Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Are GMOs bad for you?

1679111220

Replies

  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,023 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.
  • ladyannique2017
    ladyannique2017 Posts: 52 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    "Better seeds" didn't just happen. They're the result of research and development, including GMOs.

    Agree, the better seeds are part of what the slide show said was modernizing of farming. So are all these better seeds GMO seeds? I look at the country productivity charts and they're almost identical...well except for some weirdos like Algeria. But the major countries all look the same. Is the increase due to GMOs? I know we here in the US are at the forefront of GMO technology, but I'm not seeing a difference...I kind of expected to see us way outperforming everyone else. So I'm still scratching my head...how have GMOs made a difference to World Hunger?

    I know you're not the person that said this, but they haven't responded so can I ask you the follow up question I had about their comment? Kimny said something about GMOs being more affordable...are they cheaper? And that they are faster? I assume it must mean they grow faster because I don't think it matters whether a ship to Africa has gmo corn on it or not, it's going to sail at the same speed. I have never heard of GMOs growing faster than non GMOs...what's your thoughts on that?

    I am not a GMO expert and I don't feel qualified to answer your questoins, but if you want to investigate what GMO advocates/experts have to say on some of these questions, I suggest this site: https://gmoanswers.com/

    The cool thing about that site is that if your question isn't already answered, you can submit it for consideration.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.

    Thanks guys! I will check tonight from home. I'd never really thought about GMOs but with them being in the news and obamas label law this thread caught my eye as I'm not sure right now which label I want to go for. I mean, if they're equal as food, then what about ethics...if GMOs mean helping World Hunger then I want to support that. So I appreciate you taking the time to give me a couple pointers.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,182 Member
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The two issues actually are related. Golden rice.
  • rhtexasgal
    rhtexasgal Posts: 572 Member
    There is so much "stuff" about GMOs that I just go by how they make ME feel. As someone who has gone through several ulcerative colitis flares, I have become quite attuned to what I put in my body and how it makes me feel.

    I have done taste tests as well as "experiments" to see how I feel after I eat corn - both the GMO and non-GMO variety. I live in farm country in SE Texas where the major crops are cotton, soybean and corn. I have personally visited several of the farms that were open to the public and two I visited admitted to using GMO corn. So, I purchased some corn from them as well as some corn from a local organic farmer that used natural methods of pesticide (no chemicals at all).

    The result - done over several weeks to make sure I could do comparisons on myself - was that the GMO corn did not have the "richness" of flavor that the organic corn did. Also, the GMO corn made my intestines gurgle a LOT and in some cases (2 out of 3 times), I also got gut cramping and issues later with elimination. I did not experience any of that with the organic variety.

    Yeah, this was totally informal, anecdotal testing but I was curious about how I alone reacted to GMO corn and was willing to experiment on myself, chancing that the GMO corn might throw me into another flare. The bottom line was that I am not willing to purchase GMO products of any variety now on the off-chance that I may experience similar reactions. My food bill is higher but my gut thanks me for it.
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    rhtexasgal wrote: »
    There is so much "stuff" about GMOs that I just go by how they make ME feel. As someone who has gone through several ulcerative colitis flares, I have become quite attuned to what I put in my body and how it makes me feel.

    I have done taste tests as well as "experiments" to see how I feel after I eat corn - both the GMO and non-GMO variety. I live in farm country in SE Texas where the major crops are cotton, soybean and corn. I have personally visited several of the farms that were open to the public and two I visited admitted to using GMO corn. So, I purchased some corn from them as well as some corn from a local organic farmer that used natural methods of pesticide (no chemicals at all).

    The result - done over several weeks to make sure I could do comparisons on myself - was that the GMO corn did not have the "richness" of flavor that the organic corn did. Also, the GMO corn made my intestines gurgle a LOT and in some cases (2 out of 3 times), I also got gut cramping and issues later with elimination. I did not experience any of that with the organic variety.

    Yeah, this was totally informal, anecdotal testing but I was curious about how I alone reacted to GMO corn and was willing to experiment on myself, chancing that the GMO corn might throw me into another flare. The bottom line was that I am not willing to purchase GMO products of any variety now on the off-chance that I may experience similar reactions. My food bill is higher but my gut thanks me for it.

    It is highly unlikely this has anything to do with GMO. GMO corn in the US is used in processed foods, HFCS, and animal feed. The vast majority of sweet corn that is served fresh is not GMO. So my guess is that this would most likely have more to do with the actual type of corn, especially taste wise.
  • ladyannique2017
    ladyannique2017 Posts: 52 Member

    606 pages! I didn't realize there was so much out there about GMOs...
  • rhtexasgal
    rhtexasgal Posts: 572 Member
    Dnarules wrote: »
    rhtexasgal wrote: »
    There is so much "stuff" about GMOs that I just go by how they make ME feel. As someone who has gone through several ulcerative colitis flares, I have become quite attuned to what I put in my body and how it makes me feel.

    I have done taste tests as well as "experiments" to see how I feel after I eat corn - both the GMO and non-GMO variety. I live in farm country in SE Texas where the major crops are cotton, soybean and corn. I have personally visited several of the farms that were open to the public and two I visited admitted to using GMO corn. So, I purchased some corn from them as well as some corn from a local organic farmer that used natural methods of pesticide (no chemicals at all).

    The result - done over several weeks to make sure I could do comparisons on myself - was that the GMO corn did not have the "richness" of flavor that the organic corn did. Also, the GMO corn made my intestines gurgle a LOT and in some cases (2 out of 3 times), I also got gut cramping and issues later with elimination. I did not experience any of that with the organic variety.

    Yeah, this was totally informal, anecdotal testing but I was curious about how I alone reacted to GMO corn and was willing to experiment on myself, chancing that the GMO corn might throw me into another flare. The bottom line was that I am not willing to purchase GMO products of any variety now on the off-chance that I may experience similar reactions. My food bill is higher but my gut thanks me for it.

    It is highly unlikely this has anything to do with GMO. GMO corn in the US is used in processed foods, HFCS, and animal feed. The vast majority of sweet corn that is served fresh is not GMO. So my guess is that this would most likely have more to do with the actual type of corn, especially taste wise.

    It was the exactly same variety of corn in both cases. Since my diagnosis, I have not bought foods with corn in it, especially HFCS, cereal, etc. It would set my gut off. If I somehow slip, my gut tells me in quite a rude manner! Most everything I consume is fresh and the only thing in a box I eat is pasta made from quinoa and rice. It greatly limits eating out but my health now dictates it. I still eat corn but only from one organic farmer at my local farmers market that uses heirloom organic seed and uses no chemicals or herbicides.
  • mswag84
    mswag84 Posts: 67 Member
    swagartm12 wrote: »
    Time is going to tell on this one. "Independent studies" tied to tell us cigarettes weren't harmful at one time. Fact of the matter is money drives everything. The money is on the side of the producers and distributors of GMO's. I eat them my family eats them, but do they concern me to some extent absolutely. We are going to find out in the future and hopefully the pro GMO crowd can point and laugh at the people that were concerned

    Because corporations pushing for organic don't have any money?

    In comparison to Monsanto pennies on the dollar....yet again I'm not here saying GMO's are bad I eat them everyday. Time will tell I hope they aren't, but to think lobbying and "independent" studies funded by big food doesn't exist is naive. Money makes the world go round
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    rhtexasgal wrote: »
    There is so much "stuff" about GMOs that I just go by how they make ME feel. As someone who has gone through several ulcerative colitis flares, I have become quite attuned to what I put in my body and how it makes me feel.

    I have done taste tests as well as "experiments" to see how I feel after I eat corn - both the GMO and non-GMO variety. I live in farm country in SE Texas where the major crops are cotton, soybean and corn. I have personally visited several of the farms that were open to the public and two I visited admitted to using GMO corn. So, I purchased some corn from them as well as some corn from a local organic farmer that used natural methods of pesticide (no chemicals at all).

    The result - done over several weeks to make sure I could do comparisons on myself - was that the GMO corn did not have the "richness" of flavor that the organic corn did. Also, the GMO corn made my intestines gurgle a LOT and in some cases (2 out of 3 times), I also got gut cramping and issues later with elimination. I did not experience any of that with the organic variety.

    Yeah, this was totally informal, anecdotal testing but I was curious about how I alone reacted to GMO corn and was willing to experiment on myself, chancing that the GMO corn might throw me into another flare. The bottom line was that I am not willing to purchase GMO products of any variety now on the off-chance that I may experience similar reactions. My food bill is higher but my gut thanks me for it.

    Corn is generally a trigger food for inflammatory bowel disease so I wouldn't use getting GI symptoms from it as a sign GMOs are not safe.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,023 Member
    swagartm12 wrote: »
    swagartm12 wrote: »
    Time is going to tell on this one. "Independent studies" tied to tell us cigarettes weren't harmful at one time. Fact of the matter is money drives everything. The money is on the side of the producers and distributors of GMO's. I eat them my family eats them, but do they concern me to some extent absolutely. We are going to find out in the future and hopefully the pro GMO crowd can point and laugh at the people that were concerned

    Because corporations pushing for organic don't have any money?

    In comparison to Monsanto pennies on the dollar....yet again I'm not here saying GMO's are bad I eat them everyday. Time will tell I hope they aren't, but to think lobbying and "independent" studies funded by big food doesn't exist is naive. Money makes the world go round

    One of the largest suppliers of organic products in the US is General Mills. Many smaller organic lines are owned by multi-national corporations that know people are more likely to feel virtuous buying it if it says "Green Earth" on the label instead of "Kraft". My "all natural" friend nearly had a stroke the other day when I told her that Burt's Bees is a subsidiary of Clorox.
  • mswag84
    mswag84 Posts: 67 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    swagartm12 wrote: »
    swagartm12 wrote: »
    Time is going to tell on this one. "Independent studies" tied to tell us cigarettes weren't harmful at one time. Fact of the matter is money drives everything. The money is on the side of the producers and distributors of GMO's. I eat them my family eats them, but do they concern me to some extent absolutely. We are going to find out in the future and hopefully the pro GMO crowd can point and laugh at the people that were concerned

    Because corporations pushing for organic don't have any money?

    In comparison to Monsanto pennies on the dollar....yet again I'm not here saying GMO's are bad I eat them everyday. Time will tell I hope they aren't, but to think lobbying and "independent" studies funded by big food doesn't exist is naive. Money makes the world go round

    One of the largest suppliers of organic products in the US is General Mills. Many smaller organic lines are owned by multi-national corporations that know people are more likely to feel virtuous buying it if it says "Green Earth" on the label instead of "Kraft". My "all natural" friend nearly had a stroke the other day when I told her that Burt's Bees is a subsidiary of Clorox.

    Perfect business be on both sides of the aisle it's a win win....I think I read 90 percent of grown food is GMO though so it's hardly in comparison with GMO vs non GMO
  • ladyannique2017
    ladyannique2017 Posts: 52 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.

    Hi Kimny, I read up on Golden Rice last night. Learned that it is a humanitarian project to add Vit A to rice to help prevent blindness in malnourished children. But sadly, it's apparently been in development since 1992 and I couldn't find a release date...only comments like 'we're still years away from release' and 'we still have to test whether eating the beta carotene in the rice can actually be absorbed into the body as Vit A.' There were also issues with yields in test fields...apparently when they did the GE to add the beta carotene, they accidentally affected the tallness gene so a lot of the rice plants from the developmental seeds are all stunted and sort of drown in the water of a rice paddy because they are too short?!

    So although Golden Rice is an awesome idea, it can't have affected World Hunger yet because it's still in testing. It might in future..and is a very exciting application of the technology.

    [/quote]

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems [/quote]


    So when you wrote the above and then said you didn't mean it as a fact, were you just thinking about future potential of GMOs to help World Hunger?
  • ladyannique2017
    ladyannique2017 Posts: 52 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    "Better seeds" didn't just happen. They're the result of research and development, including GMOs.

    Agree, the better seeds are part of what the slide show said was modernizing of farming. So are all these better seeds GMO seeds? I look at the country productivity charts and they're almost identical...well except for some weirdos like Algeria. But the major countries all look the same. Is the increase due to GMOs? I know we here in the US are at the forefront of GMO technology, but I'm not seeing a difference...I kind of expected to see us way outperforming everyone else. So I'm still scratching my head...how have GMOs made a difference to World Hunger?

    I know you're not the person that said this, but they haven't responded so can I ask you the follow up question I had about their comment? Kimny said something about GMOs being more affordable...are they cheaper? And that they are faster? I assume it must mean they grow faster because I don't think it matters whether a ship to Africa has gmo corn on it or not, it's going to sail at the same speed. I have never heard of GMOs growing faster than non GMOs...what's your thoughts on that?

    I am not a GMO expert and I don't feel qualified to answer your questoins, but if you want to investigate what GMO advocates/experts have to say on some of these questions, I suggest this site: https://gmoanswers.com/

    The cool thing about that site is that if your question isn't already answered, you can submit it for consideration.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.

    Thanks guys! I will check tonight from home. I'd never really thought about GMOs but with them being in the news and obamas label law this thread caught my eye as I'm not sure right now which label I want to go for. I mean, if they're equal as food, then what about ethics...if GMOs mean helping World Hunger then I want to support that. So I appreciate you taking the time to give me a couple pointers.

    As I said, I'm not an expert but my evaluation leads me to believe that supporting GMOs is the more ethical choice because it results in more food being available around the world. Hunger is a huge issue and simply having more food isn't the whole solution . . . but we can't solve hunger *without* having enough food, so it's an important component.

    I loved the gmo answers web site! Thanks again for the link. You know I couldn't find anything on there showing how GMOs have increased food production globally as a positive impact on world hunger. I found one answer that hinted at it. It said that global food production had increased due to "technology and techniques" so I've put in a question to ask them to drill down into that and tell me how much GMOs have done for World Hunger through more food being available. Would you be interested in their answer too if I get one? :)
  • ladyannique2017
    ladyannique2017 Posts: 52 Member
    rhtexasgal wrote: »
    Dnarules wrote: »
    rhtexasgal wrote: »
    There is so much "stuff" about GMOs that I just go by how they make ME feel. As someone who has gone through several ulcerative colitis flares, I have become quite attuned to what I put in my body and how it makes me feel.

    I have done taste tests as well as "experiments" to see how I feel after I eat corn - both the GMO and non-GMO variety. I live in farm country in SE Texas where the major crops are cotton, soybean and corn. I have personally visited several of the farms that were open to the public and two I visited admitted to using GMO corn. So, I purchased some corn from them as well as some corn from a local organic farmer that used natural methods of pesticide (no chemicals at all).

    The result - done over several weeks to make sure I could do comparisons on myself - was that the GMO corn did not have the "richness" of flavor that the organic corn did. Also, the GMO corn made my intestines gurgle a LOT and in some cases (2 out of 3 times), I also got gut cramping and issues later with elimination. I did not experience any of that with the organic variety.

    Yeah, this was totally informal, anecdotal testing but I was curious about how I alone reacted to GMO corn and was willing to experiment on myself, chancing that the GMO corn might throw me into another flare. The bottom line was that I am not willing to purchase GMO products of any variety now on the off-chance that I may experience similar reactions. My food bill is higher but my gut thanks me for it.

    It is highly unlikely this has anything to do with GMO. GMO corn in the US is used in processed foods, HFCS, and animal feed. The vast majority of sweet corn that is served fresh is not GMO. So my guess is that this would most likely have more to do with the actual type of corn, especially taste wise.

    It was the exactly same variety of corn in both cases. Since my diagnosis, I have not bought foods with corn in it, especially HFCS, cereal, etc. It would set my gut off. If I somehow slip, my gut tells me in quite a rude manner! Most everything I consume is fresh and the only thing in a box I eat is pasta made from quinoa and rice. It greatly limits eating out but my health now dictates it. I still eat corn but only from one organic farmer at my local farmers market that uses heirloom organic seed and uses no chemicals or herbicides.

    I was thinking about what you wrote last night, and I was wondering that maybe what you experienced could have been pesticide related? You said the organic farmer used different, natural pesticides from the GMO farmers. I know Roundup is a popular pesticide..and I saw recent article saying that the WHO and other scientists now think Roundup(glyphosate) is a carcinogen? Do you think maybe you were reacting to that instead?
  • tomteboda
    tomteboda Posts: 2,171 Member
    I was thinking about what you wrote last night, and I was wondering that maybe what you experienced could have been pesticide related? You said the organic farmer used different, natural pesticides from the GMO farmers. I know Roundup is a popular pesticide..and I saw recent article saying that the WHO and other scientists now think Roundup(glyphosate) is a carcinogen? Do you think maybe you were reacting to that instead?

    Fried potatoes are carcinogens, too. So is wood smoke.

    Glyphosphate is water-soluble and has a very short environmental persistence. That means it degrades quickly, and also washes off readily. That means plants treated with glyphosphate are not going to deliver any significant amount of the substance to your table. The WHO has studied this extensively and concluded that glyphosphate poses no risk to human health as typically used or in your food.

    *Obviously you shouldn't drink the stuff, but I don't think you should drink Dawn dish detergent, and you probably use that or something like it on your plates and cookware daily.



  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    "Better seeds" didn't just happen. They're the result of research and development, including GMOs.

    Agree, the better seeds are part of what the slide show said was modernizing of farming. So are all these better seeds GMO seeds? I look at the country productivity charts and they're almost identical...well except for some weirdos like Algeria. But the major countries all look the same. Is the increase due to GMOs? I know we here in the US are at the forefront of GMO technology, but I'm not seeing a difference...I kind of expected to see us way outperforming everyone else. So I'm still scratching my head...how have GMOs made a difference to World Hunger?

    I know you're not the person that said this, but they haven't responded so can I ask you the follow up question I had about their comment? Kimny said something about GMOs being more affordable...are they cheaper? And that they are faster? I assume it must mean they grow faster because I don't think it matters whether a ship to Africa has gmo corn on it or not, it's going to sail at the same speed. I have never heard of GMOs growing faster than non GMOs...what's your thoughts on that?

    I am not a GMO expert and I don't feel qualified to answer your questoins, but if you want to investigate what GMO advocates/experts have to say on some of these questions, I suggest this site: https://gmoanswers.com/

    The cool thing about that site is that if your question isn't already answered, you can submit it for consideration.
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.

    Thanks guys! I will check tonight from home. I'd never really thought about GMOs but with them being in the news and obamas label law this thread caught my eye as I'm not sure right now which label I want to go for. I mean, if they're equal as food, then what about ethics...if GMOs mean helping World Hunger then I want to support that. So I appreciate you taking the time to give me a couple pointers.

    As I said, I'm not an expert but my evaluation leads me to believe that supporting GMOs is the more ethical choice because it results in more food being available around the world. Hunger is a huge issue and simply having more food isn't the whole solution . . . but we can't solve hunger *without* having enough food, so it's an important component.

    I loved the gmo answers web site! Thanks again for the link. You know I couldn't find anything on there showing how GMOs have increased food production globally as a positive impact on world hunger. I found one answer that hinted at it. It said that global food production had increased due to "technology and techniques" so I've put in a question to ask them to drill down into that and tell me how much GMOs have done for World Hunger through more food being available. Would you be interested in their answer too if I get one? :)

    Yes, I would be interested in the answer. I'm glad you found the site interesting.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,023 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    In the wise words of James Fell:

    y4fhnmnjcq32.jpg

    Pretty much sums up my feelings on GMOs.

    The two issues of GMOs and world starvation are not related. People aren't starving to death because someone chooses to eat or not eat GMOs. There is no correlation.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems

    I was curious about this so found a neat history piece on World Hunger and food production. There is this slide show...but it doesn't say anything about GMOs being the reason world hunger is declining...only that better seeds and fertilizer have done it and then it shows charts of lots of countries with their food productivity sky rocketing. Can you explain the gmo link?
    https://ourworldindata.org/slides/hunger-and-food-provision/#/title-slide.

    One example is Golden Rice, you can Google that to see a lot of info and opinions. I wasn't meaning to state a fact, rather to clarify what the James Fell quote was referring to, though I do agree with him.

    Hi Kimny, I read up on Golden Rice last night. Learned that it is a humanitarian project to add Vit A to rice to help prevent blindness in malnourished children. But sadly, it's apparently been in development since 1992 and I couldn't find a release date...only comments like 'we're still years away from release' and 'we still have to test whether eating the beta carotene in the rice can actually be absorbed into the body as Vit A.' There were also issues with yields in test fields...apparently when they did the GE to add the beta carotene, they accidentally affected the tallness gene so a lot of the rice plants from the developmental seeds are all stunted and sort of drown in the water of a rice paddy because they are too short?!

    So although Golden Rice is an awesome idea, it can't have affected World Hunger yet because it's still in testing. It might in future..and is a very exciting application of the technology.

    The point of the Fell quote is that GMOs are being used to more affordably and quickly feed starving or malnourished people. It's easy to be anti-GMO when you are shopping at WF and farmer's markets. When your kids are starving in a poor village somewhere, your life may very well depend on GMOs. #firstworldproblems [/quote]


    So when you wrote the above and then said you didn't mean it as a fact, were you just thinking about future potential of GMOs to help World Hunger? [/quote]

    The GMO corn and soy that are currently being used in this country were developed to make these crops easier and cheaper to grow. That's why they are used in so many food products now. Whether this has affected world hunger or not, I have no idea. There are countless socioeconomic and geographic issues that affect people's access to food, it's not just about cost and supply. However, many cheap "processed" foods have GMO corn or soy in them, and I'd bet companies would be pushing more GMO crops which could further reduce food prices if the issue hadn't become so politicized.

    I didn't say GMOs have reduced world hunger (I didn't even use the words "world hunger", that was another poster), just that it's easier to be picky about the way your food is grown when you live in abundance. Since GMOs are often developed to make crops hardier, faster growing, and easier to grow it seems logical to me that they could bring down food costs and increase supply. Unfortunately, many people around the world are hungry for far more complicated reasons than supply and poverty.