Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2015 15:46:51 GMT -5
I have been researching into GMOs and every intelligent discussion on the subject leads me to believe that GMOs are not as bad as everyone is making them out to be. When real scientific studies are done they are ignored because of possible ties to Monsanto. I consider myself a very logical person and do not want to start an argument I am simply looking for scientific evidence that is unbiased and from a reputable scientist.
I'm not saying I'm going to start using chemicals and grow GMOs but I don't think they are as bad as everyone is making them out to be.
Please listen to this with an open mind. I would love to hear your opinions.
|
|
|
Post by brownrexx on Aug 4, 2015 17:27:32 GMT -5
One reason people hate GMO's is not because their DNA is modified but because it allows the plants to be doused with Roundup to kill the weeds growing with the crop.
Therefore hundreds of thousands of gallons of Roundup are being dumped onto the Earth and killing everything in it's path. How much of this toxic chemical is getting into the waterways as runoff and killing aquatic plants which then eliminates a food source for aquatic organisms like fish.
Not only that, the person or animal who eats that crop is ingesting Roundup residue(carcinogenic?) along with their corn or soy product.
How many of our food products contain corn syrup? Is it from Roundup Ready Corn? Probably since almost all commercial corn is GMO.
I don't have time to listen to that whole talk that you attached but I did listen to the first few minutes. One point is that we can produce more food if we use GMO's to provide for our ever expanding population. I think that maybe we should address the issue of overpopulation instead of just trying to grow more and more food no matter who or what it harms.
The Earth does not have enough resources to support an ever expanding population no matter what we do. There will come a point where resources will start running out.
There is lots to think about. It's not a black and white issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2015 19:00:14 GMT -5
Yeah at one point they do discuss "pig weed" and how it is becoming resistant to roundup. I can see being against GMOs because of that issue. Maybe we are going about taking down GMO companies the wrong way. I don't like the patent on nature part of it all. even with the Carolina reaper that's not GMO (although technically is).. It's a plant, yes someone took the time to modify the Genetics with selective breeding and spent the time and money to make it the world hottest but it's still a plant. If you acquire the seeds and grow it you should be able to do what you choose with it.
On the other hand I think GMO could help a lot of starving people in other countries. Like third world countries. In the USA we have the resources to still do everything naturally. If we all had backyard/container gardens we wouldn't be so dependent on GMOs
|
|
|
Post by desertwoman on Aug 4, 2015 19:29:48 GMT -5
I'm not going to listen to a guy who has flip flopped on the GMO issue. It's such a complex issue and I have to go by how I feel about it. And what is right for me is to avoid as much as I possibly can, GMO's and food potentially grown with Round Up.
I concur with what BR has stated. Also, we don't know the long term affects of GMO foods on our bodies. We can't know until they have been ingested for decades/generations. It is one thing to have natural occurring changes in food over long periods of time. It is a whole other thing to artificially manipulate genes.
One other point is that GMO's and Round Up usage becomes a political issue. When a farmer avoids GMO's it is a step away from corporate farming. Corporate farming, as with all corporations, is obligated to their shareholders. There is a loss of personal values, integrity and ethics. This is not what I want feeding my body.
I have heard the argument of being able to grow more food on less land and how noble that is. IMO this is propaganda at its finest.
|
|
|
Post by restless on Aug 4, 2015 20:15:52 GMT -5
I am against GMOS for the purpose of pesticide sales. I will never be convinced that Monsanto or Syngenta or Bayer has any other noble purpose, like feeding the populace of third world countries or the populace of this country with any type of integrity. It is all to sell Roundup and other products. And it is not just pig weed becoming resistant. All weeds are becoming resistant to pesticides. Evolution is real. They can make harsher Roundup all they want. The world will make tougher weeds.
I am also against seed patenting and prohibiting people from saving seed. I think that crop monoculture is stupid and dangerous. History has taught us this with periods of crop failures and famine. We do not listen. We should not be putting all of our eggs in one basket. We should be planting a wide variety of crops.
I am also firmly convinced that mother nature has provided. There are crops that will grow very well in Asia, for instance, that are easy to grow and will provide vitamin A. People, however, are the problem. Farmers do not want to grow food that people won't buy at market. And people, unfortunately, are picky. So rather than a farmer planting rice and carrots, they may feel pressure to plant rice genetically modified to contain vitamin A because people won't buy carrots. I am not saying the farmer is wrong to want to make money. She has got to earn a living. Attitudes about food need to change.
We also have a greed problem. The US subsidizes farmers here to grow commodities used to make junk food and corn alcohol. If Monsanto were really, honestly, noble in their endeavors to feed the world, they wouldn't be working on more Roundup ready corn and soybeans (junk food) for those poor malnourished people. They would be focusing on healthy food like chard, broccoli, kale, carrots, sweet potatoes, turtle beans, lentils, pumpkins, farro, quinoa, chia seeds, etc., and how to grow them in more places and give them longer shelf lives so they can spend a little time in transport to get between farm and city. But it is really all about selling Roundup.
Long story short. I have zero scientific problems with the idea of GMOs. I have a whole lot of political, ethical, moral, and environmental problems with GMOs and the disgusting pesticide use they enable. And I have issues with industrial agriculture in general for the same moral, political, and environmental reasons.
|
|
|
Post by restless on Aug 4, 2015 20:30:35 GMT -5
Oh, and I also agree with brownrexx on the birth rate thing. We need to dial that way back.
|
|
|
Post by desertwoman on Aug 4, 2015 20:37:11 GMT -5
Well said, restless. You bring up what I was touching upon. Though technically there may be truth that more food can be grown on less land, that isn't the real issue. We can grow all that is needed without the GMO/Round Up complex. There are the resources to feed all people. It is the focus that needs to change on what is important.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2015 20:52:01 GMT -5
I do agree with you all and am NOT supporting GMOs. I hope that is clear. I just honestly cannot find actual unbiased science showing GMOs are harmful to us. Maybe in 50 years we will start seeing the negative results from consuming GMOs but that will be too late. For now I still believe that GMOs could be used for good. Not roudup ready GMOs but more nutritious faster growing plants, why not? If the would be done properly I can see the benefit in that. We are human and have the ability to improve things. We also have the ability to do a lot of harm.. I'm just saying GMOs themselves are not bad but how Monsanto and companies like them are creating/using the GMOs. I do have to stick up for my man Bill Nye though lol. He had a negative opinion on GMOs then learned more facts and decided that he was mistaken. He didn't flip flop. He collected more data and reevaluated his hypothesis.
|
|
|
Post by restless on Aug 4, 2015 21:21:57 GMT -5
The problem, PA Organic, is that research and development costs a lot of money. College degrees that enable research and development cost a lot of money. Equipment for laboratory research and development costs a lot of money. It may be possible to use GMO technology for noble purposes. The reality is that no one is going to do so because of money.
If there is true concern about feeding the world nourishing food, we would be better off educating the populace about nutrition, crops that will do well in certain climates, extending growing seasons, seed saving techniques, breeding improvements, land race crops, etc. This is also unrealistic because these technologies are free, unpatented, and no one is making any money from them so no one is going to do this on a large scale.
I did not watch your attached video. I am not familiar with Bill Nye's change in opinions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 5:09:15 GMT -5
When ever the possibility of informed consent is obfuscated, its safe to wager the corporation that doesn't want you know your food has been adulterated, does not have your safety in mind.
|
|
|
Post by brownrexx on Aug 5, 2015 7:40:16 GMT -5
I am not an authority on GMO's but what others are there? I think that there may be one that has a systemic poison to kill corn ear worms but that does not sound like anything I would want to eat either.
Don't forget that if you change a plant, to make it faster growing for example, then you may change it's appeal to other life forms. For example insects may be excluded from eating it and then their population declines, then the birds that eat those insects starve and on and on.
This is not a GMO but it's the same idea. In the early 1900's and again in the 1940's some lakes in CA, Brook trout from the East were introduced for people to catch and eat. Now the tadpoles in those areas are all being eaten by the trout and the frog population is endangered. This effects frog predators like the mountain garter snake and other insect eaters like the Pacific tree frog and rosy Finches. These animals are being deprived of their food source by the imported trout.
Like I said this is not a GMO caused problem but it shows how human intervention into ecosystems can have a huge effect. I don't want to wait and see if GMO's cause terrible problems before I decide to be against them. As DW said, I just have a deep feeling that avoiding GMO's is the right thing to do.
Humans are not the only life forms on this planet. Do we go about our business of producing more food for more and more people and remain oblivious to the effect on other forms of life just so that the human population can prosper?
It's a major tenet of Organic Gardening that even the insects have their place in nature and are necessary. We can't just kill them all because it would make more food for us.
|
|
|
Post by lilolpeapicker on Aug 5, 2015 8:21:20 GMT -5
It will take further investigation to say what GMOs affect. But I believe it is beginning to show its ugly truth. Two things I have a hard time letting go of is: 1) if it is so safe why are the companies involved fighting so hard against labeling? Why are the companies telling us we do not have a right to know what goes into our bodies. And 2) Monsanto is the company at the center of controversy brought us agent orange and aspartame, 2 chemicals they said were also safe. We have found out that they are not. And now GMOs. What are the chemical companies hiding? When we take medicine it is to benefit some aspect of our being that is not functioning properly. But we also know that these medicines (chemicals) have side effects that can be harmful in other ways. GMOs are no different. Why aren't they telling us the negative side of them like they have to for medicine? And it is worth the price we have to pay in human suffering for the sake of their profit? What is happening health wise is and ever increasing incidence of developmental delays, autism and ADHD. It used to be 1-2 % of our population affected this way and it is now up to 10%. That's millions of people! We have to figure out why. And it has been shown that GMOs are showing up in breast milk. Take a look at the chemicals in our bodies... duckduckgo.com/?q=chemiclas+in+our+bodiesShould this be?? But we will be at fault if we do not watch and respond when we can and at the appropriate time.
|
|
|
Post by octave on Aug 5, 2015 8:55:26 GMT -5
I hate the idea that some day all of our foods will have cross pollinated with some GMOs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 14:03:54 GMT -5
In my search for a scientific answer I found this feedtheworld.info/glyphosate-testing-test-yourself/?ngo=Kids+Right+to+Know It is a glyphosate test. For $119(each) you can get your urine, tap water, or breast milk tested for Glyphosate. It's a little expensive but I think when I get the extra money I'm going to try it. Who thinks they could pass this test with no Glyphosate in them or their water?
|
|
|
Post by desertwoman on Aug 5, 2015 14:11:00 GMT -5
Who thinks they could pass this test with no Glyphosate in them or their water? Not I which is all the more reason.....
|
|