Who's Afraid Of Gmo?

[current]

Whether anybody has an opinion on GMOs , one way or the other should read the book by Steven Druker .

 

Lets be informed is stead of some emotional knee jerk reaction .

 

This about our FOOD PEOPLE , which we ALL NEED . Surely we what to know the truth about GMOs for our own health .

Edited March 24, 2017 by current

[Maine farmer]

 

This about our FOOD PEOPLE , which we ALL NEED . Surely we what to know the truth about GMOs for our own health .

Yes, just like in my example of Oreo cookies advertising GMO free!  

 

Unfortunately everything seems to be just a marketing ploy these days.

[current]

Yes, just like in my example of Oreo cookies advertising GMO free!  

 

Unfortunately everything seems to be just a marketing ploy these days.

Sure

 

Thats the thing , are these cookies really GMO free ? , what part of the cookie is acually GMO free ?

 

Is it ALL the ingredients or some ? And what percentage of the ingredients are GMO free ?

 

We don't know .

[Maine farmer]

Sure

 

Thats the thing , are these cookies really GMO free ? , what part of the cookie is acually GMO free ?

 

Is it ALL the ingredients or some ? And what percentage of the ingredients are GMO free ?

 

We don't know .

You missed my point .  The cookies are junk food, there is nothing good for you in them weather they are gmo free or not!  We keep eating things that are obviously bad for us, and we are supposed to worry about weather they might be genetically modified?

[billvon]

Sure

 

Thats the thing , are these cookies really GMO free ? , what part of the cookie is acually GMO free ?

Is it ALL the ingredients or some ? And what percentage of the ingredients are GMO free ?

We don't know .

The above post is a great example of what's wrong with food here in the US.

 

The problem isn't that they are GMO or not.  The problem with them is they are cookies.

 

There are people out there who will eat those cookies by the pound, smug in their belief that they will be healthier because they avoided eating those GMO carrots over there.

[current]

You missed my point . The cookies are junk food, there is nothing good for you in them weather they are gmo free or not! We keep eating things that are obviously bad for us, and we are supposed to worry about weather they might be genetically modified?

I did miss your point .

 

Whether you eat junk food or not is your choice .

 

GMOs effect childern , yours or otherwise . Your childerns , childern etc.

 

GMOs is not about choice , it is a forced program on how food is produced .

 

Without through and unbiased reaserch .

Edited March 24, 2017 by current

[current]

https://phys.org/news/2016-12-gmo-financial-conflicts.html

 

This is more than troubling .

 

Science has become corrupted .

Edited March 24, 2017 by current

[Maine farmer]

https://phys.org/news/2016-12-gmo-financial-conflicts.html

 

This is more than troubling .

 

Science has become corrupted .

In the article you referenced, the scientists in question did not try to hide that hey had some financial connections to biotech or seed companies.  In fact they declared it.  Additionally, only one scientist on a team had to have declared that fact in order for the writers of that paper to consider it a conflict of interest.

 

I have been spending time looking through quite a bit of research literature that was against gmo, and on many sites, they were requesting donations, and selling horror stories with pictures of lab rats with horrific tumors.  It seemed a bit over the top to me. If gmo crops caused tumors like that, given that our cattle have been getting gmo grain for many years now, would I have not seen cows with those tumors by now?  By the way, I have not, and our herd's health has remained as good as it ever has been.

 

It also seemed to me that many of the researchers against gmo crops were already against them before doing any research.  Is it not possible that they set out to prove their case  and  were never impartial researchers to begin with?

[current]

In the article you referenced, the scientists in question did not try to hide that hey had some financial connections to biotech or seed companies.  In fact they declared it.  Additionally, only one scientist on a team had to have declared that fact in order for the writers of that paper to consider it a conflict of interest.

 

I have been spending time looking through quite a bit of research literature that was against gmo, and on many sites, they were requesting donations, and selling horror stories with pictures of lab rats with horrific tumors.  It seemed a bit over the top to me. If gmo crops caused tumors like that, given that our cattle have been getting gmo grain for many years now, would I have not seen cows with those tumors by now?  By the way, I have not, and our herd's health has remained as good as it ever has been.

 

It also seemed to me that many of the researchers against gmo crops were already against them before doing any research.  Is it not possible that they set out to prove their case  and  were never impartial researchers to begin with?

Where did you find proof that they declaired their position to biotech and seed companies openly ?

[Maine farmer]

Where did you find proof that they declaired their position to biotech and seed companies openly ?

Direct quote here from the article for which you provided the link, "Conflicts of interest were defined as studies in which at least one author declared an affiliation to one of the biotech or seed companies, or received funding or payment from them."

 

Did you not thoroughly read the article?  You should have noticed that they made no effort to look for bias in the studies that had findings against gmo crops.

 

 

Fear and outrage are big sellers these days.  

[current]

Direct quote here from the article for which you provided the link, "Conflicts of interest were defined as studies in which at least one author declared an affiliation to one of the biotech or seed companies, or received funding or payment from them."

 

Did you not thoroughly read the article?  You should have noticed that they made no effort to look for bias in the studies that had findings against gmo crops.

 

 

Fear and outrage are big sellers these days.

 

So no link , no proof of your assertions

[Maine farmer]

It was a quote from your link!

Edited March 25, 2017 by Farming guy

[JMJones0424]

Whether you eat junk food or not is your choice .

 

GMOs effect childern , yours or otherwise . Your childerns , childern etc.

 

GMOs is not about choice , it is a forced program on how food is produced .

 

Without through and unbiased reaserch .

Your claim here is false.  I would describe it as a lie.  At best, your claims are a product of a stupendous ignorance of what GMOs are and what it means to modify an organism genetically rather than through previously available means such as radiation treatment, selective breeding, and chemical alteration.  In this short post, you make many claims that are demonstrably false.  The fact that you are able to continue to spew unsupported nonsense and FUD without being properly admonished by the moderators of this website is troubling to me.

[billvon]

I did miss your point .

Whether you eat junk food or not is your choice .

GMOs effect childern , yours or otherwise . Your childerns , childern etc.

GMOs is not about choice , it is a forced program on how food is produced .Without through and unbiased reaserch .

That is true of every food you eat.  Not a single food product you consume is natural; they are all the result of centuries of untested and biased research and development.  They affect you and your children - and there is nothing you can do about it.

[current]

That is true of every food you eat.  Not a single food product you consume is natural; they are all the result of centuries of untested and biased research and development.  They affect you and your children - and there is nothing you can do about it.

The difference is in the genetics of resistence to roundup etc . A chemical , Of which naturally never was , a centry ago .

[billvon]

The difference is in the genetics of resistence to roundup etc . A chemical , Of which naturally never was , a centry ago .

It is a natural enzyme that is produced by other organisms - organisms that are all over the plants you eat.  The organisms use this enzyme to synthesize the amino acids they need.  The one they use specifically is from a microbe called Agrobacterium Tumefaciens.

 

The people most likely to be afraid of GMO's are the people who know the least about them.

[sanctus]

The difference is in the genetics of resistence to roundup etc . A chemical , Of which naturally never was , a centry ago .

Do you read anything we write? We explained already extensively (see page 6) what the resistance to round-up is and that it IS NOT a chemical. So do not state the same thing over and over without trying to support your claim.

 

ADMIN-notice: count this as a warning!