GMO Labeling?
Replies
-
http://rameznaam.com/2013/04/28/the-evidence-on-gmo-safety/
"A Scientific Consensus
All together, the scientific consensus around the safety of genetically modified foods is as strong as the scientific consensus around climate change. These foods have been studied more than any other, and everything tells us that they’re safe."0 -
This is not locating a desired gene within the corn and turning it on. It is injecting toxins into the corn seed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/bt-corn_b_2442072.html
Seriously, I'm out. I've got housework more important than some of you. jk I hate housework! :bigsmile:
Lol Mercola, you're on a roll with the quacks, William Davis, Seralini and now Mercola
Was genuinely curious until Mercola... no.
And OP, there are groups that lean towards non-GMO...and in regards to your cause, you might want to start a group if like-minded is all you want versus a debate/discussion.
For the record - those that disagree or have different outlooks =/= haters or bullies0 -
Any like minded people out there? I'm volunteering for YES on 522 here in WA state to get GMO's on food labels. We will be voting in Nov. It is similar to Prop 37 that unfortunately failed in CA.
I am overweight, my adult kids are overweight
I can't help but feel it is in part to the crap that our FDA and USDA allow to be called food. I now know better so am doing better but my body and mind crave the addicting crap that we ate for years. It's a battle but with good food I can feel my body and mind reacting better. We really are what we eat. Simple statement that I ignored for years.
Looking for others that are on this same journey. Anyone out there on MFP?
Haters don't bother... you have to learn on your own and it won't be picky a fight with me.
You're overweight because you over consumed calories (unless a metabolic disorder exists), not because of any food boogeymen.
What I see:
What the easily seduced by propaganda see:
0 -
Any like minded people out there? I'm volunteering for YES on 522 here in WA state to get GMO's on food labels. We will be voting in Nov. It is similar to Prop 37 that unfortunately failed in CA.
I am overweight, my adult kids are overweight I can't help but feel it is in part to the crap that our FDA and USDA allow to be called food. I now know better so am doing better but my body and mind crave the addicting crap that we ate for years. It's a battle but with good food I can feel my body and mind reacting better. We really are what we eat. Simple statement that I ignored for years.
Looking for others that are on this same journey. Anyone out there on MFP?
Haters don't bother... you have to learn on your own and it won't be picky a fight with me.
You're overweight because you over consumed calories (unless a metabolic disorder exists), not because of any food boogeymen.
What I see:
What the easily seduced by propaganda see:
The only reason I'm fat is because of me. *shrugs* Sucks but what can you do aside from looking for an excuse or/and boogeyman to put blame on. *le sigh*0 -
Honestly, I'm not too clear on what a GMO is other than to know what the acronym means. I only recently learned about MSG, and I'm not sure I see the big deal on that, either. It's moot to me. Regardless of either one, good or bad, consumers do have a right to know when their food has been genetically or chemically altered. The decision to buy it and eat it still always falls with the consumer, though.0
-
Let her keep going. I almost have a quack BINGO!This is not locating a desired gene within the corn and turning it on. It is injecting toxins into the corn seed.
Seriously, I'm out. I've got housework more important than some of you. jk I hate housework! :bigsmile:
Lol Mercola, you're on a roll with the quacks, William Davis, Seralini and now Mercola0 -
This is not locating a desired gene within the corn and turning it on. It is injecting toxins into the corn seed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/bt-corn_b_2442072.html
Seriously, I'm out. I've got housework more important than some of you. jk I hate housework! :bigsmile:
This thread has all the buzzwords/tactics of greatness: non-peer reviewed articles used as factual evidence, corporate greed, addiction, accusations of being a shill/hater, anything accomplished in a lab is bad, and now it has the TOXINZZZZ as well.
I love threads like this that showcase a certain mindset. I find it fascinating.0 -
it probably should be on the label but i dont care enough to vote.0
-
YES, YES, YES!!! I'm just next door in Oregon, and wish we could get this on our ballot. I'll have my fingers crossed that this one actually wins. The chemical companies that just happen to make food are slowly poisoning us. Yes, I understand free will, but there is no doubt that they share some of the blame. I buy only organic when I can, and have committed to use my dollars to support companies that feel the same way. Feel free to add me! Thanks for fighting the good fight!0
-
Would love to have more information on labels. GMO, sure. Where the food was sourced, how it was processed, etc. Information is great. I'm fine with having more detailed info readable via barcode.0
-
I have never seen so many young girls developing breasts so early in their lives, as I have recently. ...Something's going on with our food system, and although I don't know what it is, at least let me decide what GMO's I will or will not eat.
Alas, the decreasing age of menarche/puberty onset in females has nothing to do with GMOs. It's been going on long before GMOs existed and is thought to be linked to increasing levels of nutrition available to human beings once they stumbled upon the idea of agriculture. Better fed girls = girls who are better equipped to make babies = nature says, "Let's get 'em making with the babies sooner." So, if you must blame something for this phenomenon, blame the increased availability of food and the increased quality of food in general. If you want to go back to bad/less food so we don't have 8-year-olds with boobies...Well, I'm not with you on that one, I'm afraid.
Edited to add: Also, the increase in childhood obesity/lack of exercise in children has much to do with decreased age of puberty onset. The fatter a girl is and the less active she is, the more estrogen her body produces, and the earlier she'll develop. So if you want to blame GMOs for childhood obesity, there you go, but that's a specious argument at best.
In short, if you want to be concerned about GMOs, that is your choice. But there is no current evidence that justifies turning them into a boogieman that needs a label.
Shhhh. Quiet you, with your rational and far more probable explanation. No one wants to hear that. It's boring. It's far sexier to blame it on over complicated conspiracies and mad scientists with their desire to have the world filled with large chested women.
On second thought, that's exactly what's going on here. How have I been so blind?0 -
Its already on the label. All GMO foods have a bar code that starts with 8. The only way to avoid them is to go organic. No GMOs are allowed in any food labeled organic.0
-
I have never seen so many young girls developing breasts so early in their lives, as I have recently. ...Something's going on with our food system, and although I don't know what it is, at least let me decide what GMO's I will or will not eat.
Alas, the decreasing age of menarche/puberty onset in females has nothing to do with GMOs. It's been going on long before GMOs existed and is thought to be linked to increasing levels of nutrition available to human beings once they stumbled upon the idea of agriculture. Better fed girls = girls who are better equipped to make babies = nature says, "Let's get 'em making with the babies sooner." So, if you must blame something for this phenomenon, blame the increased availability of food and the increased quality of food in general. If you want to go back to bad/less food so we don't have 8-year-olds with boobies...Well, I'm not with you on that one, I'm afraid.
Edited to add: Also, the increase in childhood obesity/lack of exercise in children has much to do with decreased age of puberty onset. The fatter a girl is and the less active she is, the more estrogen her body produces, and the earlier she'll develop. So if you want to blame GMOs for childhood obesity, there you go, but that's a specious argument at best.
In short, if you want to be concerned about GMOs, that is your choice. But there is no current evidence that justifies turning them into a boogieman that needs a label.
Shhhh. Quiet you, with your rational and far more probable explanation. No one wants to hear that. It's boring. It's far sexier to blame it on over complicated conspiracies and mad scientists with their desire to have the world filled with large chested women.
On second thought, that's exactly what's going on here. How have I been so blind?
*laugh* I'm all about the rational and unsexy, I'm afraid. I don't believe in the Psychotic Secret One-World Government-Funded Evil Mad Scientist League of Doom. Even though I'm large-chested and have been since I was about 10. Even though, all those years ago back in the Dark Ages when I was 10, there weren't any GMOs. (Well, aside from those created by artificial selection, of course, which is basically...Um, every single commercially-grown crop and every single kind of domestic livestock. Plus chihuahuas, of course. And if there's one thing that's insidious in this world, it's a chihuahua.
Lab-created or not, it's all the same darn thing, only with a little more judicious splicing involved in the lab. And trust me, that day is probably coming in the doggie world, too.)
And hey, I owe my existence to GMOs. My dad is Type I diabetic, has been since he was 8 or so. The insulin he uses now is produced by E. coli (AKA bacteria that live in mammal guts and that are excreted by the bucketload in poo) that are injected with human DNA that codes for insulin so that they crank the stuff out without minding much at all. Well, OK, that sort didn't come about until the 80s, so I don't REALLY owe my existence to GMOs because I was born before the 80s. So, I owe my existence to pig/cow pancreases instead. (Pancreii? What IS the plural of "pancreas?") But anyone who has an insulin-dependent diabetic parent and who was born in the 80s or later certainly does owe their existence to a OMG!GMO. And yet, I don't hear much fussing from the anti-GMO crowd about this blasphemous bastardization of the E. coli genome that's been insidiously going on for 30-some years now. Even though people are injecting themselves with that stuff, not just eating it.
And I still don't see how putting fish DNA in a tomato is a bad thing. Ever eaten fish in some sort of tomato sauce? Like sardines packed in nasty oily tomato sauce like my dad always used to eat? (Which were disgusting, but that's beside the point.) Well, you just ate both tomato and fish DNA, and it all got mashed up in your mouth and belly such that it was TOGETHER! OMG!
OK, I'll stop now because I'm getting silly. But seriously, the hysteria is amusing...0 -
Its already on the label. All GMO foods have a bar code that starts with 8. The only way to avoid them is to go organic. No GMOs are allowed in any food labeled organic.
Organic farmers can't plant GMO seeds. As we've seen from some of the Monsanto lawsuits, there's very likely been cross-pollination from GMO strains. You're probably eating GMOs anyway.0 -
I have never seen so many young girls developing breasts so early in their lives, as I have recently. ...Something's going on with our food system, and although I don't know what it is, at least let me decide what GMO's I will or will not eat.
Alas, the decreasing age of menarche/puberty onset in females has nothing to do with GMOs. It's been going on long before GMOs existed and is thought to be linked to increasing levels of nutrition available to human beings once they stumbled upon the idea of agriculture. Better fed girls = girls who are better equipped to make babies = nature says, "Let's get 'em making with the babies sooner." So, if you must blame something for this phenomenon, blame the increased availability of food and the increased quality of food in general. If you want to go back to bad/less food so we don't have 8-year-olds with boobies...Well, I'm not with you on that one, I'm afraid.
Edited to add: Also, the increase in childhood obesity/lack of exercise in children has much to do with decreased age of puberty onset. The fatter a girl is and the less active she is, the more estrogen her body produces, and the earlier she'll develop. So if you want to blame GMOs for childhood obesity, there you go, but that's a specious argument at best.
In short, if you want to be concerned about GMOs, that is your choice. But there is no current evidence that justifies turning them into a boogieman that needs a label.
Shhhh. Quiet you, with your rational and far more probable explanation. No one wants to hear that. It's boring. It's far sexier to blame it on over complicated conspiracies and mad scientists with their desire to have the world filled with large chested women.
On second thought, that's exactly what's going on here. How have I been so blind?
*laugh* I'm all about the rational and unsexy, I'm afraid. I don't believe in the Psychotic Secret One-World Government-Funded Evil Mad Scientist League of Doom. Even though I'm large-chested and have been since I was about 10. Even though, all those years ago back in the Dark Ages when I was 10, there weren't any GMOs. (Well, aside from those created by artificial selection, of course, which is basically...Um, every single commercially-grown crop and every single kind of domestic livestock. Plus chihuahuas, of course. And if there's one thing that's insidious in this world, it's a chihuahua. Lab-created or not, it's all the same darn thing, only with a little more judicious splicing involved in the lab. And trust me, that day is probably coming in the doggie world, too.)
And hey, I owe my existence to GMOs. My dad is Type I diabetic, has been since he was 8 or so. The insulin he uses now is produced by E. coli (AKA bacteria that live in mammal guts and that are excreted by the bucketload in poo) that are injected with human DNA that codes for insulin so that they crank the stuff out without minding much at all. Well, OK, that sort didn't come about until the 80s, so I don't REALLY owe my existence to GMOs because I was born before the 80s. So, I owe my existence to pig/cow pancreases instead. (Pancreii? What IS the plural of "pancreas?") But anyone who has an insulin-dependent diabetic parent and who was born in the 80s or later certainly does owe their existence to a OMG!GMO. And yet, I don't hear much fussing from the anti-GMO crowd about this blasphemous bastardization of the E. coli genome that's been insidiously going on for 30-some years now. Even though people are injecting themselves with that stuff, not just eating it.
And I still don't see how putting fish DNA in a tomato is a bad thing. Ever eaten fish in some sort of tomato sauce? Like sardines packed in nasty oily tomato sauce like my dad always used to eat? (Which were disgusting, but that's beside the point.) Well, you just ate both tomato and fish DNA, and it all got mashed up in your mouth and belly such that it was TOGETHER! OMG!
OK, I'll stop now because I'm getting silly. But seriously, the hysteria is amusing...
I think we would agree on many things, good sir.
I'm just excited for the day where my food can talk to me before I eat it, thus informing me of the best parts to eat as seen in the pic below.
0 -
GMO isn't 'injected' with 'toxins'.
Genetic modification has been around for thousands of years. Selective breeding of plants and animals to reproduce desired genetic traits and remove undesirable genes from the genome. GMO just speeds up the process by singling out a single gene and inserting it into DNA.
Your dog is a GMO, your non-GMO corn is a GMO, your non-GMO carrots are a GMO. You could do this by hand if you wanted to, but it takes a lot longer.
EVERY living thing contains genes and DNA. The genes of the things you eat do not insert themselves into your DNA.0 -
I want GMO labeling. Not for the reasons stated by the OP, but I want to know what's in my food, what it is, and exactly where is comes from. The more info, the better.
I fail to see how "ignorance" of your food is helpful to anyone except the bottom line of the companies producing GMOs. Doesn't sound right to me!0 -
GMO isn't 'injected' with 'toxins'.
Genetic modification has been around for thousands of years. Selective breeding of plants and animals to reproduce desired genetic traits and remove undesirable genes from the genome. GMO just speeds up the process by singling out a single gene and inserting it into DNA.
Your dog is a GMO, your non-GMO corn is a GMO, your non-GMO carrots are a GMO. You could do this by hand if you wanted to, but it takes a lot longer.
EVERY living thing contains genes and DNA. The genes of the things you eat do not insert themselves into your DNA.
My dog is made of dog, just like his parents. His parents were selected because their traits were desirable. Maize that was juicy and tasty was selected, and its seeds were kept. Over generations, this led to the corn we eat today. This is called Artificial Selection, or Selective Breeding.
My strawberries have frog genes in them. This is Genetic Modification.
See the difference?0 -
GMO isn't 'injected' with 'toxins'.
Genetic modification has been around for thousands of years. Selective breeding of plants and animals to reproduce desired genetic traits and remove undesirable genes from the genome. GMO just speeds up the process by singling out a single gene and inserting it into DNA.
Your dog is a GMO, your non-GMO corn is a GMO, your non-GMO carrots are a GMO. You could do this by hand if you wanted to, but it takes a lot longer.
EVERY living thing contains genes and DNA. The genes of the things you eat do not insert themselves into your DNA.
My dog is made of dog, just like his parents. His parents were selected because their traits were desirable. Maize that was juicy and tasty was selected, and its seeds were kept. Over generations, this led to the corn we eat today. This is called Artificial Selection, or Selective Breeding.
My strawberries have frog genes in them. This is Genetic Modification.
See the difference?
You are 95% fruit fly.
The number of 'dog genes' and 'human genes' that aren't shared are incredibly miniscule. Genes are genes. They code for proteins. That's it.0 -
My dog is made of dog, just like his parents. His parents were selected because their traits were desirable. Maize that was juicy and tasty was selected, and its seeds were kept. Over generations, this led to the corn we eat today. This is called Artificial Selection, or Selective Breeding.
My strawberries have frog genes in them. This is Genetic Modification.
See the difference?
Actually, no. Do elaborate, please. Specifically, elaborate as to why it's a bad thing for your strawberries to have frog genes in them, in the sense of how this can possibly harm you. Also, elaborate as to how different frog genes are from your genes. And how different strawberry genes are from frog genes.0 -
GMO isn't 'injected' with 'toxins'.
Genetic modification has been around for thousands of years. Selective breeding of plants and animals to reproduce desired genetic traits and remove undesirable genes from the genome. GMO just speeds up the process by singling out a single gene and inserting it into DNA.
Your dog is a GMO, your non-GMO corn is a GMO, your non-GMO carrots are a GMO. You could do this by hand if you wanted to, but it takes a lot longer.
EVERY living thing contains genes and DNA. The genes of the things you eat do not insert themselves into your DNA.
My dog is made of dog, just like his parents. His parents were selected because their traits were desirable. Maize that was juicy and tasty was selected, and its seeds were kept. Over generations, this led to the corn we eat today. This is called Artificial Selection, or Selective Breeding.
My strawberries have frog genes in them. This is Genetic Modification.
See the difference?
You are 95% fruit fly.
The number of 'dog genes' and 'human genes' that aren't shared are incredibly miniscule. Genes are genes. They code for proteins. That's it.
My point is, you don't know the meaning of "GMO" if you are confusing it with breeding. You gave the wrong definition of it in the post above by claiming GMO foods are the same as artificially selected foods. You were right about everything else though. But if you don't know what GMO is you kinda lose credibility.
It doesn't matter of we share most genes with other organisms, most of it is junk. The differences may be small percentage-wise, but the magnitude of these minor differences is huge. So it's meaningless to say "we are 95% fruit fly", it's the other 5% that matters.
Harmful or not, I'll chose to be informed about what my food is over ignorance, any day. Why should I be kept in the dark just so some big multinational can guarantee its profit margins?0 -
My dog is made of dog, just like his parents. His parents were selected because their traits were desirable. Maize that was juicy and tasty was selected, and its seeds were kept. Over generations, this led to the corn we eat today. This is called Artificial Selection, or Selective Breeding.
My strawberries have frog genes in them. This is Genetic Modification.
See the difference?
Actually, no. Do elaborate, please. Specifically, elaborate as to why it's a bad thing for your strawberries to have frog genes in them, in the sense of how this can possibly harm you. Also, elaborate as to how different frog genes are from your genes. And how different strawberry genes are from frog genes.
Hard to elaborate or something I didn't say... where's the part where I wrote it's bad for strawberries to have frog genes in them?
Selecting strawberries from existing strawberry genes, is different than adding frog genes to a strawberry. Frogs did not evolve to be strawberries. Clearly, there is a difference.0 -
No...you don't know the meaning of GMO if you think it's drastically different.
Do you eat fish? You ingest fish genes. Do you eat strawberries? You ingest strawberry genes. Is it somehow different if you ingest them simultaneously rather than in two different bites?
BTW, I know a LOT about GMOs and I work with transgenic organisms regularly. GMOs helped combat widespread vitamin A deficiency in developing countries whose main staple was white rice. GMOs are why you get to eat cheese and why I get to drink Lactaid milk. People fear GMOs because they don't understand them.0 -
No...you don't know the meaning of GMO if you think it's drastically different.
Do you eat fish? You ingest fish genes. Do you eat strawberries? You ingest strawberry genes. Is it somehow different if you ingest them simultaneously rather than in two different bites?
this feels like an IQ test:
fish genes come from fish.
strawberry genes come from strawberries.
fish genes come from strawberries.
Which if these statements is NOT like the others?0 -
I am truly curious as to what big business in the US has against labeling GMO products as such, if they truly believe there is nothing 'wrong' with them?
We have truth in labeling laws. What if big business suddenly decided they didn't want to list carbohydrates on their products? There would and should be an outcry! As consumers, knowing what we are eating has been upheld to require certain labeling.
Personally, I think it is too soon to know what long term affects, both the alteration of our foods and in the plants themselves will show. The soybeans that contain roundup, have to be sprayed more and more often, than untreated soybeans, to produce equal yields and prevent pest invasions. One article exploring poor yields:
http://newfarm.org/features/0904/soybeans/ There are of course numerous articles on both sides of the argument.
So bottom line, I don't believe GMO's should be removed from stores at this point, but, I do believe the products should be labeled so as to make an informed decision. If 60+ other countries find this important, shouldn't we?
Last point. The reason wheat is not a GMO plant, is due to wheat farmers diligence and determination. They have been fighting monsanto for a long time now. Our farmers are hard working, intelligent people, who see what has happenend to soybeans.0 -
I have never seen so many young girls developing breasts so early in their lives, as I have recently. ...Something's going on with our food system, and although I don't know what it is, at least let me decide what GMO's I will or will not eat.
Alas, the decreasing age of menarche/puberty onset in females has nothing to do with GMOs. It's been going on long before GMOs existed and is thought to be linked to increasing levels of nutrition available to human beings once they stumbled upon the idea of agriculture. Better fed girls = girls who are better equipped to make babies = nature says, "Let's get 'em making with the babies sooner." So, if you must blame something for this phenomenon, blame the increased availability of food and the increased quality of food in general. If you want to go back to bad/less food so we don't have 8-year-olds with boobies...Well, I'm not with you on that one, I'm afraid.
Edited to add: Also, the increase in childhood obesity/lack of exercise in children has much to do with decreased age of puberty onset. The fatter a girl is and the less active she is, the more estrogen her body produces, and the earlier she'll develop. So if you want to blame GMOs for childhood obesity, there you go, but that's a specious argument at best.
In short, if you want to be concerned about GMOs, that is your choice. But there is no current evidence that justifies turning them into a boogieman that needs a label.
Shhhh. Quiet you, with your rational and far more probable explanation. No one wants to hear that. It's boring. It's far sexier to blame it on over complicated conspiracies and mad scientists with their desire to have the world filled with large chested women.
On second thought, that's exactly what's going on here. How have I been so blind?
*laugh* I'm all about the rational and unsexy, I'm afraid. I don't believe in the Psychotic Secret One-World Government-Funded Evil Mad Scientist League of Doom. Even though I'm large-chested and have been since I was about 10. Even though, all those years ago back in the Dark Ages when I was 10, there weren't any GMOs. (Well, aside from those created by artificial selection, of course, which is basically...Um, every single commercially-grown crop and every single kind of domestic livestock. Plus chihuahuas, of course. And if there's one thing that's insidious in this world, it's a chihuahua. Lab-created or not, it's all the same darn thing, only with a little more judicious splicing involved in the lab. And trust me, that day is probably coming in the doggie world, too.)
And hey, I owe my existence to GMOs. My dad is Type I diabetic, has been since he was 8 or so. The insulin he uses now is produced by E. coli (AKA bacteria that live in mammal guts and that are excreted by the bucketload in poo) that are injected with human DNA that codes for insulin so that they crank the stuff out without minding much at all. Well, OK, that sort didn't come about until the 80s, so I don't REALLY owe my existence to GMOs because I was born before the 80s. So, I owe my existence to pig/cow pancreases instead. (Pancreii? What IS the plural of "pancreas?") But anyone who has an insulin-dependent diabetic parent and who was born in the 80s or later certainly does owe their existence to a OMG!GMO. And yet, I don't hear much fussing from the anti-GMO crowd about this blasphemous bastardization of the E. coli genome that's been insidiously going on for 30-some years now. Even though people are injecting themselves with that stuff, not just eating it.
And I still don't see how putting fish DNA in a tomato is a bad thing. Ever eaten fish in some sort of tomato sauce? Like sardines packed in nasty oily tomato sauce like my dad always used to eat? (Which were disgusting, but that's beside the point.) Well, you just ate both tomato and fish DNA, and it all got mashed up in your mouth and belly such that it was TOGETHER! OMG!
OK, I'll stop now because I'm getting silly. But seriously, the hysteria is amusing...
I think we would agree on many things, good sir.
I'm just excited for the day where my food can talk to me before I eat it, thus informing me of the best parts to eat as seen in the pic below.
MWAHAH! Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. You're my hero, you hoopy frood!
I think what this thread needs is some good Vogon poetry. Wait a sec while I find some. Maybe after listening to it the twisted genetics will make more sense... 0 -
No...you don't know the meaning of GMO if you think it's drastically different.
Do you eat fish? You ingest fish genes. Do you eat strawberries? You ingest strawberry genes. Is it somehow different if you ingest them simultaneously rather than in two different bites?
BTW, I know a LOT about GMOs and I work with transgenic organisms regularly. GMOs helped combat widespread vitamin A deficiency in developing countries whose main staple was white rice. GMOs are why you get to eat cheese and why I get to drink Lactaid milk. People fear GMOs because they don't understand them.
And GMO monocropping will someday lead to environmental and economic devastation in those same developing countries. :drinker:0 -
No...you don't know the meaning of GMO if you think it's drastically different.
Do you eat fish? You ingest fish genes. Do you eat strawberries? You ingest strawberry genes. Is it somehow different if you ingest them simultaneously rather than in two different bites?
this feels like an IQ test:
fish genes come from fish.
strawberry genes come from strawberries.
fish genes come from strawberries.
Which if these statements is NOT like the others?
Okay--do you know what a gene is? What it does? Maybe if you did, you would realize it's really silly to say things like 'fish' genes and 'strawberry' genes and why it does. not. matter.0 -
No...you don't know the meaning of GMO if you think it's drastically different.
Do you eat fish? You ingest fish genes. Do you eat strawberries? You ingest strawberry genes. Is it somehow different if you ingest them simultaneously rather than in two different bites?
BTW, I know a LOT about GMOs and I work with transgenic organisms regularly. GMOs helped combat widespread vitamin A deficiency in developing countries whose main staple was white rice. GMOs are why you get to eat cheese and why I get to drink Lactaid milk. People fear GMOs because they don't understand them.
I keep the food on my plate separate. I do not want my mashed potato genes to touch my corned beef genes. That's just not cool. In fact, I'm going to start eating different foods several hours apart in order to make sure they don't touch while in my stomach either.
Food separation is important.0 -
GMOs are awful, not only for human consumption but also for our ecosystem. Genetically modified organisms can cross bread with organic plants and cause contamination. In the end science will be what destroys humanity. The world has been functioning for a long time before we came along and started modifying plants. GMO plants are no better than regular ones, the yields are no better and the nutritional value of GMO plants are little to none. Not to mention the pesticides killing the very bees we need to pollinate our food. Our current agricultural system is not sustainable.
Just my thoughts on GMOs coming from a farmer's son.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions