Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Eat more expensive "organic" foods. If you are dumb enough to not understand how foods are digested and absorbed into our bodies, then you deserve to pay outlandish prices for food.
I guess you don't realize that most foods we consume have been genetically modified by selective processes such as cross pollination and selective breeding. Such practices result in the same product as GMOs, but through a different process. The end result is the same.
Do you eat rice? Corn? Tomatoes? Apples? All have been genetically modified and bear little resemblence to the "natural" organisms.
You're joking right? Do you actually not know the difference between agriculture and the GMO process? Wow. And you called him out for being dumb.
GMOs are separated from conventional agriculture in that the organism is genetically altered at the cellular level most commonly for the creation of it's own chemical pesticide. This is not a naturally occurring process like cross pollination. Yes, we 'play God' so to speak when we oversee and control the cross pollination, but it's something that can happen in nature without human intervention. It won't necessarily work in our favor, but that's what the agricultural process is for. Guiding it along.
So, no, 'such practices result in the same product' is not true at all. We have no way of cross pollinating a crop into an organism that literally produces it's own chemical weapon. That cannot be done with conventional agriculture.
You also misuse the word 'natural.' You claim that our selectively bred foods are not natural. They are. They may not have occured in nature without human intervention, but it would still be possible that they would. This cannot be said about GMO food. By this logic, basically all domesticated animals are not natural, which I don't think you would claim is the case. Some have been genetically altered, like chickens, to produce more meat, but that's a separate (and clearly morally wrong) issue.
And once more I'll ask, if big GMO companies have nothing to hide, they wouldn't be lobbying against mandatory labeling. But they do.
[quote=AGoodWayOfDoingThat;37727532]It's a combination of all that. The family in America is being destroyed, fertility/testosterone is down, the desire to have a normal family is being skewed by liberals and the affects they're having on society. It's not just one thing, the government has created a perfect storm to lower Americas fertility/birth rate (They are the same and I'm not going to play semantics).[/QUOTE
OP, GMO or liberals are not destroying families
Some people donot want kids like me.
Not everyone is fitted to be a parent.
Women spend more time their careers and education so less time to have babies.
In my experience(s) it seems as though the people who are pro-GMO feel they have the right to tell others what they should and shouldn't want to put inside their bodies. All of the people that I know who are for labeling GMO's feel that people have the right to know, and whether or not they choose to eat GMO's after knowing whether or not a food product has GMO is their own personal decision.
It's just this, "Well I don't see anything wrong with GMO's, so neither should you" mentality that gets me. Would anyone be able to clarify or even correct me if my understanding of this is flawed somehow?
since its your thread.....
1. why don't you tell us what you feel is wrong with GMO
2. please describe what is GMO and not GMO...especially since EVERY PLANT has been modified from its original over the last 1000 years
3. how do you propose to label GMO products...especially since this in no produce that has not been modified
4. finally....why do you think you can force your conspiracy theory on the people
You're joking right? Do you actually not know the difference between agriculture and the GMO process? Wow. And you called him out for being dumb.
GMOs are separated from conventional agriculture in that the organism is genetically altered at the cellular level most commonly for the creation of it's own chemical pesticide. This is not a naturally occurring process like cross pollination. Yes, we 'play God' so to speak when we oversee and control the cross pollination, but it's something that can happen in nature without human intervention. It won't necessarily work in our favor, but that's what the agricultural process is for. Guiding it along.
So, no, 'such practices result in the same product' is not true at all. We have no way of cross pollinating a crop into an organism that literally produces it's own chemical weapon. That cannot be done with conventional agriculture.
You also misuse the word 'natural.' You claim that our selectively bred foods are not natural. They are. They may not have occured in nature without human intervention, but it would still be possible that they would. This cannot be said about GMO food. By this logic, basically all domesticated animals are not natural, which I don't think you would claim is the case. Some have been genetically altered, like chickens, to produce more meat, but that's a separate (and clearly morally wrong) issue.
And once more I'll ask, if big GMO companies have nothing to hide, they wouldn't be lobbying against mandatory labeling. But they do.
What science are you referring to? Plenty of scientists are skeptical of GMOs. Plenty make money from production of GMOs. Not to mention the main party involved in letting us know how safe GMOS are (besides the corporations that make them) is the FDA.
The problem with the above statement is that there has been no credible scientific reports showing GMOs to be harmful. In Europe it's due to fear of there agro business losing in competition to the United States and groups like green peace preaching against GMOs for political reasons and not scientific ones. At most a handful of scientists are worried about the potential effects of GMOs decades down the road but have not shown GMOs to be harmful. So until they can prove GMOs are harmful why should the US bother labeling food that is GMO since any product that was made from corn is made from a GMO in the United States.
I don't want to eat food made in a lab. Our bodies weren't meant to digest and process some of the junk we eat today. Antibiotics in chickens and other meats, fish farms being fed SOY? corn grown from chemical additives and wheat engineered to produce quantity, rather than quality. why do you think there are so many allergies today? peanuts, lactose, celiac disease, crohn's... other auto immune issues and so on. Many of these new allergies and diseases didn't exist until modern times.
I agree. Although I'm not preaching this to others IRL. They can do what they want.
Not only did these allergies not exist but GMOs are on my shortlist for the rise in autism culprits. (Along w plastics and cell towers.)
The problem with the above statement is that there has been no credible scientific reports showing GMOs to be harmful. In Europe it's due to fear of there agro business losing in competition to the United States and groups like green peace preaching against GMOs for political reasons and not scientific ones. At most a handful of scientists are worried about the potential effects of GMOs decades down the road but have not shown GMOs to be harmful. So until they can prove GMOs are harmful why should the US bother labeling food that is GMO since any product that was made from corn is made from a GMO in the United States.
But this is much like you can't really prove that smoking causes cancer in humans because you can't force people to smoke and even if you could, the CAUSATION is still at question. It's only correlational.
I'd love to see a double blind study longitude study with humans' health of all ages being followed for about a decade. See what group gets more diseases and also monitor their offspring. Again, only correlational but I would like to see some studies like this being done. Will Monsanto fund these to "put people at ease?" I doubt it.
In my experience(s) it seems as though the people who are pro-GMO feel they have the right to tell others what they should and shouldn't want to put inside their bodies. All of the people that I know who are for labeling GMO's feel that people have the right to know, and whether or not they choose to eat GMO's after knowing whether or not a food product has GMO is their own personal decision.
It's just this, "Well I don't see anything wrong with GMO's, so neither should you" mentality that gets me. Would anyone be able to clarify or even correct me if my understanding of this is flawed somehow?
Whether people are for or against GMOs the average person has little say in the implementation of GMOs, this falls into the realms of big business making more money, in this case Monsanto is the main player in making GMO products.
Consumers may achieve some measure of GMO labeling by protest etc but a more logical course of action would be to assume all food these days is in some way genetically modified.
Curious that the nations weight gains and resultant diabetes epidemic coincides with the major use of GMOs, Wonder if Monsanto is also into the pharmaceutical field? https://www.google.ca/#safe=active&q=GMOs+and+obesity
Whether people are for or against GMOs the average person has little say in the implementation of GMOs, this falls into the realms of big business making more money, in this case Monsanto is the main player in making GMO products.
Consumers may achieve some measure of GMO labeling by protest etc but a more logical course of action would be to assume all food these days is in some way genetically modified.
^ This is interesting. It might be enough to push me to do the experiment on myself. Maybe 3 months GMOs and 3 months off....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
