Statements like this does absolutely nothing to persuade me that gmo is bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by bryjcom
Printable View
Statements like this does absolutely nothing to persuade me that gmo is bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by bryjcom
Persuade yourself.... The info is out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSS
Just thought I'd mention something else about what monsanto has created.
Just remember that our bodies are biological computers that have code fed to it. That "code" is DNA of the stuff we eat. When you start artificially corrupting the "code" then bad stuff can happen. Don't forget that the bad "code" can corrupt other "code" as well.
They have sued farmers who grew their specific genetic strands of seeds, even though those seeds were contaminants from a neighbor's field.
No shit. So Monsanto produced agent orange. Companies all over the world produce things, often at the request of governments, that ultimately harm people.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSS
If Monsanto produced agent orange and then unilaterally sprayed cornfields planted with competitors corn and intentionally harmed people in the process, I'd be outraged. Hell...I can remember playing in the insecticide fog sprayed by trucks to kill mosquitoes as a kid. Probably contained all sorts of harmful shit. We really didn't know, nor did we really care, back then.
Yep. I'm actually more worried about the harm caused by extensive exposure to our FOB burn pit in Afghanistan than I am from GMO/Monsanto products... like you say, we didn't know what is in that smoke, and it was right outside the FOB perimeter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Crops that are engineered to stop one insect or another is not a big deal as long as there are not any unintended consequences.
Soybeans that are resistant to nematodes, corn resistant to corn borer and other pests is all fine and good as long as that is as far as it goes. These subtle changes do make some minor hits to the ecosystem, food chain etc, but does not shatter anything (that we are aware of). BUT...if this jumps species or takes a mutation and starts impacting bees on a large scale we could literally starve.
As for organic crops, they are not any better based on the fertilizer choice and the increased bacterial exposure.
The biggest risk to everyone is deregulating the food we eat. If things are not researched and tested properly before being released as a foodstuff we are inviting trouble.
The logic behind this eludes me...? How did we survive as humans, for this long, without the 'regulation' that you say we so desperately need? If people eat 'bad food' from a farm, won't that farm eventually either change its ways or go out of business? Is it really our gubment's job to "protect us from the food we eat"? If so, where's the outcry against excitotoxins, color dyes, white sugar, HFCS, etc. etc.?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraven251
I don't agree with GMO foods, at least as Monsanto and others are using it, and I don't like the Monsanto company's actions & policies. How has the 'regulation' benefited us, when, for example, the potus signs what is known as the 'Monsanto Protection Act'? Should any one conglomerate have that much power? For the record, I don't trust any of the three letter agencies including the ones with 'food' in their name, so ymmv.
Most people that ate truly bad food as we evolved, died. Now imagine something unforseen gets into the Soybean Oil or Corn Syrup derivatives, which is a worst case scenario, but is valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by sellersm
And that bill is deregulation in the guise of regulation... What I am referring to is to make sure that food and food additives are essentially safe for consumption. I don't always like some of the things that the FDA weighs in on, or in their ultimate decisions, but they do serve a purpose. Otherwise it stops being an FDA issue and starts falling under the umbrella of the CDC.
and the color dyes are regulated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_coloring
It is not the issue of "Is something unhealthy for us?" it is the question of "Is exposure to this modification going to result in converting something considered safe into something lethal on accident?"
I'd say the regulation became a necessity once food started to become mass produced, processed, and made with unnatural/synthetic ingredients, like the over preservation of our food so it lasted longer. Not all of those methods are exactly "safe" so they need someone to ensure they aren't done. Is there too much regulation now? Probably. But at one point in history, at least a basic/rudimentary regulatory process, was needed. Read the Jungle by Upton Sinclair and you'll see that we needed it in the past, but probably not nearly as much regulation is required now. You really have to pay attention when shopping to make sure you don't get something that is safe to eat, but not exactly good for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by sellersm
God only knows what I may have done to myself in my youth. My hands were always in parts cleaning solvents, paint thinners, and who-knows-what when I was a machinist. Not to mention all the exposure to paint fumes from painting motorcycles with acrylic lacquer and Imron paints. It's a wonder I have any brain cells left. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1.../mad_smile.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns