Stars align in protest against food giant Monsanto over GMO crops!

page: 3
54
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Never mind lol
edit on 15-5-2013 by Spiro because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
May 25th - Eat GMO foods.

Got it, written down in my planner.

Whenever you see celebrities getting involved, you know the "anti" side is just all about money.


EDIT: And of course DeVito, Maher and Matthews are against a company that desires perfection with its products. Those 3 will put their name on any smelly turd that can make them money. They know nothing about quality control. Who produces your albums there, Dave? Probably sounds awful without it, like your live show, right?
edit on 14-5-2013 by DaTroof because: (no reason given)


Oh please, celebrities getting involved means it's about money? You've got to be kidding.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElOmen
I was hoping to find celestial stars not celebrity stars.


Well as long as it helps bring monsanto down they're good in my book
edit on 14-5-2013 by ElOmen because: (no reason given)


Lol, i guess it was not me just thinking that also



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
reply to post by DAVID64
 


Monsanto can sue all they want. It's up to a judge to make a ruling. Hate the judges, not the company.


Secondly, I don't believe a word of those BS reports about cancer. Every single one has been skewed, poorly controlled, or misinterpreted to the point of scientific worthlessness.

Ever had a banana? Genetically modified. Own a dog that's not a feral wolf? Genetically modified.

Environmental lies + emotional BS = cash grab. See: Carbon tax


Hate the judges? Please! There wouldn't BE a judge if Monsanto weren't suing, let alone the fact that there is a well known revolving door of top executives who work for Monsanto, then the FDA, then Monsanto, then the court system.

There are so many studies published in medical journals, not just the ones in the news, so many studies out there that suggest that GMOs might be problematic, that honestly, I think most logical thinking people would be stupid not to at least question them. What does NOT get questioned are Monsanto's continued pronouncements that "it's perfectly safe." They said that about DDT too, didn't they? Monsanto themselves have never done as exhaustive testing on their GMOs that third parties have. So again, why in the world would I trust them?

The very fact that many of their crops are engineered produce their own pesticides that explode the stomachs of bugs, and that PEOPLE ARE EXPECTED TO EAT THIS is something I have no comprehension of anyone not being worried about. "Kills bugs, but won't harm a hair on us." Please!

Not to mention, that now that the plants are impervious to to Roundup, people spray a lot more of it. So whether the GMO crops in and of themselves are harmful or not, the food we get is full of more toxins because of this entire process.

And there is a HUGE difference between genetically modified and breeding. Ever had a different type of banana that has been bred selectively? Yes. Ever had a banana that was injected with DNA from a completely different organism not even of the same species? No.

edit on 15-5-2013 by thebtheb because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyofGlass
reply to post by MariaLida
 


I have mixed feelings about GMO food. I think it has great potential for keeping large populations of people alive where traditional crops can't. I think there's great potential for creating crops that can grow anywhere regardless of the environment, which could change nations that normally have lived in less desirable areas for food production.

I do not have mixed feelings about the current power of the GMO companies. The problem doesn't even rest with the companies themselves as they are doing what by law they are there to do, which is to maximize shareholder's value.

The blame rests in what type of system we have. Governments always grow from tiny monsters to large ones because they are in many ways no different from any other organized crime system. What we now have is one that is completely bought and paid for by certain groups of investors. Our constitution that was an experiment in many ways has failed completely. Anyone looking on would see how that happened, as the system itself never had a network of accountability. Never did we see the worst politicians get tried and executed for their crimes, rather they went off to work for the corporations they sold their souls to.

So now we are where we're at. There's nothing any of you can do about it. Even if these celebrities did anything it would all be for show and any real progress made will be when regular citizens worldwide admit the common failure among all of us, which is that we have put someone else in charge of our well being. Someone whose best interest is as far removed from our own best interest.

GMOs are one of the greatest inventions of mankind. Like all great inventions though, what you see come from it isn't it's potential good but the potential harm. Atomic power was used to destroy innocent lives instead of powering trains. Tesla's technology is probably being used to change weather and probably caused a tsunami, not give free energy to the world. GMOs are being used to maximize shareholder value, not to feed the world as they have the potential to do. Take every great humanitarian invention and you'll see more often than not, it was first used to do something evil.


From the research I've done, that whole "feed the world" solution of GMOs I think is an absolute crock. We fed the world fine before these crops, which are only about 12 years old. What happened before 12 years ago? Um, we fed the world. Or no, should I say, rich nations fed themselves and ignored poor nations, which is still the case. Who are GMOs feeding? The US and Canada and that's about it, people that were fed fine to begin with. Almost everyone involved in GMOs that touts them as this great thing to feed everyone is simply someone who is benefitting financially, farmers, government and the GMO makers. No benefit has been proven anywhere else.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by demongoat
 


There's a growing body of evidence that suggests GMO food may damage DNA. When you are combining plant and animal genes that isn't a surprise in my view. This stuff needs to be proven safe in the long-term before it's put onto the market, let alone forced upon people by not labelling it.

You feel it's safe, you eat it. Many people don't though, and they have right to choose what they eat. Why do you think so many countries have banned GMO, or at least made the labelling of it mandatory? Are they and all their scientific advisors lacking in knowledge?

These protests aren't only about GMO food though. They are about Monsanto's monopolization of the food industry, and it's financial influence on political policy.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by thebtheb
 


Rich nations feeding the world isn't the world feeding itself. If you know anything about raising crops, you'd know that longitude has absolutely everything to do with how easily you can grow things. When you genetically modify a crop you change it's properties to mimic another crop (or species) that is completely different. You could take a watermelon and splice it with a cactus and have a delicious fruit growing in the desert with very little water present. Just one example. The results of GMOs need to be studied very carefully and that's one thing I don't see happening. Anyone notice how tasteless tomatoes are? It's because they are genetically modified to not bruise so companies can use machines to pick them.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Cross breading is not the same as genetically modified. If you informed yourself you wouldn't sound so foolish. Monsanto Geneticly Modified Corn, wheat. stuff like that has moth DNA in them to stop fungus. Moth...let me repeat that ....moth DNA in corn. Yeah that's completely healthy,



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I don't really see the logic in labeling when most of the food supply is already owned my Monsanto. Labeling might be a good idea but this company needs a dose of Karma, it needs to burn to the ground with all of the CEO's and executives all held in life imprisonment for crimes against humanity. Hell, maybe arrest every single employee at Monsanto.

This monopoly is so tainted and evil it needs to be burned down. Labeling won't do anything since they own must of the food supply, and the average american doesn't give a # anyway if it's bad food, he just want's it cheap and readily available.

People might even choose cheaper GMO food then real organic non GMO food because of the price difference.

Only in America...



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyofGlass
reply to post by thebtheb
 


Rich nations feeding the world isn't the world feeding itself. If you know anything about raising crops, you'd know that longitude has absolutely everything to do with how easily you can grow things. When you genetically modify a crop you change it's properties to mimic another crop (or species) that is completely different. You could take a watermelon and splice it with a cactus and have a delicious fruit growing in the desert with very little water present. Just one example. The results of GMOs need to be studied very carefully and that's one thing I don't see happening. Anyone notice how tasteless tomatoes are? It's because they are genetically modified to not bruise so companies can use machines to pick them.


Tomatoes are not genetically modified. There is no GMO tomato at present. Tomatoes have been BRED not to bruise, etc. Huge difference.
edit on 15-5-2013 by thebtheb because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by thebtheb
 


You, like many other's do not even understand what you are arguing about. Please look up "Flavr Savr" then come back and make an argument. That is only one example of a genetically modified tomato.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by XLR8R
 


It IS completely healthy. You're not eating a moth, and even if you were, so what? A moth is nature. Man, the anti-GMO crowd is so misinformed it's hilarious. The Moon might be the Sun's angry brother, so FEAR IT!



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by thoiter
reply to post by randyvs
 


It's the whole system that needs changing. If it allows politicians to be bought, it's broken.


You nailed it. And the only system that won't allow people to be bought is a system with absolutely no currency
what so ever.

Because the truth is,

" The LOVE of money is the root of all evil "



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DaTroof
 


Oy DaTrook, I am sure you understand the legitimate concerns with GMOs that people like us should have. I am concerned that engineers are currently designing fruits and vegetables that cannot breed. In the same instance I am glad they are creating GMOs that cannot breed because it works as it's own fail safe.

I am also concerned with the the whole corporation complex that happens when companies own the government. That's a different concern altogether however. I really love the idea of GMOs but human beings at this point are still bred to be violent patriotic servants. Until we fix that we can't grow the maturity to be responsible with self evolution, even in the evolution of plants and veggies.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Actually you don't really understand the science which is being used. They are in some instances incorporating genes which produce toxins, these toxins are harmful to insect pests. In other circumstances they are inserting genes that enable a farmer to spray his crops with herbicides like round up.

What you have is a recipe for long term accumulation of toxic elements in our food chain. There are certain plants that do not get attacked by aphids etc, funnily enough those plants are not included in our diet a they are often toxic to us.

I am not actually against GMO technology but I know for a fact it is not regulated nearly enough and I also know there is a lack of morality and long term vision with these things. I don't suppose you understand horizontal and vertical transmission? Well these are things that need to be understood before we start doing this kind of work.

People often cite dogs and cows as being GMO's, which in some sense in correct, in the same sense we are GMO's. The difference is that these changes happened slowly over generations and you are not pulling genes from one organism and inserting it into unrelated taxa.

I have a long background in this technology and I would not put a single GMO food in my mouth unless I had information on what genes have been used and what organism they came from.

I am not having a go here. I am simple trying to explain that you only get a limited amount of information from the media and these corporations so be careful



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by thoiter
reply to post by demongoat
 


There's a growing body of evidence that suggests GMO food may damage DNA. When you are combining plant and animal genes that isn't a surprise in my view. This stuff needs to be proven safe in the long-term before it's put onto the market, let alone forced upon people by not labelling it.

no there isn't the only studies have been using rats prone to cancer, about the only real effort made is trying to figure out if this will ever be a concern at all,
how in the world would GMO damage DNA? do you know what they modify? drought and pesticide resistance, how in the world would that be a problem for our DNA? the only concern would be what they modify but inserting genes that produce harmful effects would be a great way to get into a lot of trouble.




You feel it's safe, you eat it. Many people don't though, and they have right to choose what they eat.

where did i say they couldn't? i just find it stupid not to when there is no proof it causes harm and in fact the only modifications they do is to make the plant more resistant to drought and pesticides.


Why do you think so many countries have banned GMO, or at least made the labelling of it mandatory?

pure ignorance and fear, studying something to know more about it is fine, but banning GMO is foolish, there is no evidence it causes harm. the only stuff showing harm is produced by biased liars pretending roundup caused cancer was caused by genetically modified corn.


Are they and all their scientific advisors lacking in knowledge?

lol when america puts people on science boards that know nothing about science, there is no reason to believe any other country is doing any better,
i doubt the politicians listen to their advisers, i bet the bans were out of a need to placate their constituents, not out of a real threat.
there isn't enough evidence to show harm, this was purely political on the part of the governments who banned o lableled GMO.
pure butt-covering to save their careers.


These protests aren't only about GMO food though. They are about Monsanto's monopolization of the food industry, and it's financial influence on political policy.

i agree with them then, as i posted before, the stuff monsanto does to businesses and society is evil.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Hmmm, this place is confusing, most think it's funny or "normal" for men to eat Hearts in war, but not GMOs??? What gives there?

Anyway, have any of you heard of the science genetic experiments they are doing now with mice? Taking out half of the brain, injecting human cells to make human mice creature? And then, add that to the Brain mapping,

Looks like, GMOs are going to be least of worries, or maybe,

That's part of grooming us for a mixing of sorts, yea this is off topic, but curious as to what people think of this? As science doesn't seem to invested in ethics, are you concerned that your children's generation may be forced to undergo, half human half animal mergers? Or. Half machine? After all, it's Progress right?

But yea, these mice they experimenting on, are passing tests, so to speak, wonder what thoughts are on this because this seems to be the wave of future, genetic altering that is.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by demongoat
 


Normally I am not ultra-scrutinizing but the point I will make is this: There is no law forcing companies to post their genetic manipulations to where other scientists can copy the experiment and do what they have done. You can't make statements that "there is no evidence" because the whole system is skewed and biased.

A person like me cannot go to their basement in a small-funded research project and seek the truth in regard to how these genetic manipulations react with one another. Please don't post more corporate sponsored arguments as this helps none of the peons like us.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
of course i applaud everybodys efforts in fighting this monster, wouldn't it be a good idea to simply add "GMO FREE" to product labels? obviously one can then make an educated choice and start to avoid buying monsantos products. the selection may be small at first, but more and more companies will follow. its capitalism, so they will follow the demand of consumers?



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MariaLida
 


I've never been to a protest march in my entire life, but I'm going to this one.






top topics



 
54
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join