Genetically Modified Organisms
 

With the March Against Monsanto rally yesterday at the art gallery that garnered at least 1000 people in support of labeling gmo food products, I wanted to see who out there cuts gmo's out of their diet as much as possible, who has no idea what gmo's are and anything relating to gmo. As well, let's list gvrd restaurants that use certified organic foods

This thread is for serious, mature discussions and if needed points/ bans will be awarded
Posted via RS Mobile

The whole bees dying off thing is scary as heck.

I'm growing my own produce now too.
That's the best I can do I think, lead by example to my friends and family.

FFS, I yelled out WTF in lecture when I thought the thread title says "genetically modified orgasms..."

This is an awesome start :)
Monsanto has their own seeds though now too so make sure you're buying non gmo seeds when you can :) I started my own garden and try and boycott Monsanto type products when I can. Super hard since like 70-90% of food/produce is gentically modified. But thankfully there's the new buycott app and I've got lists of companies bookmarked so I can see who to support and who not to
Posted via RS Mobile

I think being blindly against GMO completely is ignorant. Being against evil corporations is one thing, but being against improving food when possible is another.

Of course GMO can be potentially bad, you just have to acknowledge that it can also be very good, possibly helping end hunger around the world.

hand on heart, i totally read this too.

I'm actually for GMOs. A lot of people in the world cannot afford, or even grow their food. With GMOs it gives people who have harsher climates a wider variety of foods available as well as keeping food cheap. (Relatively) In addition, a lot of agriculture today isn't grown for consumption but for fuel. (Corn for example) GMOs help this process by growing things faster, that are also resistance to drought or disease. We no longer live in a time where a slight change in climate forces half the population to starve.

However, I am against the non-ethical control of GMOs by corporations. GMOs as an idea is great, but it is the implementation that gets tricky. Technically, selective breeding is a form of GMO. At what point is a GMO no longer a living organism but just a product?

TLDR: Not against GMOs but against the unethical deployment of GMOs.

One doesn't have to be a genius to understand that eating Frankenstein foods is bad for you. I think people intuitively know that GMOs are extremely bad for their health and that is why Monsanto and co. are doing everything they can to fight against GMO labelling.

One of my primary goals in life is to grow/eat the highest quality produce for my family because there is nothing more important to me than our health.

IMO, the best foods are those you grow your own. The second best are those grown by a farmer you know personally (you know your doctor/accountant/etc. on a first name basis, why not your farmer?), and/or lastly, spending a few extra bucks to buy locally grown food from your local farmers market is very good too.

To your health! :D

How does being modified make food "extremely bad" for your health?

This cannot be further away from the truth.

OP and "FARMER's" posts perfectly demonstrates the ability for ignorant mob mentality to shape the way we think. Instead of actually looking into what makes something good or bad, they just say "GMO IS BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH" which is completely and utterly wrong and in fact, impossible.

Here is a easy to understand video that explains that GMO can NOT be good or bad - it is a process, not a product. A GMO product can be good or bad, not GMO itself.


They use a good analogy - typewriters vs computers to write a book. Being against GMO food is like being against books written on a computer. It's not the process that is good or bad, it's the product.

Mark Lynas » Time to call out the anti-GMO conspiracy theory

!

The reason I am against gmos is they're reconstructing code in the DNA of plants and animals, what are the long term effects on humans? So skinny pulp you're okay with eating genetically modified animals?

Maybe it's just Monsanto I don't like because of their practices but it would be nice to have more long term unbiased studies out there. Also, I am completely for labeling so I can be the one choosing if I want to ingest gmos or not. I worry about the effect these genetically modified products have on our soils though. Monsantos seeds can only be used for one season and then you need to keep buying more, there's possible crop contamination for farmers fields that don't want gmo seeds, the weeds could become resistant and create super weeds possibly just like superbugs have occurred.

Here's a good little article

Exposing The Truth about GMOs
Posted via RS Mobile

Before the discussion, please define what GMO means for you. Stock selection like angus, dairy cows etc can be defined as GMO.. since they have been genetically modified by selection.

By defining it in a preface, it will solve a heck lot of confusion.

Can you explain what reconstructing code in the DNA mean? Do you mean mimicking other DNA sequence? Filling in gaps with similiar animals.. ala the movie jurassic park?

The reason why I ask is because you cannot just "reconstruct code" as it is not nature's business. Nature doesn't work like that, there are base pair restrictions and quite sophisticated error correction and redundancy that is built in... you fill in gibberish or something too far off, the animal just won't live.

You do realise DNA is just part of a larger picture? especially for complex animals like cows.. where its gut flora also play a role?

I think you need to do some more reading - and not just from the anti-GMO people. Potentially the blindly pro-GMO people aren't going to give very useful information either. What you need to read are the ones who stand somewhere in between. The skeptics of both sides. They throw that facts your way, and you can decide from there what you want to support. Watch my video, and Ulic's video to start, and go from there.

If you read nothing but propaganda, you aren't going to be able to see the full picture.

And this indicates the other part of the problem: "GMO" and "Monsanto" have become synonymous to everyone who's latched onto this cause-of-the-month, making it impossible for responsible GMO makers, researchers, and farmers to get a fair shake.

Does GMOs also include organisms that have been selectively bred, but no DNA has been actively altered?

I don't have a problem with GMO creation. I have a problem with companies being able to patent living organisms.

To be selectively bred, the organism's DNA has been altered.. hence why I asked OP to be specific.

DNA changes on its own over time. Natural mutations, etc. The "organic" beef you eat now has DNA that's altered from the beef your great-grandparents ate. Did it have an effect on you that it didn't on them?

But the method of selective breeding occurs in nature. With a broad definition like that, it would seem like every organism is GMO.

There are other methods of altering DNA, for example, with a virus.

I kind of figured that's what you were implying with that question.

This is the general feeling that I am getting too. I was introduced to the discourse many years ago and a very large part of the discourse was simply being able to identify science behind GMO's (in its various forms: corporate, pseudo, etc.) and the ethical implications on such things.

Are "GMO's" horrible because Monsanto has paid developers and researchers to develop GMO's to their specific needs, for the purpose of profiting? Or are GMO's bad in themselves?
It's surprising how many people are too ignorant to draw the distinction between the two.

Monsanto is evil because they patent their products. Their products crossover into neighbouring fields and then they sue the farmers that got infested with their products.

That's one reason. I'm sure there are more.

^I think that's the biggest reason for the whole current attitude: Monsanto started pissing off the world with their patent suits, your average layperson only heard "ooo, Monsanto is so bad with their GMOs!", and made the "GMO=evil" connection, which of course, is happily supported by any number of keyboard and YouTube warriors with an axe to grind, a tinfoil hat to polish, or just a desire to troll as many people as possible.

BTW, here are some of Monsanto's legal shenanigans detailed: http://www.techdirt.com/search-g.php?q=monsanto

That is true, but on top of that there is a lot of anti-GMO propaganda. I can remember people being blindly against it even before the anti-Monsanto stuff started.

It's like the pro-organic movement. There is no real reason for it - it is just branding. There may be some good things about it (farmers able to sell produce for a higher cost) and some bad, but overall people champion it for the wrong reasons (thinking it is "better for you" or somehow "tastes better")

Before that it was the anti-salt movement

Before that, anti cholesterol

Before that, the target was saturated fat

And so it goes... People ignore facts, and just join the rallying cry for the latest trend to be angry about something.