It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A team of Belgian philosophers and plant biotechnologists have turned to cognitive science to explain why opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has become so widespread, despite positive contributions GM crops have made to sustainable agriculture. In a paper published April 10 in Trends in Plant Science, they argue that the human mind is highly susceptible to the negative and often emotional representations put out by certain environmental groups and other opponents of GMOs. The researchers urge the general public to form opinions on GMOs on a case-by-case basis, thereby not focusing on the technology but on the resulting product.
"The popularity and typical features of the opposition to GMOs can be explained in terms of underlying cognitive processes. Anti-GMO messages strongly appeal to particular intuitions and emotions," says lead author Stefaan Blancke, a philosopher with the Ghent University Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences. "Negative representations of GMOs--for instance, like claims that GMOs cause diseases and contaminate the environment--tap into our feelings of disgust and this sticks to the mind. These emotions are very difficult to counter, in particular because the science of GMOs is complex to communicate."
[Edit for brevity. --DJW001] Contributing to this public opposition, the researchers suspect, is a lack of scientific understanding of genetics (not even half of the respondents in a US survey rejected the claim that a fish gene introduced into a tomato would give it a fishy taste) as well as moral objections to scientists "playing God."
"Anti-GMO arguments tap into our intuitions that all organisms have an unobservable immutable core, an essence, and that things in the natural world exist or happen for a purpose," Blancke explains "This reasoning of course conflicts with evolutionary theory--the idea that in evolution one species can change into another. It also makes us very susceptible to the idea that nature is a force that has a purpose or even intentions that we shouldn't' meddle with."
GMOs contain many stacked Cry Toxins/Proteins which are used for insecticides. These are shown to be toxic towards human cells. (Mizuki 1999).
A certain Cry Toxin used in GMO has the same structure as Ricin. And another indistinguishable from Anthrax.
GMOs are resistant to herbicides. This makes farmers able to spray more herbicides onto their crops. Like Glyphosphate which is BAD. Even Monsanto agree here. (Born. 2014.)
GMOs modify the herbicide glufosinate so now when you eat GMO glufosinate is still present I your body months later. It's hazardous to mammals. (Droge. 1992).
I could go on and on but the style of ATS skeptics is to never change their mind.
Do some more research please.
originally posted by: HUMBLEONE
The American Psychological Association is in bed with the CIA. This study was probably funded by Monsanto. NO to GMO! Monsanto and GMO is a soft kill arm of the eugenics operation.
The flow chart does a neat job of rounding up opponents into a single category - irrational. The presentation implies there are no grounds for criticising GMO.
But I must remind you the OP which I read with an open mind stated arguments against GMOs were hypothetical, speculative and anecdotal.
I've proved that is clearly bollocks.