GM or Not to GM, Which?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 8-11-2006 @ 01:45 AM by Alikospah
Some of the younger folk may not remember the taste of tamper free
foods. With genetically modified foods, what are we really eating and
is it clean foods? Already cattle in feedlots are being fed seafood
which is unclean for us. Now some sea creatures have had their genes
spliced into food animals.
What does GM vegs do to us?
Finally I've found a source of non-GM foods in Colorado Springs and
will go there soon.
Here's a site to read about GM foods and what they might mean in
addition to bad tasting food, there may be real health ramifications.

www.responsibletechnology.org...
e/index.cfm

Much of what I've read at tise site is worrying but the direct experiece I've had with GM is foods don't taste as good as they used to nor are as satisfying. When was the last time you had a baked potato with flavor that gave you a real sensation of pysical satisfaction? Its been a long time. All you can get now is "sweet" corn with the texture of styrofoam.
Thousands of years of selective harvesting gave us what we grew up on same as our parents in the early 1900s. Now its all gone. Tomatoes that stay hard and have a rind when cut open in addition to being mealy. We are losing many fine natural varieties as aggribusiness tries to take control by creating plants that produce sterile seed, it will not sprout. This will lead to a monopoly that is worldwide with one variety per crop and if you want to grow you have to get your seed from Monsanto and like concerns. This is not a good thing for the ecosystem or human diets and in many instances dangerous to animals and humans, some biased companies skew the tests on by being allowed to test their own creations, genetically modified foods and animals and real food value is unknow. Read the newletter, "Seeds of deception" back issues articles and see what's going on in truth.

[edit on 8-11-2006 by Alikospah]


reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 03:26 AM by sardion2000

The only ones that oppose GM technology are the organic food industries that stand to lose millions of dollars in profits. They are more concerned about money than the environment.


Really? They've had Anti-GMO riots in Europe & Mass Boycotts in South America. In fact, the tide has become so fervent in their beliefs that I am starting to worry that they are starting to overcompensate.

There is only one safe way to increase the amount of crop yield per acre, and that is to build vertically and not horizontally.


GM products have the promise of growing more food on less land, using less water, less fertilizer, and less pesticides.


While this may be true at surface value, it's still a misleading statement cuz it doesn't give me the entire perspective.

GMOs still uses fertilizer and pesticides as well adding in a HUGE unknown into the process, additional/different Genetic Information. GMO fields also promote the wasteful practices of Tilling, Mono cultural plantings, and Non-Seed procucing Annuals making the small farmers dependent on One seed supplier..

Organics don't do any of these things.


GM is an environmental win-win all the way around.


This is an outright lie as it implies that you have perfect knowledge of all the pros and cons of this issue. You cannot brand an entire industry like that. It's, dare I say, Intellectually Dishonest ( @ you know who you are ). The only GMO that I've read about that is literally Win-Win is a rice strain called NERICA. It's basically a mix of Drought resistant African rice with High Yield Asian rice. The results were unsurprisingly a strain that was both Drought resistant and High Yield.

Though this could have been achieved in a completely different way as well. Smart Breeding is like Genetic Modification except no direct Modifications are being done. It's basically cross-breeding plants that have been pegged as ideal "mates" through a genetic analysis. It's basically the way we've been doing it all along except with more information and a better idea of what the results will be.

[edit on 9-11-2006 by sardion2000]


reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 05:34 PM by engenerQ
Ok being a farmer I have a bit of insight on this subject.

1. back in the day foods tasted better...blah blah blah first of all sweet corn that you find is more often then not a hybrid not GM and actually that’s exactly what bread and butter is(yellow and white kernels)

2. i grow both gm and non-gm crops, and I tell you ide pick GM any day b/c you look at a “organic” and a gm farm and the organic is much sicker lacing the take-up of nitrogen, weeds run allover the place b/c you cant spray for them so your precious organic food is harvested along with poisonous plants such as black-eyed Susan’s and hemlock….o wait your rater have foods harvested with known things that will kill you rather than a unknown bitchin contest between tree huggers and big biz?

3. I am around, plant, touch, and eat gm corn out of the field. I am a organic chemist and I have found NOTHING wrong with gm foods. And if you want another side how about using GM to put vaccines in to your food so your mom doesn’t give birth to a brother with birth defects or giving your kids there shots for school to keep them safe without contamination from needles (and less crying 2!)

4. STOP QUOTING ANTI AND PRO GM SITES FOR ACTUAL SORSES, damit that like going on to the KKK website looking for minority’s rights, its just ignorant plz don’t do that crap

5. gm has been around for a generation and look at kids now ya a lot of them are ignorant (lol) but there just as smart if not more and just as healthy as any oter generation.

6. I don’t understand ppl if you don’t want GM food you better lone big biz b/c there is no way to grow a non-gm crop without having the backing of big biz……I swear I don’t want to get a reply you don’t know they could …look, I have 20,000 acres and with fuel prices new machinery, most costing upwards of $100,000 it is hard to get by letalone to make some profit


reply posted on 9-11-2006 @ 05:58 PM by sardion2000

2. i grow both gm and non-gm crops, and I tell you ide pick GM any day b/c you look at a “organic” and a gm farm and the organic is much sicker lacing the take-up of nitrogen, weeds run allover the place b/c you cant spray for them so your precious organic food is harvested along with poisonous plants such as black-eyed Susan’s and hemlock….o wait your rater have foods harvested with known things that will kill you rather than a unknown bitchin contest between tree huggers and big biz?


You've obviously been exposed to some of the bad organic farms that are just in it to make a quick profit. There have been many successes in this area and frankly, if I have the choice between ingesting toxic chemicals to possible e coli and botulism from Organic, I'd take the latter thank you very much. At least our bodies have defense mechanisms against such things. We do not have such things against Toxic Chems. I've been to numerous urban organic farms in my neighborhood and the best products I've seen produced came from mixed plots rather then monocultures. The aesthetic quality is approaching Supermarket produce rather quickly actually. I also expect the older organic farms to be phased out eventually as more and more urban farms gets resurrected from the dustbin of history.

3. I am around, plant, touch, and eat gm corn out of the field. I am a organic chemist and I have found NOTHING wrong with gm foods. And if you want another side how about using GM to put vaccines in to your food so your mom doesn’t give birth to a brother with birth defects or giving your kids there shots for school to keep them safe without contamination from needles (and less crying 2!)


O rly? Okay Mr. Organic Chemist, why don't you go into details then. Show me the long term health studies done into GM foods.

Jumping before we look has gotten us into a fair bit of trouble before, why do people assume when a new technology comes out, that it will not have the hiccups and problems we've seen in other technologies. X-Ray detectors in Shoe Stores ring a bell?



5. gm has been around for a generation and look at kids now ya a lot of them are ignorant (lol) but there just as smart if not more and just as healthy as any oter generation.


Again, show me the studies. Anecdotal evidence isn't evidence, it's sheer speculation.



6. I don’t understand ppl if you don’t want GM food you better lone big biz b/c there is no way to grow a non-gm crop without having the backing of big biz……I swear I don’t want to get a reply you don’t know they could …look, I have 20,000 acres and with fuel prices new machinery, most costing upwards of $100,000 it is hard to get by letalone to make some profit


Cooperative Urban Farms have been gaining immense popularity in my city as of late. It works by leasing out space in people yards and businesses roofs. People often don't realize just how much unused space there is in the city.

The number of Organic Farmers Markets has boomed in recent weeks as the harvests have been coming in. The prices are usually 20% less the the Supermarket, the quality is fairly high. Their "aesthetics" isn't as nice as the supermarket kind, but the nutritional value is verifiably higher.

The next big push for this cooperative is to start to push for the development of perennial crops specifically tailored for our city. It will take quite a while though... they are looking into Smart Breeding technology. They don't seem to have much of a problem with that, funnily enough.

Also, the reason many people are against Vaccination(at least the sane educated people) is that over vaccination will cause Super-bugs to develop. They are stalking our hospitals as we speak.



reply posted on 11-11-2006 @ 07:49 PM by Regenmacher
I see corporate brainwashing here and it makes me wonder if GM food is responsible for a decline in intelligence. A severe lack of brains would explain why some people readily accept the role of a subservient lab rat for the benefit of a profit driven company.

Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed

• Research by the Russian Academy of Sciences released in December 2005 found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed GM soy died within the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers fed on non-modified soy. Six times as many offspring fed GM soy were also severely underweight.

• In November 2005, a private research institute in Australia, CSIRO Plant Industry, put a halt to further development of a GM pea cultivator when it was found to cause an immune response in laboratory mice.

• In the summer of 2005, an Italian research team led by a cellular biologist at the University of Urbino published confirmation that absorption of GM soy by mice causes development of misshapen liver cells, as well as other cellular anomalies.

• In May of 2005 the review of a highly confidential and controversial Monsanto report on test results of corn modified with Monsanto MON863 was published in The Independent/UK.



Consume, buy, obey and die young...retirement is overated

[edit on 11-11-2006 by Regenmacher]


reply posted on 12-11-2006 @ 03:42 AM by Long Lance
Source


Milkweed samples were taken from within and at the edge of the Bt corn field and were used to assess mortality of first instar monarch, D. plexippus exposed to Bt and non-Bt corn pollen. Within 48 hours, there was 19% mortality in the Bt corn pollen treatment, compared to 0% on non Bt-corn pollen exposed plants and 3% in the no pollen controls. This second study counters all the spurious arguments that the Losey's study was a 'worse case scenario' that bears no relevance to field conditions. Besides which, when Losey conducted his experiments he did not spatula Bt pollen on to the leaves of milkweed, as was reported by industry, he dusted the leaves in accordance with levels observed in the field.



I hope you're aware that we need insects for pollination, randomly killing them will not just exterminate several plant species, it will upset the balance between insct species while exterminating their natural predators at the same time.

The result should be obvious: no or very few birds, tons of obnoxious insects that don't feed off plants (<-- use your imagination)

it does get better:


Cross pollination with non GM varieties creates Bt-weeds, and the Bt-plants themselves cause major problems as volunteers. Active Bt toxin leaks from plant roots into the soil where it is not biodegradable and accumulates over time. This will have major impacts on soil health, with knock-on effects on all other trophic levels of the ecosystem.

..

A total of 15 million acres of Bt corn were planted in the US in 1998, 20% of the total acreage. The leaked toxin enters the soil in an activated form -- Bt transgenes are truncated to produce active toxin, unlike the precursor-form produced in the bacterium, which has to be cleaved in the gut of susceptible insect pests. Moreover, the toxin is expressed continuously, and hence exuded for extended periods of time.



nothing to see here, move along

Conclusion: If you want to use GMOs, use a fermenter for ***'s sake.


reply posted on 12-11-2006 @ 10:11 AM by Long Lance
the usual justification for using GM is it's alledgedly higher yield.

this is generally not the case, pure and simple, f-ex. RR soya yields are on average a few percent lower than normal. claims of high yields, complete with promise percentage figures are likely a scam, they have to be because different strains thrive under different conditions, meaningful numbers are not projections, they are derived from experience.


that said, technique greatly influences growth, resistance and yield of crops

Source#2
Last week, Nature magazine reported the results of one of the biggest agricultural experiments ever conducted (2). A team of Chinese scientists had tested the key principle of modern rice-growing - planting a single, high-tech variety across hundreds of hectares - against a much older technique: planting several breeds in one field. They found, to the astonishment of the farmers who had been drilled for years in the benefits of "monoculture", that reverting to the old method resulted in spectacular increases in yield. Rice blast - a devastating fungus which normally requires repeated applications of poison to control - decreased by 94 per cent. The farmers planting a mixture of strains were able to stop applying their poisons altogether, while producing 18 per cent more rice per acre than they were growing before.


this is a tangible benefit, not just an empty promise, GMOs have NOT lived up to the hype while they fullfilled every single doomsday prophecy, cross-contamination, toxic side effects on various lifeforms, dead soil and increased use of pesticides. it's time to stop the madness while we still have a chance to succeed.

[edit on 12-11-2006 by Long Lance]


reply posted on 14-11-2006 @ 11:07 AM by SpeakerofTruth
Does this even sound healthy to you?

There are several differences between the normal breeding process and the artificial genetic manipulation process. One key difference is the use of highly-infectious viruses for artificial genetic manipulation as a promoter to switch on the introduced gene. One commonly-used virus is a highly-infectious form of the Cauliflower Mosaic Virus (CaMV). (The form of CaMV virus found in normal foods is not highly-infectious and cannot be absorbed by mammals.) The dangers were described in detail by reknowed geneticist Dr. Mae-Wan Ho in a meeting on March 31st 1999 at the invitation of UK Environment Minister, Michael Meacher. Additional scientific information about the dangers presented by infectious promoter viruses such as CaMV are described by Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Dr. Joe Cummins, Emeritus Professor of Genetics, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Western Ontario. Finally, a recent scientific report by Molecular Biologist, Angela Ryan provides further concerns regarding the use of the CaMV virus to create genetically-manipulated foods.


Another key difference between normal breeding and artificial genetic manipulation is that the genetic manipulation greatly increases the risk that the plant (e.g., soy) will develop toxic or allergy-causing compounds. Such unexpected changes have already been shown to occur in some genetically-manipulated crops.

The insertion of a new gene can sometimes alter the synthesis of chemicals in the plant. Such an alteration can lead to the change in existing chemical compounds in the plant (including a possible significant increase in existing levels of toxic compounds) or the development of new toxic or allergy-causing compounds. There would be no way to predict these effects in advance and it would be difficult to test for these effects without many years of careful, independent research on human test subjects. Gradual toxic effects could occur over weeks, months, years, or even decades and society would not be aware of the health damage until it was too late.
People think GM is healthy?

I don't know about anyone else,but that doesn't sound healthy at all to me.


reply posted on 16-11-2006 @ 11:13 AM by Long Lance
thanks for the links SpeakerOfTruth,


let me quote the folowing paragraph from your url:

Source

Extinction of Seed Varieties A few years ago Time magazine referred to the massive trend by large corporations to buy up small seed companies,
destroying any competing stock, and replacing it with their patented or controlled brands as "the Death of Birth." Monsanto additionally has had farmers sign contracts not to save their seeds - forfeiting what has long been a farmer's birthright to remain guardians of the blueprints of successive life.




So, GM succeed due to cynic patent laws and their controllability (see terminator crops) their properties and yield are completely irrelevant

As an example of the feverish attempt to expand herbicide use, Monsanto's patent for Roundup was scheduled to expire. Not to lose their market share, Monsanto came up with the idea of creating "Roundup Ready" seeds. It bought out seed companies to monopolize the terrain - then licensing the seeds to farmers with the requirement that they continue buying Roundup past the expiration of the patent. These contracts had stiff financial penalties if farmers used any other herbicide.


if you are still pro-GM crops after reading a few of the links presented here, i'm speechless, because they mostly failed to deliver any sunstantial benefit (only for the corps living off these home-brewn patent laws), while numerous side effects are well documented and already catastrophic in nature.

experience >> empty promises
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Lake Vostok Antarctica: breakthrough imminent.
  Posted 8 days ago with 175 member flags
Sky Sounds 1/25/2012 Atlanta, GA Personal Video/Audio
  Posted 16 days ago with 146 member flags
Strange sounds warn us of incoming, and very soon...
  Posted 4 days ago with 133 member flags
Volcano in Iceland Erupting Alongside The Aurora Borealis (pics)
  Posted 5 days ago with 121 member flags
6 of the oldest trees from around the world.
  Posted 9 days ago with 108 member flags
West Coast USA: Pay Attention, Cascadia May Be Ready to Rupture
  Posted 6 days ago with 87 member flags
CONFIRMED: Global Warming \'Ended 15 Years Ago\'
  Posted 12 days ago with 75 member flags
Pictures from the Aurora lightshow
  Posted 17 days ago with 73 member flags