GMOs

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.

You do appreciate that the EU isn't a country don't you? The various constituent countries all have very different incentives for their positions.

I'd also note that "the EU" is broadly meaningless when talking about regulation, as each member state enacts regulations individually. More complex again if one is discussing the European Commission or the Secretariat.

But to the point, there is a dearth of reliable data on GMO, in part because its too broad a term to be useful. There are a number of principles that do give rise to concern, with respect to propagation and cross boundary effects, but the research hasn't gone on long enough to be useful. Essentially there is some effect,but the persistence isn't known.

Yes, I am aware the EU is an economic union, not a political one. I'm not retarded. The EU is comprised of a lot of European COUNTRIES that ban GMOs, which is what I said in the first place.

In addition, bio-engineering companies are mixing the DNA of plants with desireable traits from ANIMALS. Not to mention all of the pesticides that are being grown into the plant, not just sprayed on.

I really like this film: http://www.foodmatters.tv/ It explains it very well. You can watch the first 40 minutes for free, otherwise I think there is a small price you can pay to watch the whole thing.

Anybody know where there's any real evidence that GMOs are bad or is it just another 'this food is bad' paranoia?

First - let's look at what GMOs actually are.

GMO = Genetically Modified Organism. One organism has been manipulated to include some amount of genetic material from another organism. The new genetic elements are established into the organism such that they can "breed true", or you'd have to do it every generation. The new DNA is generally going to be inserted via a random approach, and then organisms which contain the desired traits will be selected and the best of these (by whatever criteria you define "best") will be taken for further use.


WOO HOO!! FInally someone with some knowledge of what GMO really is!! Well said!
In practice, what does this actually mean?

GMO soy - one of the main "culprits" here - has been altered genetically to make it "Roundup Ready" (RR). Roundup is a glyphosate herbicide that kills broad leaf plants by way of inhibiting an enzyme the plants absolutely need to make certain amino acids. This is useful in killing most weeds, but can also kill the crop plants themselves, which isn't good.

So what scientists did was take a version of the same enzyme from a common bacteria Agrobacterium tumefaciens, which is not inhibited by Roundup, and put this gene (along with expression elements) into the genome of soy. The soy express the bacterial protein as well as their own protein. When treated with Roundup, the normal plant protein stops working but the bacterial can keep on trucking, making amino acids, so the RR plants live.

So what does this mean for our health?

If you consume soy oil, very little. The bacterial protein, being a protein, is unlikely to be found in significant quantities in the oil. Basically, in making oil, you are going to be purifying it away from contaminating stuff like proteins.

If you eat the soy beans, there will be some bacterial protein present. So what you are looking at is ONE added protein to the several thousand the soy already actually make. The rest of the proteins are going to be essentially identical (it is possible there could be small perturbations in the levels of a few of the soy proteins, but these would be small and highly unlikely to be significant) And, basically, a protein is a protein and will be treated as such by your body: i.e. you will digest it and use it as you would any other protein. There is a very small chance (as with any specific protein) that one could develop an allergy to it.

Other crops - corn, alfa and some others, have also been made RR in the same way.

So, bottom line, as far as health concerns go, I think that RR crops are going to be virtually indistinguishable from non-RR varieties. Scares over the safety of GMO crops from this point of view are, I think, baseless.

Other GM crops include rice. Rice has been made RR (but I don't think it is marketed?) and has also been modified so that it provides more nutrition, which could be a definite advantage in poor countries where rice is a staple.


Note - I'm not addressing environmental, labeling, or other concerns. Just health. And my conclusion is that there is nothing intrinsically unhealthy about GMO crops. My personal opinion is that (a) people should understand the science behind them so they can make an informed choice and (b) they should be labeled, so people can carry that informed choice into the store.

Here is a video about India problems with GMO crops... including reports about suicides taking place among the farmers there ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFF96-wrtUM

Here is a report on the alarming rate of obesity and health issues in America since the 1990's where GMOs were allowed to be added to the US food manufacturing process! ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0QRCqZMIf8 and start using common sense that something is definitely going wrong in the countries that allow GMOs in the food supply without letting its consumers know that GMOs are IN their food supply Oh, and that happens to be mainly in America where many chemicals and additives in its food supply have been illegal to use in other countries!

GMO advocates say it is because alarmist in all these other nations have made such it such a political issue that they have forced these governments to enforce labeling of their foods to include identifying that products that have GMOs be clearly stated? I have to agree I like to know if I am eating food that has been genetically altered myself. SO, I have to ask why are they hesitant about letting the public know what foods are made or mixed with GMOs ... especially if their scientific findings prove GMOs are better for us.. WHERE is their PROOF??? You won't find it here in America.. we are getting sicker NOT healthier!!

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.

I don't normally chime in on these debates, however, I have to correct you on this one. Growing up in farm country in the Midwest, I know for a fact that Monsanto has sued countless farmers for just this. My sister-in-law's father represented many a farmer in lawsuits brought on by Monsanto.

Also, you don't understand ANYTHING if you think autism and GMOs have any relation, at all. You are an idiot.