GMO crops still making headlines.

Options
«134567…10

Replies

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    I see an article about GMO at least once a week.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,160 Member
    Options
    I guess they were just off my radar until some recent reading on the subject. I expect it will take years before science will prove where they are bad, neutral or good for animal usage.
  • dstromley90
    dstromley90 Posts: 60 Member
    Options
    Poison. Monsanto pays congress off. Plenty of whistle blowers speaking out against the "studies" proving them safe. Why else would they pass laws forbidding gmo labeling
  • kk_inprogress
    kk_inprogress Posts: 3,077 Member
    Options
    catscats222 wrote: »
    true - companies donate millions a year to the federal government
    you cannot trust anyone
    coke (diet coke) is a good example
    the studies on asparartame are funded by money from coke and pepsi industries themselves
    private people do not pay for studies

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1308408/why-aspartame-isnt-scary#latest
  • ldrosophila
    ldrosophila Posts: 7,512 Member
    Options
    poor italy hope theyll be able to keep up with their food supply when we hit 10 billion with climate change. guess time will tell
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    ldrosophila wrote: »
    poor italy hope theyll be able to keep up with their food supply when we hit 10 billion with climate change. guess time will tell

    Depends if they're in Italy I guess. They have a declining birth rate I think.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    edited October 2015
    Options
    So government can't pay for research because it's biased, and industry can't pay for research because it's biased. Which one of you is going to pay for all this unbiased research?
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    I guess they were just off my radar until some recent reading on the subject. I expect it will take years before science will prove where they are bad, neutral or good for animal usage.

    They've been in use for about 20 years, and by comparing health reports before and after their introduction they're seeing no change for about 1 trillion animals in the USA in that time. How many more animals and how much more time is needed?
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    dstromley90 wrote: »
    Poison. Monsanto pays congress off. Plenty of whistle blowers speaking out against the "studies" proving them safe. Why else would they pass laws forbidding gmo labeling

    Project Non-GMO Verified exists. GMOs can be labeled all they want. What won't pass is laws that mandate labeling.
    The reason why is because GMO labeling gives consumers no useful information in making a purchase, and leads to increased costs to the consumer.
    Essentially GMO labeling laws involve upper middle class to rich people expecting poor people to pay more for food to satisfy their curiosity about the genes inside what they're eating, rather than they themselves paying the cost via purchasing things labeled Organic or Project Non-GMO Verified. Those seem pretty good reasons to avoid forcing a label on something harmless.
    To add to the issue, why can Monsanto, with ~10 Billion in revenue pay off scientists and congress, but the major oil companies with about ~100 Billion in revenue each can't pay off the same about climate change? I mean, Monsanto's revenue isn't much bigger than Whole Foods.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    I swallow a synthetic hormone every day...and I do it gleefully. That wondrous little pill has done me SO MUCH good and is primarily responsible for every pound I've lost.

    I'm a huge supporter of GM stuff and honestly haven't heard anyone who says it's actually bad for us. If I do, I'll take it seriously! But I have yet to hear a single word from anyone about it. Someone posted a debate about it here and even the people who spoke out against it didn't say it's actually bad, just that they'd rather spend money funding something else.
  • milocamolly
    milocamolly Posts: 91 Member
    edited October 2015
    Options
    OP watch the documentary GMO OMG on Netflix. It's a really good one and it explains a LOT about Gmos.
  • threadmad
    threadmad Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    auddii wrote: »
    So government can't pay for research because it's biased, and industry can't pay for research because it's biased. Which one of you is going to pay for all this unbiased research?

    yep, who indeed?
  • Adalaide159
    Adalaide159 Posts: 8 Member
    Options
    milocamolly wrote: »
    OP watch the documentary GMO OMG on Netflix. It's a really good one and it explains a LOT about Gmos.

    I politely disagree. I saw the film and found it so one sided it was not even funny.

    "As the editors wrote in the September issue of Scientific American: “The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the World Health Organization and the exceptionally vigilant European Union agree that GMOs are just as safe as other foods. Compared with conventional breeding techniques—which swap giant chunks of DNA between one plant and another—genetic engineering is far more precise and, in most cases, is less likely to produce an unexpected result. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has tested all the GMOs on the market to determine whether they are toxic or allergenic. They are not.”


    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/film-review-e2809cgmo-omge2809d-srsly-an-epicfail-in-exercising-our-right-to-know/

    That article is a very good review on the film, and has some very nice points on the science behind GMOS.

    Also, for anyone who is interested in some more information as to why GMO crops may not be evil, check out this video. She quotes some studies and throws out some interesting points about why GMO's aren't as bad as some people may think. Just so you know, this girl is a vegan, so one of her points is about how GMO crops help animal welfare, but she isn't a crazy sort of "kill all the meat eaters" vegans. Her entire channel is dedicated to shutting down broscience around fad diets, so it's interesting if you have some extra time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aA4I-WRu_s0
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    https://www.ted.com/talks/pamela_ronald_the_case_for_engineering_our_food?language=en
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Options
    The golden rice project.

    http://www.goldenrice.org
  • Blazinpghgirl
    Blazinpghgirl Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Just a little website some of you might enjoy:

    http://www.gmoevidence.com/

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,509 Member
    Options
    The whole labeling issue is pretty overzealous. Why not do it like others? If it's gluten free, it's marked "gluten free". Other than that, one HAS to assume there is gluten in the product. Same with peanut free products. So do the same with GMO. Only make the products "Non GMO" since there aren't as many products versus those that are GMO.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png
  • tinger12
    tinger12 Posts: 62 Member
    Options
    Oh man, not another back and forth about GMO science. I have been happily eating GMO engineered foods for years I'm not dead yet. I'm here to lose weight. Not worry about politicians and internet quacks spitting their agenda.

Categories