|
| Thread: GMOs / Dark Act / Monsanto makes huge mistake again |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted August 21, 2016 09:26 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 21:35, 21 Aug 2016.
|
Dude, genetic engineering is genetic manipulation. Artificial selection is roughly said the manipulation of natural selection (breeding partners, environment). Same goal, different ways. We agree. Now I believe GMOs are worse than organic foods or artificially bred organisms for that matter. We might not agree, unsure here. But why are you trying to make it look like you're refuting me is the real question. Because you're not, lol.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 21, 2016 09:56 PM |
|
|
In both cases, you are breeding new types of creatures that would not have existed if their origins had been left in nature (-al selection). I don't see why genetic engineering would be worse than the other, if you dont have a problem with the concept of manipulating DNA itself. It's not like they will accidentally create radioactive apples or something. They just alter the DNA sequance, the traditional way is also doing that through thrown in mutations, so what? Your original post indicated you had a categoical objection against altering with genes and I simply objected on the premise that manipulating genes is nothing new for humans and if one has a problem with it (the process of altering itself), then one should have a problem with agricultural artificial selection also. And no one does.
If you read your original post again and see how you formulate WHY you are against GMO's, you will understand what I pointed at.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 21, 2016 11:51 PM |
|
|
Yes, I do have a problem with the use of genetics here. DNA is still at large an unknown quantity, we have no idea what "junk" DNA is for example. Blasting in random sequences that appear beneficial at first might have unforeseen effects long term. Plus, there's tons of organic organizations that say eating bio is way healthier and nutritious, claims which are dismissed by the scientific consensus. Figures, lol.
Personally, I find organic food to be incomparably better than gmos, irradiated, water ballooned food. It looks better, it tastes better, it fills me more. But that's just me, and arguably everyone else around.
And I also don't trust corporations on principle.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 12:30 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 07:56, 22 Aug 2016.
|
Stevie said:
DNA is still at large an unknown quantity, we have no idea what "junk" DNA is for example.
Not really, we know enough to engineer it or provide quite accurate genetic maps.
Junk DNA is mostly left-overs from your ancestors that stopped being beneficial somewhere along the line. It's like a cache from millions of generations.
Stevie said:
Personally, I find organic food to be incomparably better than gmos, irradiated, water ballooned food. It looks better, it tastes better, it fills me more. But that's just me, and arguably everyone else around.
Well, my grandma buys organic food and when I visit I eat a lot. They do taste good. However, that kind of "labeled" organic food is a luxury item now, grown in quality land with best fertilizers and so on. Meanwhile, most of the GMO's people have in mind when they complain are the cheapest products among their peers, they are in the league of frozen pizza and similar stuff. There are many products in between and if you skip away the extremely pricey quality stuff versus cheapest fabrication, most of the time the situation is similar to people claiming they could tell how special X wine is only because the waiter told them that wine is great or they read it in some magazine. If blindfolded, most couldn't pick it up among other wines.
Edit: I figured somebody must have tried such a test and they did indeed: Organic or Non-Organic Taste Test
The results are inconsistent, sometimes they can tell, sometimes they can't. Of course, with their method, it's kind of like heads or tails, it's very probable when they guess right, they just got lucky. A better experiment would be to put in front of them 10 plates, 9 non-organic and 1 organic and challenge them to pick the organic one.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Lord_Woock
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Daddy Cool with a $90 smile
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 01:48 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Plus, there's tons of organic organizations that say eating bio is way healthier and nutritious, claims which are dismissed by the scientific consensus. Figures, lol.
Are we talking about study results here or just organizations promoting something as healthy?
Anyway, speaking of GMO, I've heard that there are some pretty serious plans regarding the eradication of malaria and similar diseases by introducing a modified variety of mosquitos to the environment. How do you guys feel about that?
____________
Yolk and God bless.
---
My buddy's doing a webcomic and would certainly appreciate it if you checked it out!
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 02:59 AM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 04:12, 22 Aug 2016.
|
About that Woock here again I say that scientific control over our food could be the supreme design in better societies/civilizations. Actually I think its really great in words that they would have the intention of combating diseases but I don't trust these people.
Mvass ^
Even in this society with limited knowledge on how to screw with nature, I think the government and these organizations have tainted trust in GMOs. I could trust some corporation or maybe even farmers on certain kinds of GMing. I am not sure if the mendel selective process is in the ballpark of GMing crops as a whole but with some reluctance I would be all for it. Of course Mendel selection has already been done with animals and produce. Ultimately I think there should be different categorizes of GMing and GMOs, if their arent already
Thing is, this government and the FDA (among other agencies) have severely tainted or destroyed our trust.
Example 1: So non toxic cannabis is schedule 1 "defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use" but the FDA is cool with giving 11 year olds straight opioids now - OxyContin.
Example 2: What Would It Take To Power The United States With Solar Energy? And what do we do? Supply energy using 66% non renewables and 20% Nuclear which I believe is mostly fission, creating radioactive waste. Outdated technology still using floppy discs. Meanwhile a teenager creates a fusion reactor.. But that's okay says government lets fill up some more mountains with radioactive waste.
Coal = 33%
Natural gas = 33%
Nuclear = 20%
Example 3: Fluoridation of waters is another example. The now found to be as a neurotoxin fluoride needs to be consumed, and digested to protect our teeth? I don't think so.
Example 4: Need I elaborate and point out all the times the government has been caught lying? Even planning to attack its own citizens?
I know this seems all over the place and irrelevant to GMOs but I am trying to point out some of the many reasons why our trust is gone. Monsanto and the government have been in bed for a long time and have done a lot of damage.
Monsanto is extremely well established as untrustful. Of the reported and known 42000 acres of affected crops by their new accident, guess how much of that + unreported crops will be fed to livestock and humans? I guarantee the answer is not zero.
As far as the attempt at having the public believe that GMO is the answer to upcoming potential crisis of over population, while that may or may not be true I still do not trust monsanto or the FDA government agency in overseeing this.
Okay did a quick check on who makes GMOs because I know it's not just the weedkiller agent orange Monsanto company and here is one list.
http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-firms/10558-the-worlds-top-ten-seed-companies-who-owns-nature
FINAL EDIT lol
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 05:22 AM |
|
|
What exactly is a label going to accomplish?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 07:53 AM |
|
|
What's the harm if it's going to make some people feel more comfortable? If they want to know what type of food they are putting in their mouth, why deny them this right?
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 10:41 AM |
|
|
Quote:
However, that kind of "labeled" organic food is a luxury item now, grown in quality land with best fertilizers and so on.
No, that's just the marketing bull**** advertisement of it. My grandparents grow tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, bean and other vegetables as well as some fruit trees in their house yard, on a completely normal soil, organic fertilizers (also known as snow in this forum) and water and they taste much better than the stuff I can get from the supermarket - most of which comes from GMO countries like Poland. One of the significant, if not main reason why organic food becomes less and less common in my country is because the big market chains, which are all foreign, offer much worse contracts to the local producers than they do to the importers (for example getting paid only after the goods are sold which as you can imagine can be disastrous if you produce something that turns into goo after a few days because that's what it naturally does).
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 11:26 AM |
|
|
Well, the kind of organic food I was talking about IS the kind of local-farm grown, naturally fertilized food. Basically, some people like your grandparents sell it to special stores and then people like my grandmother living in the central city buys them. Of course, you cant feed millions with such traditional farming, the goods are limited and therefore more expensive because of demand.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 12:53 PM |
|
|
That's why we skip a part of the chain and sell it directly.
Here you can find local produce at a cheap price almost every day in a local shop, or, even cheaper at the farmers' market.
The greatest experience is shopping for fish and meat in certain cities, we have a stable market there, so you can go there any day and you're gonna find local products with no effort.
And you can also see a lamb split in two...
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 01:01 PM |
|
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 01:22 PM |
|
|
I on the other hand find it slightly annoying when I get organic food with the reasoning it tastes better and am expected to be thankful.. I can't taste any difference and it's similar to when someone buys a non-gamer a video game and expects them to be thankful..
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 02:56 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 14:57, 22 Aug 2016.
|
artu said:
What's the harm if it's going to make some people feel more comfortable? If they want to know what type of food they are putting in their mouth, why deny them this right?
It's never particularly inspiring when a person's basic justification for a major, costly undertaking is, "Well what's the harm in it?" So, let me ask the question in a different way: What are the negative consequences of having no mandated labelling of GMO-containing foods?
(Then later maybe we can get into what is a right and what isn't.)
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 03:02 PM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 15:12, 22 Aug 2016.
|
Costly? For adding 3 letters to a label which exists anyway?
Quote:
Of course, you cant feed millions with such traditional farming, the goods are limited and therefore more expensive because of demand.
That's only half-true. The GMO products generally have greater "life expectancy" and damage tolerance during transportation which make them the preferred choice if you need to move them over big distances and still be able to sell them within reasonable time (or just keep them in the shop for longer time before they become unsellable). If the organic products are given their market niche without idiotic and barely legal restrictions like the ones mentioned above however, they can still sell well-enough to allow significant production and thus lower prices.
|
|
Neraus
Promising
Legendary Hero
Pain relief cream seller
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 03:05 PM |
|
Edited by Neraus at 15:05, 22 Aug 2016.
|
@Corribus
The same as not labelling the place of origin of the product.
There is a difference between buying a Greek, Tunisian or local (in my case Sicilian) orange, the place of origin gives you an indication of what is the soil it was grown on, the policies on the use of pesticides or other chemical substances, their amount and type, the type of fertilizer and the distance it travelled to come to you, which gives a broad indication on when it's going to rot etc.
Labelling GMOs gives the consumer the knowledge that the product was produced in such a way, and prepares a number of expectations, true that it's going to harm the selling of the product if the population is against GMOs, but that's the consumer's decision on what he's going to put in his place, and when he buys food he's going to exercise the same bias that he would use for example if he preferred a food from a country compared to another.
I'd say it's good courtesy towards the consumer.
____________
Noli offendere Patriam Agathae quia ultrix iniuriarum est.
ANTUDO
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 03:11 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 15:14, 22 Aug 2016.
|
@Corribus
What costly? Is it any different than listing the ingredients on a box? Let me put it this way, when Muslims for instance, demand that they should be informed if a product contains pork meat, we say, ok, they have the right not to eat pork meat, so let's simply do that. But when someone, for whatever reason, don't want to consume GMO products, we then say no, it's perfectly safe so no matter how you feel about them, it's not your choice? Why, because it's not a religious sensitivity, what does that change? Refusing to openly label GMO products will only make people more suspicious about them. If they are perfectly safe, why hesitate to be transparent about the whole thing?
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 03:38 PM |
|
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 04:21 PM |
|
|
I do not trust Corporations with natural life on earth...period We've already had very alarming incidents that most here seem to be immune.
1. The grand idea to make Pesticides & Seeds, one in the same. The brilliance caused in France and the U.S. massive bee colony destruction. If you know anything of the precious balance of nature...this was very serious folks.
2. Seed Patents. These seeds make plants that alter the genetics of natural plants. The farmers of "natural plants" have been sued because the new crap mutated the plants grown by farmers "wanting nothing to do with big-AG." Get this folks!
Once again it is GREED/Profit that "mostly" alters what we eat.
Oddly enough I just watched a few videos of the flooding in LA. As shocking as the scope of the flood was, what was as alarming to me was that of the dozens of victims on the footage, a large pct. of them were nearly all, way over-sized folks or downright obese. Wth?
Of course people can eat too much, grow older etc. but most of the people I saw were not old but in their 30s and less. Who can say what is really behind the obesity epidemic in the West?
Further the scientists are doing some bizarre stuff. iirc Something "like" merging the DNA of a barracuda and a chicken. Seriously, they should NOT be allowed to experiment with nature on anything like a grand scale. However, with Slogans like you read coming from the GMOs, who is going to object or dare to put controls/safe-guards on them?
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted August 22, 2016 04:55 PM |
|
|
Something like this needs to be done after long term results. Not to mention recessive traits and who is to say mutations won't occour? Problems already happen. But something as wide scale as this monopolizing the world agriculture is not a good idea to just throw in a few modifications, run some rats through and mass market.
Between GMOs, geoengineering, governments pushing non renewable resources and nuclear fission as our source of energy, I'm pretty much throwing in the cards. I hope to play elder scrolls 6 before it's over lol. But seriously, my compassion and rage are on fire and there is nothing I can do.
The road providing our existence might be closing. I feel pretty much safe in spiritual terms but right now I see the plate life has handed me and I only feel compelled to hope and perhaps even try to help.
|
| |
|
|
