ClassyPenguin
Banned
The process is intensive and lengthy before those crops come to market. And the amount of research and testing they do is staggering. This is very much an argument from ignorance.
What do you guys think of the anti-GMO community...?
- Thread starter Kad5
- Start date
- Status
Not they are not, because in developing countries with small farmers you can no use the GMO crop that is produced at the moment. And again we are already producing enough food hunger is not a problem because of the lack of food.
I consider them to be the Republicans of the science / nutritional world. Absolutely fucking batshit insane.
I actually just had a massive argument with a few of them, during which one of them claimed that chemotherapy was 100% ineffective and all you needed to do to prevent / reverse the course of cancer was eat organic.
He actually used the phrase "Giant, cancer-fighting salad" in a serious discussion. They were also all convinced that all organic products were miraculously farmed without the use of pesticides.
I wish I were joking.
I actually just had a massive argument with a few of them, during which one of them claimed that chemotherapy was 100% ineffective and all you needed to do to prevent / reverse the course of cancer was eat organic.
He actually used the phrase "Giant, cancer-fighting salad" in a serious discussion. They were also all convinced that all organic products were miraculously farmed without the use of pesticides.
I wish I were joking.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
That's due to the anti GMO lobby politicizing the issue. Donated sweet potato seeds from Monsanto are blocked by politics in Africa not the companies.
Food production needs to be local in order to help the hungry.
SteveWinwood
Member
I get called a Monsanto fanboy by people who can't read.
Also I put them in them in the camp of anti vaccine people. Willfully harming society due to ignorance.
Also I put them in them in the camp of anti vaccine people. Willfully harming society due to ignorance.
gutter_trash
Banned
they have a good case in the defense of traditional family farms.
in the defense of the honey bee.
in the defense of life stock's fertility
in the defense of human's health
why should the food industry in America be controlled only by 4 large suppliers?
why should Mosantanto by allowed to sue people if the stupid pollen from their GMO crops falls onto your years and you get crops that grow that have Mosanto genes? It's your property.
Mosanto is not out to solve world hunger, they are just about making money, making profits and taking the most market share. It's just about money.
in the defense of the honey bee.
in the defense of life stock's fertility
in the defense of human's health
why should the food industry in America be controlled only by 4 large suppliers?
why should Mosantanto by allowed to sue people if the stupid pollen from their GMO crops falls onto your years and you get crops that grow that have Mosanto genes? It's your property.
Mosanto is not out to solve world hunger, they are just about making money, making profits and taking the most market share. It's just about money.
Yet the US and Europe differ on many stances. Why? Politics? Or are Americans less strict with their guidelines?
Yup, any desire to get the facts correct results in being called a member of a defense force. When 90% of what people allegedly "know" about something can be refuted after a 10 second perusal of Wikipedia sources you're in for a long discussion full of that kind of behavior.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
To further illustrate the point, BT corn is made using a gene found in soil bacteria that kills harmful insects. That soil bacteria is also used by organic farmers because it's not toxic. However, the BT corn has the advantage of only killing the insects that feed on it instead of
90% if they were sprayed.
So in this instance GMO's are much better for the environment than organic farming.
90% if they were sprayed.
So in this instance GMO's are much better for the environment than organic farming.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
The EU just caved into political pressure from anti GMO groups.
They will always be differing safety standards, which is why we don't see a lot if European cars. They don't pass our safety standards.
Yep! 100% this.
The ability and technology to better and more quickly adapt agriculture to meet fast changing circumstances caused by climate change.
Which may spell massive hunger and deaths in the ensuing decade.
Assuming that we ditch all GMO for organic crops only.
Having said that, if you're as well versed with the issues of GMO as you appear to be; perhaps you should also get clued up on the actual science side of genetic modification, rather than just worrying about the business/political side of it.
It's good to have a more nuanced understanding of where the nature of the harm originates from, and hammer those elements, rather than having your arguments dismissed due to broadly generalizing the whole enterprise as a negative.
This also applies to nuclear power; to straight up demonize it, is very problematic when the typical alternatives yield more damage and deaths, albeit in a less localized, more accumulative, progressive fashion (i.e. the pollution from coal, oil and gas electricity tends to cause mass environmental havoc)... and that the very act of demonizing nuclear power is a large factor in why those disasters occurred in the first place; i.e. not enough money to build new plants, not enough work done to maintain and improve the condition of old plants - plants that run for decades beyond their original slated end of operational life - not using new nuclear tech, where problems of melt down are literally impossible.
I mean; in a very real sense... new nuclear is in terms of its pros and cons, much closer to Nuclear Fusion, the supposed holy grail of power, than it is to old nuclear. (i.e. massive power, non-toxic waste, no melt-down). But the anti-nuclear sentiment doesn't care about that.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Crops don't easily just "fall onto" other fields. Corn doesn't disperse its seeds so easily. Humans have to do that.
Oh yeah???
Yes, but again GMO food does not work like that, small farmers can not use it, because they do not have access to all the pesticides and herbicides needed to keep them alive. Neither do they have the money.
I'm just going to show a print screen here:
Ah, I see know what you are arguing for.
Essentially your argument is a form of a black swan, a rare, unpredictable event with an extreme impact.
So in this case what you fear is that some completely unpredictable discovery about GMO foods would have such a massive disutility for the world as to cancel out all of the previous benefits gained from the technology and indeed it is fairly easy to imagine some apocalyptic scenario where the vast majority of crops become inedible or something.
The issue with Black Swans is that there inherent unpredictability makes them fairly subjective issues. There are no prior probabilities we can use with this argument, indeed we don't even know the nature of the black swan for GMOs. They are essentially 'unknown unknowns'. What this boils down to is that we leave evidence behind and are arguing from a purely theoretical basis. I cannot 'prove' you wrong and neither can you because we have no data to base our assumptions on, no probabilities to reason with.
So your position is not unreasonable. It comes down to a differing set of beliefs on the possibility of a black swan occurring, you placing a relativity high chance and me relatively low.
However, there is the danger of succumbing to a version of pascal's mugging, basing a decision on the tiny probability of an outcome which has an infinitely large utility - the kind of thinking would basically stymie most scientific research as there is always some tiny probability of an infinitely bad outcome.
But that's because Europeans tend to drive smaller cars. They don't have to worry about a Ford F-150 smashing their small fiat. GMO aren't the only thing that Europeans and Americans differ in when it to health and food.
SteveWinwood
Member
Family farms are dying for tons of different reasons. GMOs are on the bottom of that list. Blaming modern engineering makes more sense.
I don't know what this means. Are you blaming gmos for colony collapse?
Once again this has what to do with gmos? I'm going to assume you're talking about bovine growth horomone... which has nothing to do with gmos.
yeah that totally healthy thing yeah it was unhealthy k
If you have a specific question or statement to make about health issues and gmos ask away. Please don't just say bu bu but its unhealthy cause frankenfood!
Why should cell phones? Don't blame that for anything but politics and business.
This has literally never happened except in the minds of people who write chain emails. If you want the court documents showing the farmers intentionally and willfully planted them and then actively lied then they're out there.
This is what I'm really sick of. Yeah, duh. No one is claiming otherwise. Monsanto as a whole is a corporation. THAT'S THEIR WHOLE GOAL. Now their are people there who's whole goal while there is to solve world hunger. That's why they believe they are there and on this earth. This involves using the limited space we have on the planet to its fullest.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
You need less to do more with gm crops. Bill and Melinda Gates foundation uses them for this very reason. And many biotech companies donate their crops and patents for humanitarian purposes.
One of the reasons they are not used because of the fear instilled by anti GMO groups.
Funny I think the Pro GMO people are pretty much like the republicans, dismissing anything that is not up their line, ignoring any scientist who is not in "their" team.
Reminds me of the Iraq war, every critic was a traitor. Totally insane.
Conciliator
Banned
It's part of the primitivist movement. It 'feels unnatural', nothing to do with science/facts. I'm not too stressed about it though until the point that the movement gets severe enough that are actually able to affect legislation and stuff, which they are far off from(as best I can tell). Those Monsanto assholes are certainly not helping the branding.
gutter_trash
Banned
I know you guys grow way too much corn and all but there are ''other'' things that exist besides corn, lol
Bill and Melinda Gates foundation also uses DDT against Malaria in Africa. Not really an argument. Of course Monsanto and other companies try to whitewash themselves, but still all that things that they are working on have no practical impact in Africa.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Most scientists agree that GMO foods are safe. Your comparisons are idiotic.
HAHAHAHAHA
I had to close when he started talking about Percy Schmeiser. Also this guy has Charlie Kelly's voice and probably his brain too.
Like nuclear energy, they totally showed us that all our concerns were a black swan, nothing never ever happened within the last 50 years. Also there is just one problem, black swans are very common in Australia.
And compared to nuclear energy there are way more scientists against GMO than there were ever against nuclear power.
Most scientists also agreed that nuclear power was safe and they also called every nuclear critic an idiot. Nothing could ever go wrong they told us.
GMO basically emphasize the problem of losing crop diversity, in favor of single kind of it, that may have an advantage short term in economical terms for industries and consumers (lower price) but then it mean we eat standardized flavorless shit and we lose lots of local crops. Happened already before, will happen again. South italy for example was ruined by this during the thirties because fascism tried to enforce mass production, which in turn destroyed all the niche agriculture industries that would've been a much better choice in the long term economically.
Also mean that basically all farmers becomes dependent from multinationals even more for seeds and everything.
All this for what? More gain for corporations? Slightly lower prices for me? Yeah, i'd rather not thx.
BUT WE CAN SAVE WORLD HUNGER WITH GMOs! We can already produce enough food, it's just matter of policies. Even if we could, tomorrow, plant an infinite food seed, people would still starve because companies want to make profits. You know what could solve world hunger better? Not being so dependant on those corporations, promote agricultural diversity and locality to give power to local economies, and avoid being so keen on mass-producing shit that only push small farmers away from competition and concentrate economical power even more in few hands.
Health concerns are largely unfounded though. It's extremely hard to imagine that such things could actually do harm, even if i think it's likely that they'd be less good for your health because a lot of what does you good are the micronutrient that could disappear in such crops in favour of other proteins/ oils. All the things that do you good in artichokes are in the mg/ug range for example, and i could easily see some balance in cellular production being skewed in GMOs variants.
/put flame shield on
Also mean that basically all farmers becomes dependent from multinationals even more for seeds and everything.
All this for what? More gain for corporations? Slightly lower prices for me? Yeah, i'd rather not thx.
BUT WE CAN SAVE WORLD HUNGER WITH GMOs! We can already produce enough food, it's just matter of policies. Even if we could, tomorrow, plant an infinite food seed, people would still starve because companies want to make profits. You know what could solve world hunger better? Not being so dependant on those corporations, promote agricultural diversity and locality to give power to local economies, and avoid being so keen on mass-producing shit that only push small farmers away from competition and concentrate economical power even more in few hands.
Health concerns are largely unfounded though. It's extremely hard to imagine that such things could actually do harm, even if i think it's likely that they'd be less good for your health because a lot of what does you good are the micronutrient that could disappear in such crops in favour of other proteins/ oils. All the things that do you good in artichokes are in the mg/ug range for example, and i could easily see some balance in cellular production being skewed in GMOs variants.
/put flame shield on
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Crop diversity and GMO actually work well together to promote diversity and sustainability.
GMO foods are sometimes engineered to promote micro nutrients in foods such as golden rice (one study which was vandalized by anti gmo activists).
GMO foods are sometimes engineered to promote micro nutrients in foods such as golden rice (one study which was vandalized by anti gmo activists).
This is a good post against GMOs
don't even talk to each other
I think it's human nature to instinctively reject things that are viewed as 'unnatural'. Which is kind of a specious idea in this modern world.
Also, I think there are some that are struggling with mental illness and in an attempt to 'fix themselves', meticulously analyze everything they put into their body. This idea that their ailments can only come from food that didn't exist 5000 years ago.
BUT, they are important people in this world. You need a good diversity of thoughts and opinions on all things. It keeps everyone else in check and opens minds up a little to the possibilities around them.
Also, I think there are some that are struggling with mental illness and in an attempt to 'fix themselves', meticulously analyze everything they put into their body. This idea that their ailments can only come from food that didn't exist 5000 years ago.
BUT, they are important people in this world. You need a good diversity of thoughts and opinions on all things. It keeps everyone else in check and opens minds up a little to the possibilities around them.
How does any of this make sense to you? GMO's don't have anything to do with crop diversity, in Argentina there are hundreds of different kinds of GMO Soy already,
Smiles and Cries
Member
I'm skeptical about the anti-GMO movement I've seen a few debates on it, not recent one was on NHK World got to say the anti-GMO guy sounded really conspiracy cookoo instead of giving me good reasons to understand his views.
Humans have been messing with crops since farming was a thing... Did we study the effects of putting animal poop in the soil to make plants grow faster?
where was all the anti-animal poop protests? Humanity has just become more ignorant and more bored we need shit to protest about.
I'm in the why can't we have both camp
Humans have been messing with crops since farming was a thing... Did we study the effects of putting animal poop in the soil to make plants grow faster?
where was all the anti-animal poop protests? Humanity has just become more ignorant and more bored we need shit to protest about.
I'm in the why can't we have both camp
SteveWinwood
Member
I disagree pretty heavilly with your diversity statement, especially compared to tons of other food crops (everyone loves that story about bananas) diversity is at an all time high. But what do I know, I only see a couple tens of thousands of populations a day.
What does this mean??
Smiles and Cries
Member
I think it means he does not agree with you
I don't see how when you consider that for example 95% of sugar beet acres in the US is of glyphosate-resistant GMO variant, and almost all corn and soy is GMO nowaday.
I also honestly tend to be pretty wary of what American say on health issues considering they're much more liberal than EU in this regard (what to feed livestock, GMO availability etc...) and live 10 years less on average. Meat from the US can't even be sold in the EU for example because in the US you can actualy use BGH, at least up until few years ago, then i heard something about new regulations being pushed but i'm not sure if that got anywhere.
So you're saying that because they all have that one gene then they're same variety?
No... I can't even parse it. tens of thousands of populations... of what? What populations? People? Different species of food?
Midnight Phoenix
Member
My second head thinks that GMO is good for my tentacles.
IMO sometimes is pretty stupid, when label no GMO is placed on salt or water.
IMO sometimes is pretty stupid, when label no GMO is placed on salt or water.
CornBurrito
Member
GMO critics are not the same as Monsanto critics though. Monsanto critics aren't vaccine deniers. But people who think GMOs are inherently bad because they are unnatural are like vaccine deniers, because vaccine deniers also argue that vaccines are unnatural and thus are inherently bad.
You can actually use BGH in the US because the current scientific consensus is that it doesn't have any significant health impact on humans.
Pretty cut and dry.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
I don't mind being called a Monsanto shill as I've been called worse. They just need to step up their payment so I can buy GTA V.
There are also scientific GMO critics, because there are scientific reasons to be against GMO. Of course dismissing that is so much easier.
CornBurrito
Member
The argument would be that the anti-GMO scientific studies were just as scientific as the studies showing a link between autism and vaccines.
Do you have any idea how plant ferilization actually occurs?
Protip, its not when a lady plant loves a man plant very much and then they settle down to have little seedlings. Think more on the lines ejaculating into a fan, or a bee of some kind and and where it lands, it lands.
If that happens to be a species where hybridsation is possible or the gene changes are subtle enough to no preclude it from fertilization you have gene transfer. Then monstno come along and sue your ass.
Krauser Kat
Member
Im not for or against GMO foods. I have huge problems against the copyright and reproduction of crop seeds. Its a lot of control over something that could be detrimental if the holders got abusive with pricing.
I usually just go to the farmers market anyway, i would rather buy local gmo than organic shipped from across the country.
I usually just go to the farmers market anyway, i would rather buy local gmo than organic shipped from across the country.
SteveWinwood
Member
One group of outcomes of a cross. A population.
Tens of thousands of crosses of a crop.
There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of GMOs but the majority of the anti-GMO types probably couldn't tell you what a gene is or what being genetically modified entails. For that reason, I don't particularly like them, but it's natural to be afraid of anything that's very novel and mysterious, especially if it ends up in your fridge.
- Status