Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"If GM crops are bad, show us the evidence"- UK 'Independent'

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 




Whether it is safe to eat or not, it is the fact that these companies lobby our politicians, they have them under their control.

So, you can provide no study conclusively demonstrating GMO crops are harmful.

The seeds are patented, they are monopolising the food supply of the world, country by country. If it doesn't worry you, then at least worry for the poor bastards who will come to inhabit this world after us.

Why should I worry about something that has not been proven harmful? What if it is purely beneficial?


You keep saying 'what if', so you really think it is a good idea to introduce GMO all around the world based on the fact that it might be beneficial? 'What if' it isn't?

Any company that creates a 'terminator' seed should be viewed with extreme suspicion. Why do they lobby so much to prove the safety of their products yet refuse to label what is GMO in the USA? Why are Monsanto so friendly with the US government?

You put a lot of faith into these extremely corrupt people-





posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   

One of the main arguments offered in support of the wide use of genetically engineered crops is that they reduce overall pesticide use. This is particularly the case with Monsanto’s “Bt” line of corn, soy, and cotton seeds, which are able to produce their own pesticide, a “natural” toxin from genes of the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis. Ironically, commercial pesticide derived from Bt also happens to be one of the only chemical pesticides approved for use in organic agriculture, because it’s produced through a biological process.

Biotechnology companies thus consider Bt seeds some of their most “eco-friendly” products. In theory, farmers don’t have to spray pesticide as much or as often on these crops, and therefore pesticide runoff into waterways is much less of a concern. Well, after years of denial, Monsanto finally admitted recently that superbugs, or pests that have evolved to be able to eat the Bt crops, are a real and growing concern. And now, researchers at the University of Notre Dame have shown that the Bt from genetically engineered maize is polluting waterways in Indiana (the study area). They found Bt toxin in almost 25 percent of streams they tested, and all the streams that tested positive were within 1,500 feet from a cornfield.

Bt gets into streams and rivers by leaching out of crop debris left on fields through the now-ubiquitous industrial “no-till” farming technique, in which fields aren’t plowed after harvest so as to prevent soil erosion. As a result, leaves and stalks get washed into streams through large-scale farms’ irrigation canals: the Notre Dame scientists found such debris in almost 90 percent of streams near cornfields. And while the Bt levels detected weren’t shockingly high, the tests were performed six months after harvest. The debris had been sitting in the streams and leaching Bt pesticide into the water for quite a while.

The fun part? No one has any idea yet of the effects of long-term, low-dose exposure to Bt on fish and wildlife. Perhaps it’s high time somebody did a study on that since, as the researchers dryly observed, the presence of Bt toxin “may be a more common occurrence in watersheds draining maize-growing regions than previously recognized.” Apparently.

So. Not only do genetically engineered crops have worse yields than conventionally bred crops, cost more, lead to pesticide resistance, contaminate other plants with their transgenes, possibly cause allergies and even organ damage, but now we also learn that the plants themselves are possibly poisonous to the environment.

grist.org...



There's not a whole lot left to say about the negative effects of GMO......except they are evil and all should ban them.
edit on 13-6-2013 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Post the peer reviewed study right now. You aren't getting away with a drive by. Post that stuff right now

You post hypocritical crapola...

Yes there are independent studies by scientists that are not beholden to the biotech industry.

When asked for links to the studies, you post links to reviews of the studies, not the actual studies. Or you post something like this...

Google is your friend...or not as we have recently found out. There are plenty of studies out there, Do your own homework. Why are GMOs forbidden in most European countries. I am not here to do your work for you. Actually, YOU prove up and post some studies telling everyone how genetically modified food is all the rage.

After all this time, you still do not know how this site works...I am not the one making the claims here...the OP is...I am asking for salient documentation to support the claims made here...not some hyperbolic crapola...
As far as your links are concerned, I read the material. From your first link, I read the following:

The study was reportedly run by Profit Pro and is called the "2012 Corn Comparison Report."

I entered the following in the Google search and invite all other participants here to do the same:
2012 Corn Comparison Report
In return, I receive the following:
Results
So, there is no published study...just the reviews...why will these groups not link to the actual study?
From your second link, I entered the following:
2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn
In return, I received the following message:

Your search - 2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn Learn more ... - did not match any documents. Suggestions: Make sure all words are spelled correctly. Try different keywords. Try more general keywords. Try fewer keywords.

Search results
Your claims are found wanting...

There are no actual studies demonstrating any support for the claims made by the OP...



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by totallackey
 


OK I failed according to you. Post up Bro. Can't wait to see your peer reviewed studies.

How's this:


Pigs fed GM grain suffer health problems, study says

Pigs fed a combination of genetically modified soy and corn suffer more frequent severe stomach inflammation and enlargement of the uterus than those who eat a non-GM diet, according to a new peer-reviewed long-term feeding study published Tuesday in the Organic Systems Journal.

The five-month study combined “real on-farm conditions” with “strict scientific controls,” according to lead researcher Judy Carman of Flinders University in Australia.
edit on 13-6-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)


On another edit: Look, it has been established that GMOs are no good. We are just about the only country that allows them. I am not going back and forth with you. And certainly anyone who reads this thread will have enough information to research the subject further. Oh, you hate that, don't you??
edit on 13-6-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 




You keep saying 'what if', so you really think it is a good idea to introduce GMO all around the world based on the fact that it might be beneficial? 'What if' it isn't? Any company that creates a 'terminator' seed should be viewed with extreme suspicion. Why do they lobby so much to prove the safety of their products yet refuse to label what is GMO in the USA? Why are Monsanto so friendly with the US government? You put a lot of faith into these extremely corrupt people-


Look, it is quite simple...Just like the title of your thread...If GMO crops are bad, show the evidence...I asked for studies...All I have found are studies stating the words, "possible," maybe," and, "potentially."

What do you know about "terminator," seeds?



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   
People forget that GM seeds are made to be resistant to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide. This is so fields can be liberally doused with Monsanto's poison and the crops will still grow. This encourages over use of the Roundup herbicide which ends up in the food product, watersheds, and aquifers and eventually it ends up in us.

For more information on Monsanto please visit this thread.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


No, I do not hate that...and thank you for finally linking to an actual freaking study...

Study link


Conclusion
Pigs fed a GMO diet exhibited heavier uteri and a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation than pigs fed a comparable non-GMO diet. Given the widespread use of GMO feed for livestock as well as humans this is a cause for concern. The results indicate that it would be prudent for GM crops that are destined for human food and animal feed, including stacked GM crops, to undergo long-term animal feeding studies preferably before commercial planting, particularly for toxicological and reproductive effects. Humans have a similar gastrointestinal tract to pigs, and these GM crops are widely consumed by people, particularly in the USA, so it would be be prudent to determine if the findings of this study are applicable to humans.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


No, I do not hate that...and thank you for finally linking to an actual freaking study...

Study link


Conclusion
Pigs fed a GMO diet exhibited heavier uteri and a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation than pigs fed a comparable non-GMO diet. Given the widespread use of GMO feed for livestock as well as humans this is a cause for concern. The results indicate that it would be prudent for GM crops that are destined for human food and animal feed, including stacked GM crops, to undergo long-term animal feeding studies preferably before commercial planting, particularly for toxicological and reproductive effects. Humans have a similar gastrointestinal tract to pigs, and these GM crops are widely consumed by people, particularly in the USA, so it would be be prudent to determine if the findings of this study are applicable to humans.

www.google.com... &gs_l=hp...0l4j0i22i30.0.0.0.9964...........0.pbgQUnSVs5s



Maybe this would be an answer to infertility???? I don't know. But what I do know is this:

The Pancreatic Cancer Action Network has released a special report called, The Alarming Rise of Pancreatic Cancer Deaths in the United States: Why We Need to Stem the Tide Today. This report was written by the organization's Research and Scientific Affairs team, led by our Vice President of Scientific and Medical Affairs Lynn Matrisian, PhD.

The alarming findings presented in the report include the fact that by the year 2020, and to the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States.

The SECOND leading cause of death? That speaks volumes.
edit on 13-6-2013 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Gotta go against the grain here (no pun intended)
Not worried about GM crops, HAve never seen proof that they have killed anyone.
I stay away from the topic usually.
Never effected me negatively.
Is that wrong?
edit on 13-6-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
This is our media, the press is supposed to be free and well as this paper is called, 'Independent'.
This is most likely just the beginning of a huge propaganda push for GM to be accepted in the UK, now is the time, if you haven't already, to start growing your own fruit and veg, before it is too late.


Surely, you are not suggesting that because a newspaper produces a point of view that conflicts with your worldview the press in the UK is not “free”. They have a point. Where is the evidence we’ll all end up with three arms and diminished intelligence? Is it only “propaganda” if the message disagrees with you?


Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Whether it is safe to eat or not, it is the fact that these companies lobby our politicians, they have them under their control.


Firstly, lobbying is two way with the companies balanced by the pressure groups and, secondly, I disagree the politicians (where I live) are not under the control of the GM companies. There is insightful and intelligently informed debate from both corners.

Regards



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey

I would like to see some supporting documentation for this statement.

If you do a quick Google search on the issue then you'll have your answer..
Here's one article for example:
Link
Can't show more because I'm on a mobile.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 

That study does not show that GMOs had anything to do with the results.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Look, it has been established that GMOs are no good.

No. It hasn't.

edit on 6/13/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ScorchedFire
 

There is nothing in that article about GMOs.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
The burden of proof is not on the people who say GM is bad, the burden of proof is on those who say it's good, or at least not bad. They can't, because until they have used us and the rest of life on this planet in their experiment they can't prove it. So far there are too many studies that say it is a dangerous way to go, so we owe it to future generations to tell them to shove it.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by tazdeill2
 


The burden of proof is not on the people who say GM is bad, the burden of proof is on those who say it's good, or at least not bad.


Why is it that those who say GM food is dangerous cannot come up with a reason why? Are they poisonous? No more so than many other non-GMOs. Can the genes somehow invade human bodies and cause harm? No more so than the genes from non-GMOs.

Why should GM crops be considered inherently more dangerous than any other crops?
edit on 6/13/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Want any prove? just look at the deterioration of Americans health since Monspanto introduce their poison food into the food chain.

That is all the prof you need,



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 

GMOs make people eat burgers and fries?



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by tazdeill2
The burden of proof is not on the people who say GM is bad, the burden of proof is on those who say it's good, or at least not bad. They can't, because until they have used us and the rest of life on this planet in their experiment they can't prove it. So far there are too many studies that say it is a dangerous way to go, so we owe it to future generations to tell them to shove it.


Regardless of the OP point that GM is not proven to be bad for you, there will always be people who believe it is. Therefore, the logic follows that these people should prove their point. I would like to see peer reviewed and proper academic and independent studies that demonstrates your claim that “...far there are too many studies that say it is a dangerous way to go ...”.

Regards



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by ObservingYou
 




And to gain the same nurishment we would have from cabbages 100 years ago - we'd have to eat 50 times more!!

I would like to see some supporting documentation for this statement.


www.scientificamerican.com...


but it is true that fruits and vegetables grown decades ago were much richer in vitamins and minerals than the varieties most of us get today. The main culprit in this disturbing nutritional trend is soil depletion


Done deliberately. Not so with Aquaponics and really providing nutrients for plant growth.

I bet they hate organic aquaponics.

gmojudycarman.org...

Evidence of GMO harm in pig study




GM-fed females had on average a 25% heavier uterus than non-GM-fed females, a possible indicator of disease that requires further investigation. Also, the level of severe inflammation in stomachs was markedly higher in pigs fed on the GM diet. The research results were striking and statistically significant.


25% in studies isn't a "possibility". Its a huge statistical finding and very worrisome!

farmandranchfreedom.org...




This is a briefing about the contents of a new, peer-reviewed scientific paper titled: A long-term toxicology study on pigs fed a combined genetically modified (GM) soy and GM corn maize diet, by Dr. Judy Carman, Howard Vlieger, Dr. Larry Ver Steeg, Verlyn Sneller, Dr. Garth Robinson, Dr. Kate Clinch-Jones, Dr. Julie Haynes, and Dr. John Edwards.....


EU has ruled against GM because of the actual real studies by real scientists, not because of hearsay.

www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com...

Pesticides gentically put in the food.

Hell YEAH, wanna eat those!

You go ahead and feed yourself as much of that crapola as you wish to, but I am going to pass.

I think some of our media needs to be replaced by papers and radio by the people, for the people.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


GMOs are on anything that is processed, is people that never eat burgers and fries and still have health problems due to other foods that they have in their daily diets that are full of GMOs.

Like I say anything that is prepackage, pre cock, ready to eat are all full of GMOs, can foods most of all.

Only those food items that are organic certified can be trusted if they are not from big manufactures that also manufacture processed foods with GMOs as they get contaminated.

Plain and simple you don't have to be a genius to know how GMOs get in our food chain and why GMO producers do pay billions of dollars so legislation is not passed to label GMOs on food items.

Know who your producers are and you will know what is in the crap you are eating, learn to identify, the ingredients in your food that are GMOs . I do.





new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join