Genetically modified foods: a good thing

[ang_hulk]

The modifications were talking about here are on the genetic level. Like adding/subtracting genes. If you can taste a diff in genes; then you need to be in Area 51.

Im cool withit as long as it doesnt effect the taste.I dont like when genetic mods make somthings texture or consistency different either.

 

[Kritish]

We'd need three planets if everyone lived the way Americans do. So either we stop having babies or we eat genetically modified foods that yield more.

 

[Babs Gordon]

I live on an organic farm. Mmmm.

GMOs... I'd rather avoid biological things made by humans trying to play god. 8')

 

[Destructus86]

http://current.com/green/93871522_s...aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582


http://crisisboom.com/2011/02/26/wikileaks-gmo-conspiracy/

Really? It's good?

 

[Doctor Evo]

http://current.com/green/93871522_s...aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582


http://crisisboom.com/2011/02/26/wikileaks-gmo-conspiracy/

Really? It's good?

Do not make the mistake of conflating the technology with its prior implementation. I see that many posters in this thread do this on a regular basis, and it only serves to confuse the issue and to vilify a technology that truly does not deserve it.

That said, I think that the largest issue surrounding the use of GMOs is not one of human health, but of impacts on ecosystems.

 

[Destructus86]

Do not make the mistake of conflating the technology with its prior implementation. I see that many posters in this thread do this on a regular basis, and it only serves to confuse the issue and to vilify a technology that truly does not deserve it.

That said, I think that the largest issue surrounding the use of GMOs is not one of human health, but of impacts on ecosystems.

It's basically the same method used for people who sell drugs on the street.
MAKE them dependant on you, so they can't get the drug anywhere else.

Which is exactly what our government has been doing since being in bed with drug companies. Making deals with other governments or threatening trade war with them if they don't comply with GMO.
Forcing farmers to buy ONLY GMO seeds which self destruct after one year making it impossible to reuse, instead...they have to take what little money they have and buy NEW seeds every year. Those that can't afford it don't get a crop...and because of this entire farms can fail. Often times one farm will help feed surrounding villages, without it things get even harder for them.

I know people who have witnessed all of this FIRST HAND in Africa alone. They've seen the deaths caused by failing crops, farmers who couldn't afford new seed.

All because our government and it's chemical company friends see an opportunity to make money through control.

 

[Destructus86]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsi4F8M8Hm8&feature=share

A new form of slavery

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

I'm all for drought resistant corn, rice, and wheat. ONLY and only if it is not the sole property of some large agro-company hell-bent on controlling profits and making poorer countries dependent on their product.

We've already genetically modified our sheep, cows, potatoes, pigs, tomatoes, chili peppers, corn (they used to only be a few inches long), grapes, peaches, nuts, beans, citruses, horses, cats, dogs, chickens, rice, plantains, for thousands of years. No reason to stop now.

Granted, I'm not the most educated on the subject, but having GM foods in the food chain, does that threaten other natural forms? Will it mean we will have only one kind of a certain food in the market? As long as there is variety, I don't see how this can be a bad thing. Somebody educate me here.

 

[redhawk23]

I could really care less. I live in a Country where food is everywhere. I do think that Genetically Made Food would be a no lose situation for third world countries.

Except when the modified genes end up contaminating the rest of the food stock by natural processes and suddenly Monsanto owns the crops of farmers who never even did business with them. This happens.

 

[redhawk23]

I'm all for drought resistant corn, rice, and wheat. ONLY and only if it is not the sole property of some large agro-company hell-bent on controlling profits and making poorer countries dependent on their product.

We've already genetically modified our sheep, cows, potatoes, pigs, tomatoes, chili peppers, corn (they used to only be a few inches long), grapes, peaches, nuts, beans, citruses, horses, cats, dogs, chickens, rice, plantains, for thousands of years. No reason to stop now.

Granted, I'm not the most educated on the subject, but having GM foods in the food chain, does that threaten other natural forms? Will it mean we will have only one kind of a certain food in the market? As long as there is variety, I don't see how this can be a bad thing. Somebody educate me here.

Not really the same at all. Breeding will never lead to tomatoes with scorpion genes. Breeding will never produce crops with a "terminator" gene.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Do not make the mistake of conflating the technology with its prior implementation. I see that many posters in this thread do this on a regular basis, and it only serves to confuse the issue and to vilify a technology that truly does not deserve it.

That said, I think that the largest issue surrounding the use of GMOs is not one of human health, but of impacts on ecosystems.

It's basically the same method used for people who sell drugs on the street.
MAKE them dependant on you, so they can't get the drug anywhere else.

Which is exactly what our government has been doing since being in bed with drug companies. Making deals with other governments or threatening trade war with them if they don't comply with GMO.
Forcing farmers to buy ONLY GMO seeds which self destruct after one year making it impossible to reuse, instead...they have to take what little money they have and buy NEW seeds every year. Those that can't afford it don't get a crop...and because of this entire farms can fail. Often times one farm will help feed surrounding villages, without it things get even harder for them.

I know people who have witnessed all of this FIRST HAND in Africa alone. They've seen the deaths caused by failing crops, farmers who couldn't afford new seed.

All because our government and it's chemical company friends see an opportunity to make money through control.

It's awesome that you completely ignored everything I said.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Not really the same at all. Breeding will never lead to tomatoes with scorpion genes. Breeding will never produce crops with a "terminator" gene.

Though one might easily be able to argue that such a targeted approach is actually safer in some respects than selective breeding.

It's easy to say, "Oooh, ahhh, scorpion genes! Scaaaary!" without any actual context with respect to the function of those genes. I'd be willing to bet that 90% of you can't even define what a gene actually is. I'm not trying to be smug: I'm just trying to illustrate a point about context.

 

[TheBat812]

The problem is more that we don't know the long term affects of actually genetically altering our food. Using selective breeding was a much different game and was still all 'natural'. Here we're playing with fire and with a century of using artificial foods and products we've already seen tangible increases in cancer rates and other disastrous consequences including the companies who sell these genetically modified plants to have a monopoly on the industry, trapping farmers into buying their seeds only. It's one hell of an industry that needs to slow down. I'm not saying it should be illegal, people can buy whatever products they like, but it would be nice to have more options so as not to increase chances of cancer and other detrimental side effects of genetically engineered foods.

 

[Figs]

The problem is more that we don't know the long term affects of actually genetically altering our food. Using selective breeding was a much different game and was still all 'natural'. Here we're playing with fire and with a century of using artificial foods and products we've already seen tangible increases in cancer rates and other disastrous consequences including the companies who sell these genetically modified plants to have a monopoly on the industry, trapping farmers into buying their seeds only. It's one hell of an industry that needs to slow down. I'm not saying it should be illegal, people can buy whatever products they like, but it would be nice to have more options so as not to increase chances of cancer and other detrimental side effects of genetically engineered foods.

Exactly. Some people are not thinking of possible long term affects...or they just don't care. Personally it's a bunch of ******** to force people to eat modified food when it's healthier to eat something natural.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Exactly. Some people are not thinking of possible long term affects...or they just don't care.

There is something to be said for extended testing periods of these products, sure.

Personally it's a bunch of ******** to force people to eat modified food when it's healthier to eat something natural.

Are you implying that any and all GMOs are less healthy? What are you basing this on, exactly?

 

[Figs]

There is something to be said for extended testing periods of these products, sure.

Are you implying that any and all GMOs are less healthy? What are you basing this on, exactly?

They want us to eat something that has been modified. How do they know its actually healthy for us like natural food? we will be consuming unnatural products/items, I cant see that as a good thing. My qurstion is why are so many people flocking to this like sheep?

Also, there have been studies showing that these hormones they're pumping in the food most likely are the cause of girls getting their periods at a much younger age. That's perfectly fine if you want to blindly eat this stuff but I would rather stick to organic food.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Using selective breeding was a much different game and was still all 'natural'.

Actually, that's not necessarily true. You're still creating phenotypes that wouldn't (and sometimes couldn't) exist in nature without human interference. How is that "natural?"

 

[Doctor Evo]

They want us to eat something that has been modified. How do they know its actually healthy for us like natural food? we will be consuming unnatural products/items, I cant see that as a good thing. My qurstion is why are so many people flocking to this like sheep?

Refer to my previous post about context. That should answer this question at least partially.

Please also refer to my previous post regarding implementation. The fact that people haven't been as careful as they should have been in the past is not sufficient reason to disregard and vilify the technology as a whole.

Also, there have been studies showing that these hormones they're pumping in the food most likely are the cause of girls getting their periods at a much younger age. That's perfectly fine if you want to blindly eat this stuff but I would rather stick to organic food.

Those aren't GMO's. Do you understand the difference?

 

[TheBat812]

This is coming from a non scientist, but imo there is a difference between putting things that don't usually meet in nature, yet it still works, and changing the genetics directly to suit whatever you want. I see what you mean, the two are pretty similar. Honestly the bigger problem is the processed and artificial foods we eat that are legitimately not meant for humans to handle.

 

[enterthemadness]

It's a good thing, but label it a GMO when for sale in every state.

 

[Doctor Evo]

It's a good thing, but label it a GMO when for sale in every state.

I do believe that's reasonable.

 

[Doctor Evo]

This is coming from a non scientist, but imo there is a difference between putting things that don't usually meet in nature, yet it still works, and changing the genetics directly to suit whatever you want. I see what you mean, the two are pretty similar.

"Still works" in what context?

Honestly the bigger problem is the processed and artificial foods we eat that are legitimately not meant for humans to handle.

Agreed. With respect to the issue of human health, there are bigger things to worry about than GMOs. Again, my biggest issues with GMOs are the potential effects on ecosystems and wild populations.

 

[Figs]

Refer to my previous post about context. That should answer this question at least partially.

Please also refer to my previous post regarding implementation. The fact that people haven't been as careful as they should have been in the past is not sufficient reason to disregard and vilify the technology as a whole.

Those aren't GMO's. Do you understand the difference?

You're saying the genetically modified food isn't the same as a GMO basically?

My main question to you Evo. What is wrong with sticking with natural/organic foods? Why do we need to eat something that has been altered, or why should we actually?

 

[TheBat812]

"Still works" in what context?

meaning they can cross breed without any help from genetic modification from within the cells themselves. It's still just allowing nature to make the connection.

 

[Doctor Evo]

You're saying the genetically modified food isn't the same as a GMO basically?

You said this:

Also, there have been studies showing that these hormones they're pumping in the food most likely are the cause of girls getting their periods at a much younger age.

...which has *nothing* to do with genetic modification.

If I take a syringe and inject you with testosterone, are you then a GMO?

My main question to you Evo. What is wrong with sticking with natural/organic foods? Why do we need to eat something that has been altered, or why should we actually?

1) Define "natural."

2) Genetic modification is a tool which can allow us to increase food production to meet increasing demands. Advances in agricultural technology have thus far facilitated levels of production that are sufficient to meet these demands, but demand continues to rise. There may come a point when it is no longer feasible to continue clear-cutting forest to increase area for farmland, so the focus must then shift to increased efficiency. One way to do this is to ensure increased yields in the face of limited resources. Genetic modification provides a simple and cost-effective means of achieving this goal, particularly by decreasing losses from pest damage (without the use of pesticides) and increasing actual harvested biomass (without an increase in fertilizers which can pollute the environment and have negative effects which are disproportionate to the gains from their use).

I don't think you should have to eat GMOs, but I really think you're failing to acknowledge the vast potential that this technology has with respect to feeding an exploding population. The potential benefit to mankind is enormous. And before you yet again bring up the issue of human health, I would again direct you to my previous comment about context concerning genetic modification.

Of course, I can't ignore the socioeconomic factors contributing to world hunger either, but that's a different debate.