'Frankenstein' meat could get go-ahead in EU: Safety fears over the use of GM animals, page 1


Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 15 times
Topic started on 15-7-2012 @ 07:12 AM by Corruption Exposed

'Frankenstein' meat could get go-ahead in EU: Safety fears over the use of GM animals


www.dailymail.co.uk
The first step towards approving the use of genetically modified animals to make so-called ‘Frankenstein foods’ has been unveiled by European food watchdogs.

They have produced guidance on how to examine the risk posed to the environment by genetically modified fish, insects and animals.

Critics fear the new consultation document will ‘open the floodgates’ to the widespread farming of GM animals and crops across Europe.

Details of the plans have been revealed by the European Food Safety Au
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.fda.gov
www.telegraph. co.uk
www.dailymail.co.uk< br />
Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Frankenstein Foods- Health Hazard or Not
FDA Issues Final Regulations for Genetically Engineered Animals


reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 09:13 AM by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by JosephKnecht



What worries me is the increased rate of exposure to the use of genetically modified foods and animals by the media in recent years. It's almost as if they are desensitizing us to the whole issue by bombarding us with announcements of "how safe it is" of "studies show that the risks are minimal" when in reality they really don't know what they are talking about.

Some people think this is a good thing but I don't think tinkering with Mother Nature is a good idea.


reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 11:28 AM by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by wingdflame



I can understand your point where you can see some good from genetic engineering. Perhaps it would one day allow us to cure diseases and improve the quality of life. Regrettably I'm unsure whether or not this is the path we are taking. There are obvious positive possibilities when it comes to this kind of research, but I can see a whole lot of bad as well.

I just hope we don't screw things up so bad where we can't fix it. We already have enough crap going on so the last thing we need is genetic hybrids screwing up millions of years of natural evolution.


reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 01:51 PM by TheLegend
reply to post by thebtheb


With 95% of soybeans, 86% of corn, and 70-75% of all processed foods in the US containing GMO ingredients, then who is to thank for that "surplus"? Why is the nation with the most GMO food also one of the most well fed and obese? A problem with proponents against GMO is that a researcher from 08, who many studies reference, came out and said that they "grossly misinterpreted" her study on purpose. Read the blue.

Notice I said "resilient". They don't require pesticides, which infect the soil and water, and are immune to viruses. That's a fact which makes them more versatile. They're also working on drought-tolerant crops. Whether it yields more is debatable as there's scientific groups advocating both yes and no. However, it's an evolving science. I imagine interstellar civilizations are eating GMO while space traveling. It would just be a much more refined form than our current GMO.

But some are missing the true intent here. GMO caused 99% sterility by the 3rd generation in animal studies. Don't forget Bill Gates supports GMO greatly and has a hand in shaping it. He hates humans and publicly said there needs to be less people - he even has a formula. That's the main agenda, not profits or feeding people (altho in the far future GMO will completely replace organic and be superior). Right now it's either GMO or WWIII. Choose your poison. Oh wait, they already chose for you.
edit on 15-7-2012 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 02:47 PM by thebtheb
Originally posted by TheLegend
reply to
post by thebtheb


With 95% of soybeans, 86% of corn, and 70-75% of all processed foods in the US containing GMO ingredients, then who is to thank for that "surplus"? Why is the nation with the most GMO food also one of the most well fed and obese? A problem with proponents against GMO is that a researcher from 08, who many studies reference, came out and said that they "grossly misinterpreted" her study on purpose. Read the blue.

Notice I said "resilient". They don't require pesticides, which infect the soil and water, and are immune to viruses. That's a fact which makes them more versatile. They're also working on drought-tolerant crops. Whether it yields more is debatable as there's scientific groups advocating both yes and no. However, it's an evolving science. I imagine interstellar civilizations are eating GMO while space traveling. It would just be a much more refined form than our current GMO.

But some are missing the true intent here. GMO caused 99% sterility by the 3rd generation in animal studies. Don't forget Bill Gates supports GMO greatly and has a hand in shaping it. He hates humans and publicly said there needs to be less people - he even has a formula. That's the main agenda, not profits or feeding people (altho in the far future GMO will completely replace organic and be superior). Right now it's either GMO or WWIII. Choose your poison. Oh wait, they already chose for you.
edit on 15-7-2012 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)


That study is ONE study among many. Other studies suggest it's more like 30% less. There is bad journalism, I agree, but I base my opinion on several dozen studies I've read.

They don't require pesticides? GMO crops are DROWNED in pesticides, many of them are designed to be resistant to Roundup, so farmers use even more than they ever did. Roundup is poisoning the soil.

And PUHLEASE about the whole Bill Gates said he wants to reduce the world population. Watch the video he allegedly said that in - it was a tiny slip of the tongue in the way he phrased a sentence, nothing more. Talk about taking something out of context and running with it.


reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 03:22 PM by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by thebtheb




And PUHLEASE about the whole Bill Gates said he wants to reduce the world population. Watch the video he allegedly said that in - it was a tiny slip of the tongue in the way he phrased a sentence, nothing more. Talk about taking something out of context and running with i


It was not a slip of the tongue, here let me refresh your memory.


The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.




Please tell me how that is a slip of the tongue, especially since he has said similar things on various occasions. If Bill Gates is funding it then it most likely has hidden motives.
edit on 15-7-2012 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 15-7-2012 @ 03:30 PM by Maslo
reply to post by Corruption Exposed





Please tell me how that is a slip of the tongue, especially since he has said similar things on various occasions. If Bill Gates is funding it then it most likely has hidden motives.


This Bill Gates quote does not prove any sinister motives, it was debunked a million times already. Better access to reproductive services means less population growth.
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^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