GMOs

Here's a study I recently found about Hamsters who were given GMO soy milk as opposed to their regular nutritional GMO free diet. After a few generations, they were unable to produce babies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

I stay away from GMOs as much as I possibly can. I would say that about 65-80% of my diet is GMO Free, Most of that is aswell organic.

And yes, the seed companies will obviously tell you they are doing good. There is no money in a business admitting its harm to others. Its all about the money. ALL

Here's a study I recently found about Hamsters who were given GMO soy milk as opposed to their regular nutritional GMO free diet. After a few generations, they were unable to produce babies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

I stay away from GMOs as much as I possibly can. I would say that about 65-80% of my diet is GMO Free, Most of that is aswell organic.

And yes, the seed companies will obviously tell you they are doing good. There is no money in a business admitting its harm to others. Its all about the money. ALL

To be fair, it could have been due to the soy, not the fact that it's GMO soy. Hamsters don't live off soy milk anyway, so it's not surprising that they couldn't get enough nutrients to reproduce from something that isn't balanced for them.

In for the imminent bickering, but hoping for some good information between all that.

If you are concerned about consuming GMO's, know that in the US, the only crops that are GMO-grown are Soybean, Corn, Cotton, Canola, Squash, Papaya, Alfalfa, Sugarbeet. Stay away from those items and you're golden.

There hasn't been one single clinical human trial on the safety of GMOs. Monsanto tells the FDA that they are safe so they are everywhere in our food chain. Most advanced countries have food labeling laws that label whether the product contains GMO ingredients. We can't seem to get that passed here in the US despite Obama using it as a campaign promise.

There's actually a lot of information out there if you just look. You'll likely find better research studies and articles from outside our country though. Monsanto spends a lot of money to protect it's financial interests here.

Here's a study I recently found about Hamsters who were given GMO soy milk as opposed to their regular nutritional GMO free diet. After a few generations, they were unable to produce babies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/genetically-modified-soy_b_544575.html

I stay away from GMOs as much as I possibly can. I would say that about 65-80% of my diet is GMO Free, Most of that is aswell organic.

And yes, the seed companies will obviously tell you they are doing good. There is no money in a business admitting its harm to others. Its all about the money. ALL

In the future, link to the actual scientific paper on the study, not an article about a study written by "Jeffrey Smith: The world's leading consumer advocate promoting healthier non-GMO choices"

Plus the idea of the European Union banning them sounds just as much 'our farmers need revenue, let's make sure we can't buy from America' as concern over how healthy the food is.

Bingo.

Protecting their own economic interests in the guise of public health isn't beneath any country. It doesn't prove that the EU truly thinks GMOs are unhealthy, they just want to keep food prices higher.

Did I say that? I said that our fat *kitten* arnt on that list. Which means that it is probably a contributing factor. I didnt say it was the only factor. Calm down bro.

And I dont think you have to tell anyone on this site that calories are what make people fat, we all know that like the back of our hands.
The handfuls of things that made our continent so fat are countless. Large portions,HF Corn syrup, Polluted dairy and unneeded lactose, Industrial gluten use, Freezer ready foods, poor labelling. I could go on for days.

I am not trying to start a bloodbath, I am genuinely distressed at the total lack of unbiased information. How is anyone supposed to form an educated opinion if the actual facts are so slim?

I know, I know, it's the internets. Some of us try.

Thanks for the article. I'll give it a look.

My skepticism stems from being raised in corn country. It was my understanding that almost all corn and soy were pretty much hybrids. I learned that over 20 years ago. I really do have a hard time believing something with so little evidence available is so overwhelming harmful, when basically we've been doing the same thing with selective breeding since domestication and agriculture began.

Is it because of the genetic tampering that people are concerned? I can see some genetic tampering would be worrying. But I have a hard time believing everything on clean eating sites. Period.

Plus the idea of the European Union banning them sounds just as much 'our farmers need revenue, let's make sure we can't buy from America' as concern over how healthy the food is.

I have not read a lot but I can say that with a basic knowledge of Biology as a high school biology teacher, that selective breeding is a bit different than GMO. With selective breeding you allowed plants to germinate in a more natural way...you might control which pollen gets to what flower to increase the odds of getting desired traits, however, just like there is always a 50/50 chance that a baby will be a boy, there are many families that have all of one gendered kid. Selective breeding allows for dominance, recessiveness, multiple genes etc to still be a determining factor to what we get.

With GMO's, if my understanding is correct, DNA is extracted from a plant with a desirable traits and injected into a seed, altering the DNA. It has been speculated that this practice is partially, note I say partially, responsible for the increase in food sensitivities. The food being grown is changing faster than the flora in our gut can change to learn how to digest the different proteins etc being formed by the DNA of these new super foods. Therefore people are struggling to properly digest and utilize certain foods. I don't know if that is true but it makes sense to me.

I don't know if they are good or bad or neutral, but I do think they should be labeled, because no one knows. If food products are labeled I as a consumer can decide how to support or boycott the practice. Let the free market take over on this one.

Monsanto is the worst, with over 30 of their executives in the United states parliament system, they have so many strings to pull they dont have enough puppets.

Their "single yield" crops allow for one season of growth and do not produce any seeds due to genetic manipulation. This has caused 600,000+ Farmers in India (and in some cases their families) to commit suicide to prevent lose of their homes due to insane debt due to Monsanto.
Think about that. 600,000+ suicides...... And rising every day.

Also every year (May 12, and Oct 12) there is a bi-annual world wide protest "March Against Monsanto" where people gather at local parliament and share in GMO free foods, music, and share awareness to Monsantos evils.

What part unbiased did you miss exactly, hoss?

I didn't ask of the company that made them was reputable. They clearly aren't if they're not releasing information readily. I want to know of actual honest to God studies that exist that prove they're bad. Not your political agenda against an obviously unscrupulous company.

If I wanted to have that conversation, I'd start in on Wal-Mart.

I too would want to see those studies - real studies, not some experiment where they switch out a complete and balanced feed for a lone ingredient that happens to be GMO and draw a conclusion from that. That's sloppy, sloppy science.

About.com has an entry with some good links in it regarding GMO.

http://biotech.about.com/od/Genetically-Modified-Organisms/a/The-Controversy-Of-Genetically-Modified-Food.htm

And yeah, I voted for labeling. I have no issue with it, I was more curious about the lack of actual information about why it was bad in the first place. I definitely support people knowing what they're eating. I just wish there was more information so they could use that labeling to educate themselves.

I bet you are from WA. I am also voting for labeling because I want to know as much as possible about what I eat. Most of what I know about GMO's is from Mercola since I read his newsletters but I do understand how biased he is, and I don't always take the time to read his references.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/10/what-science-tells-us-about-the-safety-of-genetically-modified-foods/

There are no peer reviewed papers supporting GMOs actually being dangerous. It's all fear mongering at it's finest.

http://www.nationofchange.org/dr-oz-defends-monsanto-eat-gmo-foods-they-re-same-non-gmo-organic-1354555215

Now I'm SCARED!!!!

I do try to stay away from GMO's with the "better safe than sorry".

If Dr. Oz says it's good, shouldn't that be enough? Grab your keytones and GMO's!

When everyone is growing the same GMO variety of a crop and a blight or fungus adapts to that one variety, or some invasive insect species comes along with no natural predators and happens to consider that GMO crop the tastiest thing it's ever come across, where will be then? In the same boat as Ireland during the Great Famine when the potato crops were struck by blight.

this is one of the specific reason why GMO crops exist, so they don't all have the same genetic makeup. the potato famine was caused by late blight, which they have found a way against using GMO.

The mere fact that food producers and manufacturers don't want to let consumers know whether their products contain GMOs is for me a pretty good reason to want to avoid those products if I can (it's an arrogant, anti-consumer attitude that I see no reason to reward).

Organic companies are donating money to protect themselves too...why? http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/24/some-organic-brands-oppose-washington-state-gmo-labeling-law/#.UmppNRClrFw

And of course GMO companies are protesting labeling. There's so much unwarranted fear of GMOs...it's like being in the dark ages again.

On top of that there are concerns about the damage to biodiversity that results from seed companies' business practices, which include suing farmers who aren't their customers for patent infringement if their fields get invaded by seeds or cross-pollinated from a neighboring GMO-using farmer.

This has NEVER happened. Monsanto has never sued a farmer for GMO seeds spreading to other crops. In fact, if they find that their seeds have spread, they will pay to have that farmers crop cleaned up.

Farmers who don't want to use the GMO products are forced to choose between being driven out of business or shifting to the GMO seed, which has to be purchased anew every year. It eliminates the ability of farmers to practice traditional techniques, including replanting seed from their harvests and selecting for the best performing plants, because their fields have been invaded by the patented GMO crops.

Most seed companies have a do not reuse clause in their contract. Not just GMO...it's pretty a pretty standard business practice.

When everyone is growing the same GMO variety of a crop and a blight or fungus adapts to that one variety, or some invasive insect species comes along with no natural predators and happens to consider that GMO crop the tastiest thing it's ever come across, where will be then? In the same boat as Ireland during the Great Famine when the potato crops were struck by blight.

There is more diversity in GMO crops than non-GMO....the potato famine you're citing happened long before GMOs came into existence.