[werd]

What do people think on this? Is everyone ok with these genetically modified grown stuff? Frankenfoods born out of Monsanto lab. Do we trust Monsanto and their GMO'd herbicided tolerant stuff? Remember they brought us stuff like PCBs and bio weaponry like Agent Orange. Sold it too knowing full well it was evil.

[JerryM]

[RDavidson]

I think the whole GMO thing is blown out of proportion with regard to food safety. However, what I REALLY don't like about GMO crops is what they're doing to the ecosystem....like the evolution of pesticide resistant weeds, messing up the soil quality, and the massive shortage of bees. Those are the BIG issues, particularly the bee shortage. It's awful.

[werd]

I think the whole GMO thing is blown out of proportion with regard to food safety. However, what I REALLY don't like about GMO crops is what they're doing to the ecosystem....like the evolution of pesticide resistant weeds, messing up the soil quality, and the massive shortage of bees. Those are the BIG issues, particularly the bee shortage. It's awful.

I agree with you on that and it also seems to go completely unnoticed. There appears to be a lot of memes like JerryMs that miss the ball on that. It's is like they want you to look at the technical data regarding food and ignore the farming malfunctions. It' doesn't have to be GMOs either the topic is for both but GMOs are typical huge corporate farms. Well that and they are supplied by that freak-of-nature Monsanto.

[JerryM]

Have you asked your Doctor about his/her thoughts, werd?

What do you consider 'genetically modified'?

Have you heard of Norman Borlaug?

The memes exist for a reason, my friend.

[WGH]

GMO's are really, really bad if you are rich enough to buy some organic like me, but 100% organic would bankrupt me. Albertson's just had corn on sale - 8 for $1.00 and it is pretty good, every ear was perfect.

As just one example: Say what you will about sugar but a lot of people consume pounds of it. A recent interview with beet farmer Andrew Beyer, from Kent, Minn. had this quote:

"Planting genetically modified sugar beets allows them to kill their weeds with fewer chemicals. Beyer says he sprays Roundup just a few times during the growing season, plus one application of another chemical to kill off any Roundup-resistant weeds.

He says that planting non-GMO beets would mean going back to what they used to do, spraying their crop every 10 days or so with a "witches brew" of five or six different weedkillers."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/12/477793556/as-big-candy-ditches-gmos-sugar-beet-farmers-hit-sour-patch

So you can ponder what the "witches brew" of weedkillers do to Mother Earth and the general population's health and your health insurance even if you eat zero sugar.

[werd]

Have you asked your Doctor about his/her thoughts, werd?

What do you consider 'genetically modified'?

Have you heard of Norman Borlaug?

The memes exist for a reason, my friend.

Genetically Modified in a lab. The memes work but unfortunately are too laser and do not address the problem as it exists practically.  They do not address what Rdavidson said and they do not address the patent issues. I typically agree with all the memes btw.

I have heard of N. Borlaug but he has been off my radar for a long time and not since I haven taken an interest to GMOs.

[FullRangeMan]

Currently german big guy Bayer/Basf is taking Monsanto, not a good thing too.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2016/05/12/report-bayer-exploring-monsanto-acquisition/84273680/

[werd]

Currently german big guy Bayer/Basf is taking Monsanto, not a good thing too.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2016/05/12/report-bayer-exploring-monsanto-acquisition/84273680/

Explains why all the negativity and illegality with GMOs in Europe. They are being forced to merge with Bayer to gain acceptance in Europe IMO. It looks likes the negativity and bans are a lobby tool by Bayer. This brings up another issue with GMOs and Labeling. If there is going to be this kind of politics played with our food then we almost certainly need the labelling. The labelling will get things out in the open where it needs to be.

[JerryM]

What would you like to see on the label? That you're not going to die of starvation because this food was grown with a genetic change? That tons of herbicide was not needed due to a genetic change? That vitamins known to be deficient in your country exist in this food, due to a genetic change?

Do you ever eat a hot dog? Good grief, try to keep things in perspective.

[werd]

What would you like to see on the label? That you're not going to die of starvation because this food was grown with a genetic change? That tons of herbicide was not needed due to a genetic change? That vitamins known to be deficient in your country exist in this food, due to a genetic change?

Do you ever eat a hot dog? Good grief, try to keep things in perspective.

I want to see the country of origin, who the seed provider is, who the farmer is. I do not understand this anti labelling. The more info the better. I typically see anti labelling by the Monsanto shills. Labelling is absolutely proper and inline with modern day technology that makes this very easy. They just do not want to label it because of marketing. The reason why info like this is being withheld; not because of any scientific logic but pure marketing. That is B.S and not a reason to not label.

[werd]

What would you like to see on the label? That you're not going to die of starvation because this food was grown with a genetic change? That tons of herbicide was not needed due to a genetic change? That vitamins known to be deficient in your country exist in this food, due to a genetic change?

Do you ever eat a hot dog? Good grief, try to keep things in perspective.

double post delete please

[WGH]

If GMO's are a concern then here is a short list of what to avoid:

What percentage of U.S. crops are GMO? http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us.aspx#.UfFqm9LCaM4

    Corn: 92% - Sweet Corn, Field Corn (high fructose corn syrup, corn ethanol, etc.) No more ketchup on your fries. No driving either unless it's an electric car.
    Soybeans: 94% - soybean oil—which is widely used for processed foods and in restaurant chains. In fact, soybean oil accounts for 61% of Americans' vegetable-oil consumption.
                                It's also often used  to make an emulsifier called soy lecithin, which is present in a lot of processed foods, including dark chocolate bars and candy.
    Cotton: 94% - cottonseed oil, which is used for frying in restaurants and in packaged foods like potato chips. Underwear, socks, t-shirts, and other comfy clothes.
                            You can identify a non-gmo person by their 100% polyester leisure suit in commando mode.
    Canola: 90%
    Sugar Beets: 95%
    Squash
    Papaya
    Alfalfa - hay for cattle

http://www.fooddialogues.com/foodsource/gmo/what-percentage-of-u.s.-crops-are-gmo

http://time.com/3840073/gmo-food-charts/

[werd]

GMO's are really, really bad if you are rich enough to buy some organic like me, but 100% organic would bankrupt me. Albertson's just had corn on sale - 8 for $1.00 and it is pretty good, every ear was perfect.

As just one example: Say what you will about sugar but a lot of people consume pounds of it. A recent interview with beet farmer Andrew Beyer, from Kent, Minn. had this quote:

"Planting genetically modified sugar beets allows them to kill their weeds with fewer chemicals. Beyer says he sprays Roundup just a few times during the growing season, plus one application of another chemical to kill off any Roundup-resistant weeds.

He says that planting non-GMO beets would mean going back to what they used to do, spraying their crop every 10 days or so with a "witches brew" of five or six different weedkillers."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/12/477793556/as-big-candy-ditches-gmos-sugar-beet-farmers-hit-sour-patch

So you can ponder what the "witches brew" of weedkillers do to Mother Earth and the general population's health and your health insurance even if you eat zero sugar.

Actually the use of Glysophate has gone up steadily and heavily. The use of herbicides have increased and it is incorrect to say it has gone down that is false. This debate between Monsanto and their counterparts gives an excellent understanding of the problem. Monsanto acted like a Corp would act. basically saying yah but we are corporation what do you expect. The opposing view or anti GMO was largely based on farming and herbicide use out of control.

I hope this thread works. I am really interested in this because it effects basically all our food.


http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/1161-genetically-modify-food

[JerryM]

...I hope this thread works. I am really interested in this because it effects basically all our food. ...

Seriously then, go ask your doctor. Go to the nearest college and ask a scientist. Ask several.

[werd]

If GMO's are a concern then here is a short list of what to avoid:

What percentage of U.S. crops are GMO? http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us.aspx#.UfFqm9LCaM4

    Corn: 92% - Sweet Corn, Field Corn (high fructose corn syrup, corn ethanol, etc.) No more ketchup on your fries. No driving either unless it's an electric car.
    Soybeans: 94% - soybean oil—which is widely used for processed foods and in restaurant chains. In fact, soybean oil accounts for 61% of Americans' vegetable-oil consumption.
                                It's also often used  to make an emulsifier called soy lecithin, which is present in a lot of processed foods, including dark chocolate bars and candy.
    Cotton: 94% - cottonseed oil, which is used for frying in restaurants and in packaged foods like potato chips. Underwear, socks, t-shirts, and other comfy clothes.
                            You can identify a non-gmo person by their 100% polyester leisure suit in commando mode.
    Canola: 90%
    Sugar Beets: 95%
    Squash
    Papaya
    Alfalfa - hay for cattle

http://www.fooddialogues.com/foodsource/gmo/what-percentage-of-u.s.-crops-are-gmo

http://time.com/3840073/gmo-food-charts/

We got GMO salmon now and apples. It is headed to all types will be GMO

[werd]

Seriously then, go ask your doctor. Go to the nearest college and ask a scientist. Ask several.

 

they are going to give me an opinion based on their knowledge of medicine. They are not going to give an agriculture view or an in depth research view. That is silly.  I know GMOs are to date healthy. 

Btw if you look at that link the anti GMO are scientist and by no means flakes. It depends on who you talk to and what they want you to know. They do not claim GMOs cause cancer but they claim that herbicide use is so out of control that long term studies of herbicides are not complete and remain dangerous due to the environmental impact. It's not about science denial of chemicals. That is click bate bullshit.

[Folsom]

GMO's, currently, are almost entirely safe. The danger comes not from the unknown, but the known, with them. The way the problem works isn't when you take a protein from one thing to another, but when you choose the wrong protein to splice.

Let's say you add a protein from peanuts to potatoes because it prevent the rot that can occur and wipe out a potato crop. But what if that same protein is the one people with peanut allergies are affected by?!?!??! Now that's the concern. This can be done with proteins people are not "allergic" too but are very bad for them in less obvious ways. "Lectin" is a term you may want to look up. Monsanto literally chased the #1 expert on them out of the USA.

The worst thing about Monsanto isn't GMO. GMO's have the potential to be very positive and do AMAZING things for humans. The problem is Monsanto sue's the ever loving shit out of everyone. Anyone that isn't a Monsanto farmer lives in absolute fear of being sued into oblivion by them. They are trying to monopolize the USA. They don't even have to win in court, under stupid premises like a seed blew into the wind of a neighboring farmer, so they found "copywrited" DNA in the farm next door, when all they have to do is bankrupt the farmer by keeping them in court.

Monsanto isn't in Montana yet, the only reason why is the farmers don't trust them because they're fucking crooks. They are not opposed to them because of GMO's.

What should you eat?

Now that's a harder question to answer. It's very personalized. But in general the issue with most GMO products is they aren't nutrient dense. But eating organic isn't the only way to eat, there's plenty of non-organic products that are as high or higher quality than a "USDA" organic product. The "USDA" organic is a standard to punish small farmers in many ways, btw.

Can you eat organic? Yes you can. It's not that expensive, or more expensive, depending on what you buy, where, and how. If you're seeing it as being a lot more expensive you have strange habits. Those that eat very poorly and try to switch to eating poorly but organic will see a $ increase.

[FullRangeMan]

What I dont like in GMO is the seeds are now a private company proprierty, also it seems to do a unsafe change in the soil as mentioned and maybe bad to the consumer body, not to mention poisoning the food chain.

In my country there is no more organic wheat is all GMO with 500% more gluten, this is why many people are allergic to gluten today.

[werd]

Monsanto first introduced GMOs back in the 90s, how the hell could anyone expect a safe product? Their history is weapons bio engineering and PCBs.. Fact. That is a fact, a sad one but true. What info were they handing out in the 90s before they had all this data we got now? What were they saying back then that it was safe. We know by their history anything they say is bullshit.  How much of this new data is a convenience that seems to suit their business stance about cancers? I do not trust this as far as I can throw it.

Me not trusting it does not make the food unsafe but we know there is a lack of information around the overuse of herbicide. That is another fact. The notion that GMOs cause cancer is unlikely. The Monsanto shills seem to talk about that constantly because they appear to have studies discarding it. I can't see any other reason why but to create a decoy from the real problem of herbicide overuse which sits right in the pocket book of Monsanto. This company needs to fail