Please watch this if you think GMOs are not a problem.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: reldra

I see more than enough to tell me food made this way will more than likely be problematic.

I haven't.

For people eating it and for it sustaining generations of growth. And for companies copywriting the seeds.

Do you know that seed licensing is not exclusive to GM varieties?

Also that things like genetically modified mosquitoes may cause more problems than they are meant to fix.

For example? Do you think that genetic modification is a random process. Like natural mutation?

My answers (multi quotes always mess up my replies):

1- You should look further.

2-Yes I know that.

3- It can be natural. It can be purposefully done too.

a reply to: reldra

1) I've looked. I've seen some very poorly designed experiments which claim to prove that GM food is highly dangerous.

2) Good.

3) When it is done purposefully it is random. How is that "safer" than controlled?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: reldra

1) I've looked. I've seen some very poorly designed experiments which claim to prove that GM food is highly dangerous.

2) Good.

3) When it is done purposefully it is random. How is that "safer" than controlled?

I wasn't prepared with all the articles that I have read...and from normal sources. I don;t read scare mongering sources about GMOs. There is a problem with them and with companies like Monsanto.

a reply to: reldra
I said I don't think agricultural monopolies benefit consumers. Which is not to imply that Monsanto is a monopoly (or was, with the Bayer purchase pending).

But I can keep that a separate issue from the fear and ignorance about GM crops.

a reply to: Phage

I am more worried about the long term repercussions for others but the short term for mine. I am highly sensitive to food. I'm talking sometimes I eat out at places and get sick without even eating anything I am not supposed to. That is how weak my system is. I will make my own food out of things I know are okay for me and even then I get violently ill and have to call in to work. It's like navigating a landmine every time I go into a store. It's instant for me, but think about what happens to people's bodies over time. If mine rejects it, who is to say that it is actually effecting everyone but in little ways that you wouldn't notice until it's too late.

There are even plants that they breed so that when a bug bites the leaves, it dies. Our bodies have only had these intentionally modified foods for a short time of human history. Can you honestly tell me that you don't think there are no repercussions to our bodies for this?

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

There are even plants that they breed so that when a bug bites the leaves, it dies.

Pretty much all plants carry their own supply of insecticides. For a reason.

But You are concerned about the Bt toxin. It has been studied for a long time, since before GM crops were a thing. It is, actually, quite natural.
www.bt.ucsd.edu...

Can you honestly tell me that you don't think there are no repercussions to our bodies for this?

Yes.

a reply to: Phage

Thank you for the bit of reading. I am always eager to find out new things about this topic.

As for it not being harmful, I think we will agree to disagree on that one.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

As for it not being harmful, I think we will agree to disagree on that one.

Ok.
Just don't go all fearful and ignorant on me. Bad combo.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad
For one of the few times I am with Phage
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

There are even plants that they breed so that when a bug bites the leaves, it dies.

Yes the leaf dies. Naturally

Our bodies have only had these intentionally modified foods for a short time of human history.

Depends on what you call a short time

Can you honestly tell me that you don't think there are no repercussions to our bodies for this?

So far , the FDA does.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

As for it not being harmful, I think we will agree to disagree on that one.

Ok.
Just don't go all fearful and ignorant on me. Bad combo.

HAHA I won't. But it is something that I think is feasible. I also have a messed up internal system so I am extra paranoid about food in general.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad
For one of the few times I am with Phage
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Can you honestly tell me that you don't think there are no repercussions to our bodies for this?

So far , the FDA does.

I feel like you know how much I hate the FDA

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad
That's a shame. There is nothing in particular that seems to bother me. Unless taken to excess.

Tell me though, which do you think would be more effective in keeping you informed if you are concerned about GM food products? A voluntary system with labels which say "Non-GM". Or a mandatory system which would result in labels which say "May contain GM products", similar to the "May contain nuts" warnings we now see.

a reply to: Phage

The problem lies with the ADA and the FDA. There are no regulations. I have to look up every single ingredient to make sure I can ingest it. Then there are some ingredients that say "spices". Seriously? You can't list them? Also, fun fact, most spices have gluten. If you don't have an expiration date on them, there are preservatives in them. But there are never any ingredients on the ingredients. It's more of a personal vendetta but about 15% of the people I know battle similar health issues, they just ignore it, and obviously it gets worse.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad
All large corporations and government organizations are not evil...
And , genetic modified food and plants have been around since an Augustinian friar back in the day . Want to know the year ?

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Are you familiar with the Seralini Study?

They have done a great job at at this website keeping track of research proving the disastrous effects that GMO crops and their toxic pesticides have resulted in.

a reply to: elementalgrove

I am. That's one of the very poorly designed experiments I was talking about.
Seralini is known for poorly designed experiments and questionable statistical analysis.

a reply to: Phage

Yes that was the mantra used in order to get the study originally retracted...

However as time has gone on, he one the a defamation and perjury case as well has having his study published once again.

Study found here.

a reply to: elementalgrove

However as time has gone on, he one the a defamation and perjury case

Not sure what that has to do with anything. Doesn't change the fact that his experiment was deeply flawed.

well has having his study published once again.

Yeah, in a brand new journal which scientists don't really pay much attention to. That does not make his "study" valid. Interestingly, the new journal did not actually subject the paper to peer review, contrary to what Seralini claims.

This study is almost identical to the prior study, with some minor but important differences. Séralini claimed in a press release that the republished study was peer reviewed but that is not accurate, according to the publishing journal’s editor made to Nature magazine. “We were Springer Publishing’s first open access journal on the environment, and are a platform for discussion on science and regulation at a European and regional level.” ESEU conducted no scientific peer review, said editor Henner Hollert, “because this had already been conducted by Food and Chemical Toxicology, and had concluded there had been no fraud nor misrepresentation.” The role of the three reviewers hired by ESEU was to check that there had been no change in the scientific content of the paper, Hollert added.

source

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish
GMOs are not a problem. They're our best chance of ensuring food security for humanity.

Are you having a little giggle posting up that twaddle ....you think you are clever posting a meme that is so incredibly wrong it hurts.....go hang your head in shame....

a reply to: Phage

Phage I am sure that you will not be surprised that I find your "source" highly conflicted when it comes to their take on Serralini...

They had the audacity to call Monsanto the company of the year!!

Also lets take a look at the author of your source.. Jon Entine, corporate propagandist!

Entine has multiple, documented ties to biotech companies Monsanto and Syngenta, and plays a key propaganda role via another industry front group known as the American Council on Science and Health, 1 a thinly-veiled corporate front group that Sourcewatch describes as holding “a generally apologetic stance regarding virtually every other health and environmental hazard produced by modern industry, accepting corporate funding from Coca-Cola, Kellogg, General Mills, Pepsico, and the American Beverage Association, among others.”

I tend to agree with the sentiment that Monsanto is the Worlds most evil corporation! It is simply a matter of history!