blackouts of the March Against Monsanto...which I personally observed...and wariness gives way to straight up red flag waving.

I never said you were a "know nothing" only that I tire of the constant stream of fear of strange things that people do not understand. Not understanding something should not make someone fear it in this day and age. Sadly, that is a very strong SHOULD. Maybe people just don't care about March against Monsanto...I sure don't. If people cared so much, they would go out, and find ways to be better than a company they hate (much like your family is doing) rather than waving a bloody sign and being part of the herd.


Just like cigarette companies, right?

The main (and only thing that counts) difference is that we need food to eat. A larger percentage of people eat, then smoke cigarettes. Also, are GMOs shown (scientifically) to be harmful to a person?



Community service= publicly sanctioned slave labor
Concrete to fill the cracks= couldn't possibly be more expensive than chemicals and without the possibility of cancer as a side effect
Besides, small amounts of herbicides probably aren't too harmful. But dumping gallons and gallons onto fields which subsequently runs off into the surrounding land and into the water table, residue getting into plants that we eat, plants eaten by animals that we eat...snowball effect. THAT is when it becomes problematic.

Filling the cracks would not stop plants from pushing up through.
Concrete to fill gaps = much more expensive than spreading a contact killing plant killer, links to show it causes cancer?

Farmers don't just "dump gallons and gallons onto fields". They are subject to the same laws as everyone else and must follow them or face fines. Plus, who would dump a product that they pay for with their own money willy nilly on their crops? They have very specific doses for each crop. Even a personal weed killer has dilution tables and recommended dosage. Have you taken a look at how long these chemicals actually stay in the soil for? It might surprise you. Don't just go by what you hear, research it.
Snowball effect? Do you have any idea how diluted it would be?!?!? From the field, to the animal, to us? Even if there was any, it would be so minimal that I wouldn't even give it a second thought. There are places that you can send water for testing if you are concerned. Go search these up, take a sample from a suspect place and send it in.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
a reply to: Grimpachi

No they don't farm, they just keep creating chemicals and completely unnatural strains of plants in labs.

I'm talking about heirloom seeds and good old fashioned selective breeding. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough about that.


Good old fashioned selective breeding is to GMOs as black and white cable is to high def satellite programming.

Essentially the same thing, just one is more advanced.



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I didn't expect them to "get" the chemistry, but I thought a detailed explanation would help. It might as well be sorcery to the anti-GMO people. Indeed, it is, to them. What I really hate are those scifi films where DNA changes people into monsters or aliens. Even the often-scientific Star Trek joined the bandwagon, where genetically-enhanced people are unavoidably homicidal psychopaths.
a reply to: superman2012



posted on May, 26 2015 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: superman2012

originally posted by: ladyvalkyrie
a reply to: Grimpachi

No they don't farm, they just keep creating chemicals and completely unnatural strains of plants in labs.

I'm talking about heirloom seeds and good old fashioned selective breeding. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough about that.


Good old fashioned selective breeding is to GMOs as black and white cable is to high def satellite programming.

Essentially the same thing, just one is more advanced.


Yes, technically everything is GMO with breeding - they get genetically modified by doing so.

However, the term for what monsanto and other companies are doing is called "transgenic"


of, relating to, or containing a gene or genes transferred from another species


That is the issue - the unknown long term consequences of mixed species at the DNA level... Not to mention the unknown long term full spectrum ecological impacts. Monocropping is not really as good for the ecology as Norman Borlaug may have thought with his "green revolution"



posted on May, 27 2015 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Parthin
A lack of understanding of what is specialty science is the root cause of the protests. Of course genetics research is ongoing, as is research in every branch of science. The mechanisms of gene expression are thoroughly understood.
Every GMO must undergo FDA testing before it is released.
a reply to: SubTruth





Do you trust the government......Really this is a serious question. Personally I think employes floating back and forth between government and corporate jobs is sketchy as crap. I would be willing to bet nefarious things happen daily.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join