GMOs Scary or not?

Options
1235721

Replies

  • QueenBishOTUniverse
    QueenBishOTUniverse Posts: 14,121 Member
    Options
    I'm pasting from my response to the organics good/bad thread because it's the same damn problem.
    I may need to switch my avatar for this one. Look, I work in marine ecology. There are some major concerns about ecosystem effects from large scale farming practices, and as someone has already mentioned, monoculture crops etc. are also an issue. But let me be clear on this.... NONE of the scientific concerns relating to organic farming practices or GMO's have ANYTHING to do with whether the foods are harmful for the consumer. These are large scale ecosystem effects, and ecologist's very real concerns are getting drowned out by a bunch of scare mongering propaganda and turning the entire issue in to a damn joke so that the real problems get swept under the rug and aren't being dealt with. /end rant.
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?

    If you read back you'll see that people opposing GMOs aren't just making a choice for themselves. They're choosing what food other people can eat as well.

    If it were simply a matter of people choosing what to eat for themselves this would be a non-issue. Anti-GMO proponents are electing to make that choice for everyone.

    I would imagine there are far more against laws that prevent labelling of GMO, or even forced labelling of GMO, than there are against the modifiction itself.

    Anyone in favor of laws that prevent labelling of GM foods are, in fact, also making a choice for others.
  • s_pekz
    s_pekz Posts: 340 Member
    Options
    in for tin foil friday
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?

    If you read back you'll see that people opposing GMOs aren't just making a choice for themselves. They're choosing what food other people can eat as well.

    If it were simply a matter of people choosing what to eat for themselves this would be a non-issue. Anti-GMO proponents are electing to make that choice for everyone.

    I would imagine there are far more against laws that prevent labelling of GMO, or even forced labelling of GMO, than there are against the modifiction itself.

    Anyone in favor of laws that prevent labelling of GM foods are, in fact, also making a choice for others.

    There are laws against hitting someone in the face with a hammer, not laws against the existence of hammers. Actually the law is about causing someone grievous injury, to focus on the hammer itself would be to miss the point.

    There are laws against releasing a GMO product that is harmful to the general population with no warning label. There aren't laws against the existence of GMOs. Actually the law is about protecting the consumer from harm, to focus on GMOs themselves would be to miss the point.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?

    If you read back you'll see that people opposing GMOs aren't just making a choice for themselves. They're choosing what food other people can eat as well.

    If it were simply a matter of people choosing what to eat for themselves this would be a non-issue. Anti-GMO proponents are electing to make that choice for everyone.

    I would imagine there are far more against laws that prevent labelling of GMO, or even forced labelling of GMO, than there are against the modifiction itself.

    Anyone in favor of laws that prevent labelling of GM foods are, in fact, also making a choice for others.

    There are laws against hitting someone in the face with a hammer, not laws against the existence of hammers.

    There are laws against releasing a GMO product that is harmful to the general population with no warning label. There aren't laws against the existence of GMOs.

    There are laws being voted on regularly that would prevent the labelling of GMO foods. That would take away a citizen's right to know whether they are consuming GMO foods or not.

    I don't see how your hammer reference is relevant to this. Has anyone suggested physically attacking others with food should be okay?
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?
  • SunofaBeach14
    SunofaBeach14 Posts: 4,899 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    Scaremongering
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,641 Member
    Options
    Probably the biggest concern of food safety for GMO food (and mainly corn/soybeans, lets get real about what we eat that is actually GMO) is field conditions that grow mold on corn which then leads to production of a variety of fungal toxins such as aflatoxin and zearalenone.

    The rest of the bovine feces a lot of people actually worry about are so minutely small and even my mentioned "big deal" is of no concern if the fields are taken of, not drought stricken, and stored correctly.
  • FunkyTobias
    FunkyTobias Posts: 1,776 Member
    Options
    GMO.jpg
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    Scaremongering

    In what way would a label be scaremongering? Foods have labels of all sorts. Why is it necessary to forbid this one?
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    My god you like to argue for the sake of arguing!
  • FunkyTobias
    FunkyTobias Posts: 1,776 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    Scaremongering

    In what way would a label be scaremongering? Foods have labels of all sorts. Why is it necessary to forbid this one?

    Please to cite your sources? There are no laws forbidding labeling foods "GMO free".
  • SunofaBeach14
    SunofaBeach14 Posts: 4,899 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    Scaremongering

    In what way would a label be scaremongering? Foods have labels of all sorts. Why is it necessary to forbid this one?

    They're safe for human consumption. Labeling it implies otherwise. It's the game that you all play. Science be damned, GMO sounds frightening. Let's label and then continue scaremongering.
  • BlueButterfly94
    BlueButterfly94 Posts: 303 Member
    Options
    I tend to try and stay away from GMO's, they usually end up being tasteless. Those giant strawberries in the stores? We have to add sugar and chocolate and such to them because we modified them to be big, because we thought bigger was better. The natural, smaller strawberries are YUMMY. <3 Unfortunately the walmart here doesn't sell them.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,641 Member
    Options
    I have a feeling that people in the first world, who have never gone hungry, are the only ones who are screaming about how scary GMOs are.

    So?

    Just an observation. Although I think it's pretty funny that for so long, all of the Miss America's and Bono's of the world wanted an end to world hunger. We finally have the technology to start working on it, and those same types of people want it banned because they're scared of dirty science touching their food.

    But if one isn't starving, so why shouldn't they have choice over what food they consume?


    People should eat what they want to eat. However, I think that calling for GMOs to be banned, or screaming their "dangers" from the rooftops could be detrimental to getting them to the countries that need them.

    *Edit to fix quotes.

    How so? As you point out, the people doing the screaming don't generally live the areas that may need it. Yet isn't it here, in the land of plenty, that it is mostly sold and used?

    Banning GMOs would cause irrevocable damage to the developed world as well.

    What harm would labelling it do?

    Scaremongering

    In what way would a label be scaremongering? Foods have labels of all sorts. Why is it necessary to forbid this one?

    You're too smart to ask a question so naive. You don't think if (hypothetically) food had to label EVERY pesticide used to grow them that it would effect sales?
  • fooninie
    fooninie Posts: 291 Member
    Options
    I vaccinate my kids and believe that non-GMO is the best approach to foods. Wow...that was quite the stretch of a comparison.