GMO Crop Sabotage on the Rise, page 5


Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 90 times


reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 12:56 AM by rockn82
reply to post by obamuh



Surely you would not have children if you knew having them would be a death sentence for them. Yet, they continue to have children. Why? What is in inside a human that thinks even though they are starving they should invite a child to come into this world only to watch it wither die by their doing? Should we be sending all of Africa condoms? Should we continue to help those who do not wish to help themselves? I am rather certain they understand their plight. Trust me, I do understand your sentiment of wishing to save lives; but at what point do we draw the line? Do we kill the many to save the few? Do the ends justify the means? Why do you place the blame of the death of Africans on the shoulders of the people that take an "anti-GMO stance"? From your reasoning it would be fine to kill off every head of livestock on the planet so long as it sustained the populace even though it may lead to our eventual destruction.

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

My friend I will say just one last thing before I go. Every instance, every single one, of humans interfering with nature has lead to a terrible outcome.

Well Wishes



reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 04:33 PM by dingleberrysalad
as far as gmo's go, nobody really knows what nasty effects they're going to have on our health in the future, but the obvious problems we can see are that it's all about the control that these companies have. it's not bad enough for these guys to f_ck around with our food in all ways imaginable, but the whole biotech thing is just a movement to monopolize our food supply, from the farmer who plants the seed all the way to the market. there are so many things wrong with this subject, i could go on and on, but i just have to say that the root to the whole problem is how aware the consumer is. the root to so many problems that the world has is that your "average joe" just doesn't give a sh-t. happily oblivious to everything that isn't a blatant invasion of his little bubble of self-centered consumerism.
if only "freedom of the press" actually meant something.
who knows the truth about anything that's happening all across the world? who can know? poor people might be lucky to get basic cable, which is the most obvious propaganda that's out there, though they might have internet access, they have to search, and search, to find any shred of truth about anything, then they need to find evidence to back it up.
the real tragedy is that the poor people are the ones who are taken advantage of. unknowing or even knowing slaves, who have know other choice, no other way of survival than to just give in and play the game.
and who can afford to eat organic? there is not middle class anymore. there is only slaves any overseers.
big businesses like monsanto keep pushing to make the whole world eat THEIR food, and they won't even eat it themselves, hell, they're the ones can afford not to.
whoever may be reading this post, or maybe even doing they're own research about things may know the truth, but what about the majority who just don't care? those who don't have the internet have such limited resources to get the truth from, how do we keep them informed? will they accept what you tell them?
not only must we keep informed for our own personal health, and while you may not really care about the health of the d1ckhead that lives down the street, his children don't have much of a choice what he puts on their dinner plate now do they? what they know is what he wants them to know, and this is how they come into the world, generation after generation, mindless consumers, who don't have the courage or even the time to care about things that don't seem to effect them. or maybe their just don't happen to be interested in the subject. is it a matter of interest, or is it a matter of just having a little bit of moral fiber in your diet as well as concern for the well being of those who are led blind-folded into the blender of capitalist greed?

just a little food for thought my friends,
here's a couple links for anybody who's new to the subject,
later

www.ornl.gov...
www.saynotogmos.org...
www.ethicalinvesting.com...
www.sourcewatch.org...
www.organicconsumers.org...
www.monsantosucks.com...


reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 05:03 PM by gladtobehere
The environmental concern is valid. The other very real concern is the effect that these Frankenstein Foods, Franken Foods, Genetically Modified Foods, Genetically Modified Organisms "GMOs"; not the least of which are Bt-toxins and rBGH, have on our bodies.

Part of the issue is the fact that the giant food conglomerates who can fund these studies have no interest in doing so, or if they do, its on a short term basis.

Though efforts have been made to discredit him, Dr. Arpad Pusztai documented the effects of GMO foods on rats:

When Pusztai fed supposedly harmless GMOs to rats, they developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and showed signs of a damaged immune system. Moreover, the results clearly indicated that the cause of the problem was due to the unpredictable side effects arising from the process of genetic engineering itself. In other words, his study suggested that the GM foods already on the market, which were created from the same process, might also create such effects.

When Dr Pusztai expressed his concern he was fired from his job of 35 years and silenced with threats of a lawsuit. His 20-member research team was disbanded, all testing protocols were abandoned, and the pro-GM establishment embarked on an extensive disinformation campaign to discredit the study’s results to protect the reputation of GM foods already in the marketplace.

www.seedsofdeception.com...


Once again, without fail, the FDA has abandoned the safety of the consumer over the profitability of the corporate state:

It’s easy to understand the FDA’s industry-friendly policy on regulation of GMOs when you see the revolving door between agency regulators and the companies they regulate.

The FDA has claimed it was not aware of any information showing that GM crops were different “in any meaningful or uniform way,” from non-GMO crops and therefore didn’t require testing. But 44,000 internal FDA documents made public by a lawsuit show that this was a complete lie.

The overwhelming consensus among the FDA’s own scientists was that GM foods were quite different and could lead to unpredictable and hard-to-detect allergens, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems. It turns out that FDA scientists, who had urged superiors to require long-term studies, were ignored.

www.seedsofdeception.com...



reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 05:32 PM by SarK0Y
reply to post by grahag



You're grouping together all GMO again. Please don't. Not all GMO is harmful to the environment. And you need to quantify your statements if you're going to scare people with them.

my friend, i didn't say "all GMO", i said "current GMO" & look, Primary cause to grow GMO is to get most stable plants against outer factors(climatic zones, animals/insects/fungi/bacterias/viruses)+ minimal time to blossom up. but, in fact, we face two d(r)eadful troubles:
1. if whatEver Alive doesn't consume those plants, where are causes to conjecture plants shall be harmless for humans???
2. where are the techs to renew Croplands??? GMO only accelerate the devastation of soil.


reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 05:37 PM by gladtobehere
Mike Adams, the Health Ranger (www.naturalnews.com...), has a lot of great information on his website. Didnt know he had a rap "fetish".

edit on 5-11-2010 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 5-11-2010 @ 08:25 PM by SarK0Y
reply to post by cybertroy



The bottom line is, will the GMO crop nourish us, in other words, will our body accept it as good healthy food? And will the environment accept it, in other words will it decompose normally into usable compounds, and will it harm or help animals?

surely, No: to get maximal crop needs to apply very harmful methods against environment.
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags