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.

 

Animals Avoid GM Food, for Good Reasons

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   
This article I found while thumbing through this months edition of Countryside Magazine. Countryside is a magazine for the people by the people, that is what makes it really interesting.

Difference between open pollinated and hybrid is open pollination yields new seeds and hybrids do not. Most seeds for planting these days is hybrid.

www.countrysidemag.com...
Ed Sauerland, Okeana Ohio Pg. 16 Countryside Magazine September/October 2007




COUNTRYSIDE: I'd like to tell you about an experience this past winter that I found interesting. Every year I plant a patch of open pollinated field corn. Lastwinter I strung two wires from the front rack on a hay wagon to the back rack, and I had saved about 100 ears of the corn for seed to plant this year. I hung them on those wires because I did not want to put them in the corn crib. There were about a dozen ears laying on the floor of the hay wagon and I noticed one day that raccoons were chewing on those ears. I decided that when they were gone (in less than a week), I would put some of my hybrid corn on the wagon and feed them that-then maybe they would not try to reach my open pollinated corn that was hanging on those wires. The raccoons ate a few bites from the hybrid ears and quit. I put more of the open pollinated corn on the wagon and they ate that right away.

So what do you think the open pollinated corn had that the hybrid corn did not have? Does that tell you anything? I found it interesting. - Ed Sauerland, Okeana, Ohio


[edit on 8-8-2007 by ADVISOR]




posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
That tells me that coons are smarter than most humans. Which is damning with faint praise the coons.

Surely seems as if there was something in the hybrids that the coons felt instinctively was not "good".

Nature works slow, but sure. Humans invent and then need to correct.

My heart lies with nature being right.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Considering that raccoons seem to eat pretty well anything, this is a rather curious report. It certainly makes one take pause and say "hmmmmmmm?"

I live in an urban environment and not a garbage pick-up goes by without seeing dozens of these "black-eyed" vermin (yeah, they might be cute but they are vermin nonetheless) making a mess of things by rooting through the garbage bags lining the street. Judging by the mess they leave behind, they typically carry away anything one could even slightly consider as being edible.

If they pass on genetically modified corn, one has to assume that there is something going on that the raccoons consider to be not kosher or unwholesome. It would interesting to see whether this reaction is limited to raccoons.



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I'm a bit confused........hybrid corn would be the offspring of two types of corn that were allowed to cross breed.....the seeds would not automatically be sterile, but would produce a corn that had traits from both of the parent varieties. ( the year after we planted silver queen and Indian corn too close together, we replanted the ears we'd saved of Indian corn only to have very few colored kernels among the white in the second year)

GM (genetically modified) seeds are the ones made to be sterile, so one could not save seed to be planed the next season but would need to purchase new seed each time. Monsanto also adds a pesticide to at least some of their GM corn........that might make a raccoon leave it be.

www.newswithviews.com...

This year we have a hybrid yellow/white corn, (g-90) that has been scarfed down by kids, horses, and chickens......all with equal relish! ( None left for the poor raccoons this year, but in the passed they have stolen silver queen right off the stalks at the back of the garden, and silver queen is also listed as a hybrid.)

www.mbsseed.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by frayed1

I'm a bit confused........hybrid corn would be the offspring of two types of corn that were allowed to cross breed.....the seeds would not automatically be sterile, but would produce a corn that had traits from both of the parent varieties. ( the year after we planted silver queen and Indian corn too close together, we replanted the ears we'd saved of Indian corn only to have very few colored kernels among the white in the second year)

GM (genetically modified) seeds are the ones made to be sterile, so one could not save seed to be planed the next season but would need to purchase new seed each time. Monsanto also adds a pesticide to at least some of their GM corn........that might make a raccoon leave it be.

www.newswithviews.com...

This year we have a hybrid yellow/white corn, (g-90) that has been scarfed down by kids, horses, and chickens......all with equal relish! ( None left for the poor raccoons this year, but in the passed they have stolen silver queen right off the stalks at the back of the garden, and silver queen is also listed as a hybrid.)

www.mbsseed.com...


That is what he is referring to GM corn (hybrid) as opposed to open pollinated naturally cross pollinated.

Monsanto adds what is called round-up ready corn to 90%+ it's plantable corn that does not produce seeds, but it is suppose to be able to handle the weed killer that farmers put down. This itself is a worthless practice because the roundup or weed killer is doing many things. Pesticide corn is not yet available on a wide scale because it really doesn't work and is only in the testing phase.

Roundup ready corn and what is does:

One it completely kills all beneficial nitrifying bacteria and microbes need to break down nutrients and convert organic matter into usable nitrogen that the plant can use. And 2 it is produce a strain of weeds that is roundup resistant or called super weeds.

We are so short sighted in this country, because the rest of the world has pretty much banned this type of seed.

Google search

[edit on 7-8-2007 by Realtruth]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Ridiculous.

I don't much care for "stories" when we are talking about such a huge issue as modified crops.

Hardly scientific, strung up corn in the back yard, and a topic for the dinner table at best.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
Ridiculous.

I agree.

Tens of thousands of lab tests, experimental plantings, animal and human trials blah blah blah and no-one spots any problems. Then along comes one anecdote, unverified, from a site that actually makes a boast of its lack of editorial professionalism ('by the people, for the people'), about a few raccoons in one particular place refusing to eat a few ears of corn and the whole GM project is thrown into doubt?

I don't think so.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

Tens of thousands of lab tests, experimental plantings, animal and human trials blah blah blah and no-one spots any problems. Then along comes one anecdote, unverified, from a site that actually makes a boast of its lack of editorial professionalism ('by the people, for the people'), about a few raccoons in one particular place refusing to eat a few ears of corn and the whole GM project is thrown into doubt?

I don't think so.


So the whole world ought to take the word of those doing the scientific work, and also the selling of the products, and never mind any personal observation.

And to head off the "There are government standards and laws that protect people" answer that I'm sure to hear; I don't trust people that can be bought as easily as half of our government, on all levels, can be bought.

So if you want to blindly follow the herd and swear by the crap our corporate overmasters put out, go ahead. Just don't expect everybody to agree. Better living through chemicals is not on my drug free agenda.

How they wish we would recite this:

"I pledge allegiance to Monsanto, and the conglomerate for which it stands, highly visable and next to God, with ignorance and power over all."



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:31 AM
link   
"I pledge allegiance to bandwagon trends, and the ignorance for which it stands, completely useless and next to nothing, with amusement for the educated among us."

Changes mine.

It's highly amusing to me that this "folksie" claim is held in such high esteem.
This just in; my cat does not like the sweeper at all. I believe this just goes to show you that sweepers are a horror upon mankind and cat's are just smarter than us because they know.

All knowing small mammals, show us the path.



----------------------------
Removed quotation BB Code

[edit on 10/8/07 by masqua]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
forsakenwayfarer, since you speak of your cat in the present tense, you must not have found the cat food that kills, and was passed right along through channels to our pet population.

Now when pets started dying, vets started checking, and the problem was found from the bottom up, not from the top down. In other words, there was no notice until there was a problem with the animals.

Gee, sounds like you smart, "Don't pay any attention to what the animals do." bunch lost out that round.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:46 AM
link   
This has nothing at all to do with poisoned food. (which is also the same ingredients used in a lot of PEOPLE food.) Having a known poisonous chemical placed in food by either neglect or plain ignorance, or something more sinister, STILL has nothing to do with genetically modified food.
The connection just isn't there, and it's nothing more than pulling for straws because you don't have any valid argument here.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
Ridiculous.

I don't much care for "stories" when we are talking about such a huge issue as modified crops.

Hardly scientific, strung up corn in the back yard, and a topic for the dinner table at best.



Originally posted by Astyanax


Tens of thousands of lab tests, experimental plantings, animal and human trials blah blah blah and no-one spots any problems. Then along comes one anecdote, unverified, from a site that actually makes a boast of its lack of editorial professionalism ('by the people, for the people'), about a few raccoons in one particular place refusing to eat a few ears of corn and the whole GM project is thrown into doubt?

I don't think so.


Before the both of you make up your minds by everything you already think know, here is some info I think will interest you, unless you want to follow blind ignorance.

Have you actually done any digging into this subject? I can see that you haven't.

I posted this article to make a point from the perspective of a normal everyday person seeing the results of a product that animals refuse to eat globally and not just in his backyard.

Here are just a few links with scientific studies and conclusive results.

Animals Avoid GM for a Good Reason


Although it may be difficult to credit animals with the ability to distinguish between GM and non-GM feed, this anecdotal evidence is supported by scientific evidence that they can indeed distinguish between organically- and non-organically-produced feed

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


GM Grains are Illegal in Europe



The presence of this GM material in rice on sale in the UK is illegal under European health law, even at extremely low levels," said FSA director of food safety Dr Andrew Wadge.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
This has nothing at all to do with poisoned food. (which is also the same ingredients used in a lot of PEOPLE food.) Having a known poisonous chemical placed in food by either neglect or plain ignorance, or something more sinister, STILL has nothing to do with genetically modified food.
The connection just isn't there, and it's nothing more than pulling for straws because you don't have any valid argument here.


Ah, but it does bear on the subject. If an animal has food that it rejects, no matter if the data is empirical in nature, it should be noted. My dog refused to eat for two days because all at once he didn't want what had before been his favorite brand. I changed to another brand and he ate it. I later found out that I had been trying to feed him poisoned food.

The point is that when animals show signs that they find something to be wrong with food, we ought to at least take a closer look instead of relying on the maker of that item to tell us the truth.

Now you want to ridicule anyone who pays attention to the animals in this story, as if there is NO WAY something could be wrong with the corn. You base your position on the fact that it's been tested in a lab. Yet, you have no way of knowing if the product itself was made/altered under as stringent of conditions as the original experiments. You have no reason, except blind faith in the manufacturing entity itself, to think that some costly safety protocols may have been "overlooked".

That is defacto a pledge of allegiance to the big boys in agribusiness.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
The connection just isn't there, and it's nothing more than pulling for straws because you don't have any valid argument here.


I never pull straws only slowing try to educated people that do not want to see the real truth that is right in front of them and there is plenty of evidence out there that have valid scientific results, if people make the effort to read.

Since I own a large farm myself I have seen the results first hand, but most of the time, that means nothing to people that live in the city and eat what is feed to them without questioning it. Kind of like cattle, but worse.


Analogy: Remember the miners that bought birds into the mine shafts with them to protect themselves from undetectable gases, they died due to their sensitivity to the gases, thus allowing the miners to escape sometimes before they were enveloped by deadly gases.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

Tens of thousands of lab tests, experimental plantings, animal and human trials blah blah blah and no-one spots any problems. Then along comes one anecdote, unverified, from a site that actually makes a boast of its lack of editorial professionalism ('by the people, for the people'), about a few raccoons in one particular place refusing to eat a few ears of corn and the whole GM project is thrown into doubt?

I don't think so.


Those tens of thousands of tests weren't ALL favorable toward Monsanto's GM corn.....but perhaps the un-favorable ones were with held??


When a German court ordered Monsanto to make public a controversial 90-day rat study on June 20, 2005, the data upheld claims by prominent scientists who said that animals fed the genetically modified (GM) corn developed extensive health effects in the blood, kidneys and liver and that humans eating the corn might be at risk.


The GM crops have pesticides added.......

genetically engineered to produce a form of a pesticide called bacillus thuringiensis or Bt, designed to attack a corn pest called the root worm.

www.newswithviews.com...

Sounds like intentional poisoning to me......and if it was doing no harm, why be devious about reporting the outcomes of tests like the one mentioned above??



posted on Aug, 10 2007 @ 12:39 PM
link   
i have collected plenty of links regarding GMOs and their rarely ever ementioned side effects, ignore them at your own peril, because, while various lab tests certainly exist, you are not going to hear of the more alarming ones....


let's go:

the same story form another website, which might be considered untrustworthy by some, but so be it

an example of genetic deviation in GM soybeans, this unexpected mutation remained unnoticed for quite a while, because most labs only look at several key markers and ignore 99% of the the inserted genetic code, even fewer will fully sequence the entire genome, but that's where transcription errors can occur.

here's an animal study for a change, probably 'not scientific enough', though....


- mice.. good enough?


another one that slipped through




but finally, one of the worst and of the earlier incidents:

EMS 1989 - this one is real fun because IF this incident had surfaced in 1989, the GM industry would have been shut down for good.

follow-up - the aftermath, including another racket and another apalling instance of absolutism, the banning of an amino acid.

a few more links for your perusal

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 10 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 10 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   
The alteration of quotes and the creation of entirely false quotes will stop immediately.

Any further posts containing altered quotes will be dealt with quickly.



From the T&C's

1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

Alteration of quotes is hoaxing.


[edit on 10/8/07 by masqua]



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Ah yes, Monsanto, the folks who gave us Nutrasweet.

Monsanto, the folks whose wonderful genetically altered products contaminate non-Monsanto farmers' crops. Then for good measure, Monsanto puts their legal resources into action to SUE those criminal farmers who are unlucky enough to have crops down wind from a genetically modified crop.

Monsanto--better living through human experimentation, coercion and litigation.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join