GMOs Scary or not?

SunofaBeach14

Corn is corn. Why is it scarier if it grows better and is resistant to fungus? What do anti-GMO people honestly fear that it is going to do to them? All I've seen so far is fear of "what if?"... and that's like being afraid to leave your own home, because ... "well what if...?"

It's not always about what eating it will do. Some people are against GMO purely for environmental reasons. Some people like honeybees.

Keep throwing dirt at the wall. Something's got to stick, right? lol

_John_

and we actually eat a lot less "whole" gmo's than we think, usually we're eating a byproduct like just the corn syrup or soybean oil (cornmeal being a decent exception). Usually foods like whole kernel corn are a variety that is non GMO when they are consumed as the whole plant. Especially the tastier corns.

QueenBishOTUniverse

Corn is corn. Why is it scarier if it grows better and is resistant to fungus? What do anti-GMO people honestly fear that it is going to do to them? All I've seen so far is fear of "what if?"... and that's like being afraid to leave your own home, because ... "well what if...?"

It's not always about what eating it will do. Some people are against GMO purely for environmental reasons. Some people like honeybees.

To this I say STOP IT. All this labeling fear mongering crap DISTRACTS from environmental and ecological issues. Yes, there are points of concern, but that's it....concern. You turn the entire issue in to a joke when you blow it up out of proportion and turn it in to a damn conspiracy theory.

phil6707

This discussion is pointless for another 100 years. There is no data old enough to be able to identify any trend on long term consumption of GMO over generation.

All we can do is theorical assumption based on scientific reason and it would not sound good.

However, with any data to discuss, any opnion is irrelevant

phil6707

that type of testing is a joke because it does not allow to determine long term effects

So yes you can eat them and you dont die; PASSED

What will happen in 150 years to human body: speculation

_John_

that type of testing is a joke because it does not allow to determine long term effects

So yes you can eat them and you dont die; PASSED

What will happen in 150 years to human body: speculation

so let's just not eat anything or use any new products that weren't developed more than 150 years ago...

snowflake954

I really do not understand the backlash against labeling a food GMO. What is so scary about labeling!

There is more to the debate than whether a food has been genetically modified, I love the argument that all food has been genetically modified since the dawn of man. Combining 2 different tomatoes to make another breed of tomato is alot different than breeding as tomato that is resistant to herbicides, because, you know, they keep using more and more and stronger and stronger chemicals. Never mind what that is doing to native plants and insects.
I just think there is still not enough info on it yet. Besides, who trusts the companies providing these GMO crops? Monsato? Dow? You think they are being strait with the public?
And since I am a bourbon drinker, I also found this an interesting take on the whole thing, Four Roses and Wild Turkey are the only whiskey's NOT using GMO corn

“European and Asian markets won’t buy whiskey made with GMO corn,Whiskey distilled today won’t be bottled for four to 15 years. If GMO grain is discovered to have issues 5 years from now, or if the government requires GMO labeling down the line, the distillery would be in quite a bind with a lot of aging whiskey that could be affected.”
According to Colin O’Neil, regulatory policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, “to assume that the only real risk is contamination of genetic material ignores the fact that these crops by and large will either produce an insecticide – which has been proved not to break down in the human gut – or are engineered to withstand exposure to herbicides.

“Residues of pesticides on corn present an increased exposure to consumers,” concludes Mr. O’Neil.

Is there anything besides fears, "what ifs" and "group X does it so we should do it too" style arguments that would legitimize labeling?

Is there a reason.

I grew up on a farm, and I think pestacides, fertilizer and their runoffs into lakes are more dangerous than GMO. I now live in Italy, which is highly anti-GMO. They are constantly ranting against it. However, and this I'd like Aaron to answer, I once read several years ago that foods will be specifically modified in the future to cure certain diseases. At that point the anti-GMO debate will be useless, since we will have to, and want to, eat GMO to cure ourselves. True or not Aaron? or anyone else in the labs? Everytime I read about these arguments demonizing GMO I think--just wait, one day the tide will turn. Am I right? Thanks.

delicious_cocktail

that type of testing is a joke because it does not allow to determine long term effects

So yes you can eat them and you dont die; PASSED

What will happen in 150 years to human body: speculation

so let's just not eat anything or use any new products that weren't developed more than 150 years ago...

I guarantee that if you consume GMOs, you will die and your body will be unrecognizable in 150 years

QueenBishOTUniverse

that type of testing is a joke because it does not allow to determine long term effects

So yes you can eat them and you dont die; PASSED

What will happen in 150 years to human body: speculation

so let's just not eat anything or use any new products that weren't developed more than 150 years ago...

I'm still trying to figure out if we're referring to a human body that's been exposed to it for 150 years, or that somehow the effects will pass from one generation to the next....

amusedmonkey

These kinds of discussions remind me of discussions about vaccines, global warming, evolution, the latest "end of the world" predictions and so on. I rarely engage in them because I can't do it with a straight face.

There is broad scientific consensus that food on the market derived from genetically modified crops poses no greater risk to human health than conventional food. If you are an insulin dependent diabetic, you are injecting yourself with one of the earliest GMOs, so why aren't we complaining? and that's just one example.

Either way, there's nothing wrong with having moral and spiritual opinions, or opinions based on scaremongering and marketing, what is wrong is calling them science.

asdowe13

And honestly, it’s these lawsuits that create much of the fear. Why not label it? Too expensive? No. Most GMO are used in processed foods and they are all labelled. And those labels are regularly updated without passing the cost along to consumers. So the question becomes, why spend millions of dollars to prevent the labels? What are they hiding?

I think this thread is a clear example of why it would be a bad idea in unnecessarily label as most people don't even know which foods are GMO and just assume from the great marketing tool "organic" is that anything without "organic" is GMO.

That's because the organic or "non-GMO" label is the only way to know. The only reason not to label is to keep the consumer from making their own decision. If people want to know they should be allowed to know.

Call the manufacturer and ask then!

Showcase_Brodown

Meh.

What is the objective difference in the end result between non-GMO and GMO? What does a GMO apple have in it that a non-GMO apple does not? And if there is no difference to my body, why do I really care which specific method we used to come up with it?

My official stance is: Don't care. If good evidence comes up showing that it's harmful, then I'll stand corrected. Until then, it's not worth hiding under my bed with my hands over my eyes.

fatcity66

Glad to see such hearty discussion!
I myself eat GMO foods and I couldn't tell the difference...but I have family members who are vehemently opposed to them and want them labeled.
It actually sounds like very few foods AREN'T genetically modified, therefore, maybe labels would make people realize just how much they would have to give up if they didn't eat GMO foods? Might be a good thing, as an eye-opener for some that you really can't avoid them without sacrificing a lot.

phil6707

when you modify the genome of corn, it is not corn anymore

so many people commenting here with no background in chemistry or biology.

GMO corn is a mutation of corn. It is not a natural evolution (read Darwin if you want to educate yourself about about the difference between evolution, mutation, selection and modification)

We have no way today to say if it is bad of not because we have no data spanning over multiple generations

Alyssa_Is_LosingIt

when you modify the genome of corn, it is not corn anymore

so many people commenting here with no background in chemistry or biology.

GMO corn is a mutation of corn. It is not a natural evolution (read Darwin if you want to educate yourself about about the difference between evolution, mutation, selection and modification)

We have no way today to say if it is bad of not because we have no data spanning over multiple generations

By that logic, does that mean that someone whose genes have been altered by a genetic mutation isn't human anymore?

QueenBishOTUniverse

when you modify the genome of corn, it is not corn anymore

so many people commenting here with no background in chemistry or biology.

GMO corn is a mutation of corn. It is not a natural evolution (read Darwin if you want to educate yourself about about the difference between evolution, mutation, selection and modification)

We have no way today to say if it is bad of not because we have no data spanning over multiple generations

<<< Graduate degree from the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. I believe I have heard of this Darwin person you speak of. You do realize that genetic mutation is THE mechanism for evolution, so yea, GMO corn is artificially mutated and selected, but still qualifies as corn since that's a rather large genus with a whole lot of different species in it.... In order to no longer be classified as corn, it would have to no longer have the basic traits common to all corn species...

ETA: and I still want to know how the DNA in the corn is going to some how affect human populations over multiple generations, what's the mechanism for that?

Aaron_K123

that type of testing is a joke because it does not allow to determine long term effects

So yes you can eat them and you dont die; PASSED

What will happen in 150 years to human body: speculation

Which is why we wait 150 years before using any newly developed product. Oh wait, no...we don't...that would be ridiculous.

DeguelloTex

when you modify the genome of corn, it is not corn anymore

so many people commenting here with no background in chemistry or biology.

GMO corn is a mutation of corn. It is not a natural evolution (read Darwin if you want to educate yourself about about the difference between evolution, mutation, selection and modification)

We have no way today to say if it is bad of not because we have no data spanning over multiple generations

LOL.

It looks like the only thing you got right is that it isn't "natural evolution."

Aaron_K123

when you modify the genome of corn, it is not corn anymore

What? Explain that to me.

so many people commenting here with no background in chemistry or biology.

<<< has a significant background in chemistry and biology and biochemistry and genetics and molecular biology and has worked as a research scientist for many years. Ph.D in molecular biology and a focus in biochemistry and microbiology. Is that relevant? Not really, but hey if you are going to claim people who are commenting don't have a background in particular fields it well then I'm going to bring it up.

GMO corn is a mutation of corn. It is not a natural evolution (read Darwin if you want to educate yourself about about the difference between evolution, mutation, selection and modification)

I must have missed the part of Origin of Species that talks about DNA as it relates to heredity and the effects of GMOs. Reading Darwin is good for a history lesson, if you want to learn about genetics pick up a modern textbook.

We have no way today to say if it is bad of not because we have no data spanning over multiple generations

When has that EVER been a criteria for the safety of a product?

_Terrapin_

Robert Fraley PhD Monsanto's chief technology officer on state labeling laws"It would create unnecessary cost and confusion...We are absolutely supportive of voluntary labeling". Source: Bloomberg article 7/7 to 7/13/14. Also, from the article, GM varieties make up 90 percent of all corn grown in the US. A very good article which brings a brighter light on the benefits of efficient growth of many crops, corn is just the largest.