Frankenfoods - Ban the GMO's?

[G. Adams]

Quote by: Pooeypants That is completely different. It is well known and characterised that nuts can cause hypersensitivity type 1 in a significant portion of the population. We have no evidence of problems amongst humans from GM food consumption, the fear is illogical.

The deal with the fear through education, not through hiding it in foods and then saying 10 years later "look, we've been feeding you this stuff for years, stop bitching". if I want to choose none GM products it's within my rights, but how can I do that if the products are not labled?

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI (2.) It is playing "God", strawberries weren't made to be as big as a house or yield 800 per plant (just hypothetical, not fact!) and pumping nutrients into them or slpicing genes wasnt to be had either. Its just smart, bored humans wanting to change things.

Well, first we assume the existance of a god. If we assume that god made all the plants, you then assume that it is wrong to change gods creation. Well, we've been doing it for thousands of years. God or mother nature or whatever did not make boxers and poodles and dovermans - humans did that. The corn that god/nature made was as hard as wheat and had a 3" cob. Man made big, sweet soft corn. Call it what you want - but screwing with our food supply is hardly new. We have made bigger changes with traditional breeding so far than we have even talked about doing with genetic engineering.

(3.) Not true. Just because I don't believe in something, and I choose not to eat it, doesnt mean I am going to become a phanatic...it just means I won't support or purchase it.

Lets try not to be stupid. I said at the top that the reason I give don't apply to everybody. If you re not a phenatic then you are not a phanatic. I was just saying that that is one of the reason that some people oppose them.

I don't think reason #3 applies to you. Reasons 1,2 and 5 apply to you.

[FIFI]

Maybe not, but when I have the choice, I choose organic. How do you know for sure if its genetic?
My brother was diagnosed with ADD / ADHD at 10, and until that time, my Mother swears he was normal and fine. Or "safe"? Many contries ban GMF's because they don't believe in those reports, and niether do I. Cigarettes were "safe" too, now look at what we know.

BTW, my whole family switched to "natural" and all around healthier foods, and my brother has stayed off Ridilin ever since (my parents took him off after hearing reports of growth reduction and side effects after prolonged use)

[Prometheus]

Quote by: dotcoma Does the sensitivity, particularly in the EU have more to do with trying to prevent the large US agriculture sector from dominating Europe's? This seems like how the EU banned certain cosmetics that supposedly had small amounts of cancer-causing components within. Conveniently enough this put a huge damper on the largest cosmetic exporter...the US.

Possibly, but it could also be the europeans trust their government food regulators *far* less than americans trust their regulators. It probably has something to do with being lied to about mad cow in europe.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI Maybe not, but when I have the choice, I choose organic. How do you know for sure if its genetic? My brother was diagnosed with ADD / ADHD at 10, and until that time, my Mother swears he was normal and fine. Or "safe"? Many contries ban GMF's because they don't believe in those reports, and niether do I. Cigarettes were "safe" too, now look at what we know. BTW, my whole family switched to "natural" and all around healthier foods, and my brother has stayed off Ridilin ever since (my parents took him off after hearing reports of growth reduction and side effects after prolonged use)

Well you are free to beleive that, but the proteins that are added through genetic engineering are very well understood, and there is *no* evidance, or serious scientists who think that it could cause ADD/ADHD. The food may be a placebo. Also, when they say "organic" that means no GMO, but it also means no pesticides, steroids or growth artificial enhancers, MSG and all that other crap. It is *far* more likely that your brother responded to a pesticide poison or steroid than the GMO portion.

[FIFI]

Quote by: Prometheus I don't think reason #3 applies to you. Reasons 1,2 and 5 apply to you.

I might accept being lumped into #1-2... but 5!! Now thats just harsh! I never claimed that your stupid because you want to argue over the existance of God while I am talking about corn, or that your seemingly endless supply of arrogence is fueled by your meaningless "fact" and statistics.

So don't insult me because I don't agree with your ideas that altering our food is "natural" and dandy. Instead, attempt to discuss your opinions with me, like an adult...:rolleyes: If you can handle that.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: Prometheus G. Adams: Good questions, let me answer them. The newer generation of GMO's are totally infertile. Either they have no pollon/seeds, or they are made such that fertilization would fail. Because it violates the truth in labling law. This seems counterintuitive - let me explain. Let's say that I marketed a new soda, and right on the from of the bottle I wrote, "Potassium Sorbate Free!". That would be illegal, becasue the average buyer does not kow that potassium sorbate is not harmfull at all. Since it has no affect on the product, it is deceptive and illegal. The same would be true if I wanted to make everyone lable their soda if it had potassium sorbate. It would be stupid because the scientists know that it has no affect on health. The law states that if a change causes no difference in a product, then it can't be used as a selling feature or be forced to have that trait labled. Since every scientist knows that GMO's do not harm anyone, there is no reason to lable it. Especially with the lies that everyone beleives about GMO's. It's not a matter of long term verses short term. The extra cost of the seeds each year is more that paid for by the increased yeild and decreas in growing cost. Many farmers buy new normal seeds every year anyway, because they are buying special hybrids. Of course the seeds from Monsanto (biggest and basically only producer of GM seed) are more expensive then the hybrid counterparts. But again, the extra cost is more that worth it. How do I know? The farmers keep buying them for one, secondly, I live in a farming community, and my dad is a farmer. I know from personal experiance that the farmers take home more money at the end of the season. This point is not disputable. No one denys this. The damand for food is growing. Also a great amount of the extra money they make is not on yeilds, but on saving tremendous amounts of money on water and pesticides.

A) Good to hear, in that case I have no object to their actual growth near none GM crops.
B) In the UK all ingrediants are clearly listed already. If a consumer wants to choose between GM and none GM products, they have to be informed somehow, the only way is by labeling the product.
C) Okay, well I won't deny the benefits to a commercial farmer. But how about the subsitance farmers in sub-saharan africa?

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI I might accept being lumped into #1-2... but 5!! Now thats just harsh!

Lets not get angry. You obviously have some leaning to ward the precautionary principal. If you in fact don't beleive the precautioinary principal, the obviously you don't fit in #5 (but you posts have followed that line of reasoning).

I never claimed that your stupid because you want to argue over the existance of God while I am talking about corn, or that your seemingly endless supply of arrogence is fueled by your meaningless "fact" and statistics.

You decided to talk about god when you said we were playing god. Which of my statistical claims do you challenge? I am pretty lazy and don't want to look of the sources, but I will find them if you request.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: G. Adams B) In the UK all ingrediants are clearly listed already. If a consumer wants to choose between GM and none GM products, they have to be informed somehow, the only way is by labeling the product.

In my arrogance I assumed we were talking about the US. I know little about labling if europe.

C) Okay, well I won't deny the benefits to a commercial farmer. But how about the subsitance farmers in sub-saharan africa?

They are prime benificiaries. We have already shipped to africa (and other third world) at no cost, crops which are more nutritious and grow better in their bad soil. Google search "golden rice" and "papya ringspot" to see more.

[FIFI]

Not to worry... I am too lazy to back my claims either. Though I would like to know who has tested and claimed that GMF are safe, if its at the top of your head.
Sorry for the PMS I was being insulted on another forum, and I mistook your tone and there's as the same... forgiven?

By the way, in response to G. Adams (nice to see you again!) I do have a problem with GMF and non GMF foods being grown close together. Pesticides and fertilizers don't just stay in one place: one good wind, watersheds and other factors can contribute to contamination.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI Though I would like to know who has tested and claimed that GMF are safe, if its at the top of your head.

The FDA. Now I know they have taken a bad rap lately, but they really do a good job with GMO's. I have personally dealt with getting a crop approved, so I know how rigorous it is.

GMO's are very easy to test, because you know exectly wht you are adding, down to the sequence data.

[FIFI]

FDA is a very good source, and I can only imagine the safe checks they put in place for crop growers, but wouldn't it be better to have groups who are focused just on GMF's and have had the time to thoroughly test them to approve?
Or how about what G. Adams said they do in Euroupe... list the ingredients!

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI FDA is a very good source, and I can only imagine the safe checks they put in place for crop growers, but wouldn't it be better to have groups who are focused just on GMF's and have had the time to thoroughly test them to approve?

I guess you could, but there is really no good reason to make a totally new beurocracy when the one we have works fine.

Or how about what G. Adams said they do in Euroupe... list the ingredients!

Because there is nothing to list. If it's a cereal, the ingrediant is simply "corn". Your cornflakes don't tell you wheather it is made from hybrid SY6765D or hybrid SY689F (Both traditional hybrids). Likewise they don't tell you that they are made with cultivar MON123ZM (A GMO or "transgenic" corn).

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: G. Adams The deal with the fear through education, not through hiding it in foods and then saying 10 years later "look, we've been feeding you this stuff for years, stop bitching". if I want to choose none GM products it's within my rights, but how can I do that if the products are not labled?

The information is there. We were told by the British Medical Society that there is no conclusive proof of GM food being damaging (the US population played guinea pigs).
I mean, if education can overcome fear, why is the MMR still being rejected by parents? There was one flawed report that was completed biased and everyone takes it as gospel, as a result we are seeing an emergence in the 3 diseases it is meant to immunise against. All this time we've had doctors telling us that there is no link between autism and MMR vaccine but still, people's irrational fear is putting them off getting their child vaccinated.
Does that make sense to you?

[FIFI]

yes, but I think people do have the right to know what kinds of chemical they may be using... but then again, I think cigarettes should too. Maybe I am just a fanatic, but I like to be warned.

I am not saying make a new beurocracy, I just don' t see why having some indepentent studies (i.e. non-growers and non-gov't funded) research could hurt, especially on growth patterns, overall health... and maybe even behaviors of those eating it.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: FIFI yes, but I think people do have the right to know what kinds of chemical they may be using... but then again, I think cigarettes should too. Maybe I am just a fanatic, but I like to be warned.

Yah, but if the lable says that the GM corn has been modified the the Bacillus thurgensius toxin, no one knows what that means. Thats why we have government regulators.

[FIFI]

hmmm... good point. Let me stew on that one for awhile. I will have a rebuttle! ;D

[G. Adams]

Quote by: Pooeypants The information is there. We were told by the British Medical Society that there is no conclusive proof of GM food being damaging (the US population played guinea pigs). I mean, if education can overcome fear, why is the MMR still being rejected by parents? There was one flawed report that was completed biased and everyone takes it as gospel, as a result we are seeing an emergence in the 3 diseases it is meant to immunise against. All this time we've had doctors telling us that there is no link between autism and MMR vaccine but still, people's irrational fear is putting them off getting their child vaccinated. Does that make sense to you?

That has only been a recent phenomenon, give it ten years and people will be using it again. Look at beef and BSE, were all eating it again now it's been shown we have almost the safest beef in the world.

Given time, GM products can be succesfully pushed if there is good education to support it.

However, I will still stick to organic stuff where possible, gm or not.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: G. Adams That has only been a recent phenomenon, give it ten years and people will be using it again. Look at beef and BSE, were all eating it again now it's been shown we have almost the safest beef in the world. Given time, GM products can be succesfully pushed if there is good education to support it. However, I will still stick to organic stuff where possible, gm or not.

Yes, it is recent and why I highlighted it. We're already living in a well educated society but yet we still have mass hysteria over absolutely nothing, end resulting being suffering and death from diseases that could easily have been vaccinated against. When faced with such stupidity, what else can you do?
Organic? Hah, to produce the same amount of vegetables, organic crops required vaster amount of land due to their lower yield. Not that anyone cares about the habitats of wildlife these days.

[G. Adams]

Well while I'm at home most of my fruit and veg is grown by my mam, and thats all organic. The meat is usually organic, or at least free range. I occaisionally hunt rabbit and that is as free range and organic as I can expect.

On the MMR thing, I'm not surprised that there was a scare. I would much rather get measles, mumps and rubella consectively than have autism. These diseases arn't wide-spread killers, despite what the revisionists keep trying to make out. Autism is awful, however. Now we know the report was dodgy, and the rate of MMR usage will go up again. Better to have been safe than sorry untill we knew better.