|
|
| Do you think GMO foods need labels? |
| No, I'm not worried |
|
11% |
[ 3 ] |
| Yea sure, I'm fine either way |
|
7% |
[ 2 ] |
| Yes, I can't believe they are unlabeled |
|
81% |
[ 22 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:32 pm
Noodle Hierarchy Obscurus When I talk about splicing I mean opening up the genome of a plant and inserting something like scorpion DNA. Selective breeding of fruits and vegetables is a natural thing. All humans did was bring those plants together and breed them for favorable traits. Never in nature would tomato and scorpion DNA splice together. It's like how livestock were bred for favorable traits. Or even dogs. We don't tamper with their genomes; we just breed two individuals that have a favorable trait in hopes that that trait will be passed on to the offspring. I guess you could say that selective breeding would also bring out the better parts of an organism. Evolution makes things better, stronger, more productive. Just as with corn, which I've seen bad mouthed alot in this chat. We only grow seeds from certain plants because these plants were the best for production of farmers and industry. Then I guess one could say that corn isn't so bad either. But when you consider that so many people are allergic to it, it's confusing why they'd use corn syrups as a sweetener instead of the other alternatives. And this thing about dogs being bred to produce favorable traits. Some of that's highly controversial. There's this type of dog that they at one point had bred to be so small that everytime a female gave birth, it would die because it's body could not handle the strain. >.> But anyway. This thread is about food. When you consider situations as the one above though, it makes you wonder if doing things for the human benefit and not allowing things to occur naturally could be the right thing to do. Afterall. Humans affect so many things in this world. We are overpopulated and we need new, better, faster resources to be able to sustain all of the people on the planet. And the ways we have come up with to do this are sometimes quite controversial. There is the moral standard of "Playing God." But then again, you have to think about greater goods. Everyone I'm sure as heard of "Golden Rice"? A rice that is produced in mass quantities, enriched with vitamins and nutrients and shipped to countries where poverty is rampant. This sort of GMO helps save lives. You see people talk about corn a lot because it has been genetically modified by man playing with its genome to make it one of two types of GM corn. The first is dubbed "Roundup Ready" and it has been genetically modified to make it resistant to herbicides so that it can be sprayed with copious amounts of herbicide to keep weeds out of the field and increase corn yield. The second kind is Bt corn and it has had bacterial genes inserted into its genome to make it resistant to pests. All of this sounds good in theory, but there seems to be evidence (which I have not actually seen, but it's apparently a big deal) that the bacteria in the human digestive system can assimilate these genes. In the case of Roundup Ready corn, you end up with gut bacteria that are immune to herbicides. That doesn't seem like such a horrible thing, but in the case of Bt corn, these gut bacteria end up with genes that produce a protein that essentially functions as a pesticide. There have been reports that livestock that are fed Bt corn have thinner intestinal walls and Bt corn is blamed for lots of gastrointestinal problems and disorders. The difference between selective breeding and genetic modification is that you're taking something completely foreign and putting it into the genome of a plant species to get a specific benefit. The problem is that these "benefits" often aren't tested for side effects. Genetically modified foods make it easier for us to produce more food to feed a population that is out of control. However, you have to consider if it's worth it if the quality of life for those people is going to be lowered because of it. Instead of sticking the DNA of one species into another we should be working on better tested and proven safe methods to solve our hunger problems.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:30 am
I've learned a little bit about how corn fed cows have intestinal problems. Of course, there's always the not so common and more expensive choice of buying meat that is only grass fed. People claim that animals fed nothing but grass have a "gamier" taste. Which some people would enjoy but others wouldn't.
I'm not a big advocate of animal rights. At all. But I know the difference between right and wrong and in some specified circumstances I have done a heck of alot of research. I don't consider the treatment of many farm bred animals to be ethical. But this can spark a whole debate on ethics, what it is and what it is not. They differ from person to person. But I think it is more beneficial for both you and the animal if you were to buy meat that came from grass fed cattle. These animals are even allowed to roam around out in the a enclosed "wild". Now, the processing of the meat is another thing people get their knickers in a knot over. >.>; I wont get into that, watch Food Inc.
I believe that genetically modified foods should be tested however. The problem of world hunger is very present and now. We have the capabilities to produce large amount of food for these people however testing these things might take decades. To get the full affects of a GMO on a group of people you would have to wait until that person ages. But as I have stated before I think it is completely impossible to avoid genetically modified foods altogether. Part of it comes from the fact that people are mislead and don't exactly know where their food comes from. But the government doesn't necessarily make discovering those things easy for us. What we would need for some of the bigger changes to happen, no more corn fed cattle and more prominentaly labeled GMO's. Is a large group of people who give a hoot. Consider this. Some vegetarians become vegetarians for the sake of the fluffy cute little animals. Which are cute, but you know what. Just because one person decided to stop eating meat, does not mean that the cow producing the one steak they would have eaten before does not get killed. What you would need for change is people who are willing to protest the production of GMOs and distribution of them. Someone who knows what they're talking about. Because nothing is worst then a blind follower trying to lead. >.>;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:03 pm
Cows that are grass-fed are healthier because they are designed to eat grass, not corn. Corn makes them bigger in a shorter time and they don't have that gamy taste, but you also have to shoot them up with antibiotics and sometimes they're given hormones to make them even bigger.
It's amazing to me how in the US real food costs more than processed food. That being, a cow that was allowed to run around a pasture and eat grass is more expensive than one that was put through the process above. It's cheaper to buy fast food than it is to buy fresh vegetables.
There's something wrong with that picture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:07 pm
I don't know much about grocery shopping myself. But I do know that if you buy things in bulk, like potatoes, it will cost you less and it's also better for the environment because of less packaging waste. I of course don't come from America and I don't know if it is much different there. But yeah. It's so much easier and cheaper for people to buy a box of kraft dinner then it is to roast a few potatoes, it seems. By the way, that's my favorite vegetable. >.>;
It would seem there isn't half as much work that goes into turning out naturally fed cows as it is with corn fed cows. You just let them roam around, it grass that grows naturally and then kill em when they're good and fat and big. No steroids to buy, no corn feed to buy even. Very strange indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:26 pm
Noodle Hierarchy I don't know much about grocery shopping myself. But I do know that if you buy things in bulk, like potatoes, it will cost you less and it's also better for the environment because of less packaging waste. I of course don't come from America and I don't know if it is much different there. But yeah. It's so much easier and cheaper for people to buy a box of kraft dinner then it is to roast a few potatoes, it seems. By the way, that's my favorite vegetable. >.>; It would seem there isn't half as much work that goes into turning out naturally fed cows as it is with corn fed cows. You just let them roam around, it grass that grows naturally and then kill em when they're good and fat and big. No steroids to buy, no corn feed to buy even. Very strange indeed. It takes more time for grass-fed cattle to mature and they also don't yield as much as the corn-fed, hormone-injected variety. In the states we have places like Sam's Club where you can buy things in a ridiculously large quantity for a low price. Still, fresh fruits and vegetables don't keep that long regardless of how much you buy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:18 am
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/07/01/refined-foods-are-bad-but-these-may-be-far-worse.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 11:55 am
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/08/10/company-research-on-genetically-modified-foods-is-rigged.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:51 pm
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/10/04/watch-out-there-are-more-problems-with-genetically-modified-foods-than-youre-allowed-to-know.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:22 pm
It would be great if I could read those articles without having to make an account with them. =/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:40 am
GMO food needs to be labeled as such. That doesn't mean I won't buy it, but some things need to be known for what they are. The changes in DNA for a species destabilize what nature intended, and only some of the time is that new species genetically stable. The rest of the time, the product can cause serious problems for the consumer. When you digest protein, you are digesting the carbon chains and other molecules, more or less including the altered DNA. There's no way of knowing what effect that NEO MEAT - especially if it's RAW, is going to have on you. For all we know, the xenogenic vectors could infect the consumer. If growth hormones can effect our milk and then give small children breasts, imagine what retroviruses in our raw food could do?
Salmon is usually served raw...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:18 pm
i thought you can just click "no thanks" to making an account with them and carry on reading? all having an account with them does is add you to their mailing list, where I get these articles. but you can opt out of that too. they are a safe site, but those pop ups asking you to join are annoying lol.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/10/05/dont-eat-these-beans-if-youre-thinking-of-having-children.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:21 pm
Michael Noire GMO food needs to be labeled as such. That doesn't mean I won't buy it, but some things need to be known for what they are. The changes in DNA for a species destabilize what nature intended, and only some of the time is that new species genetically stable. The rest of the time, the product can cause serious problems for the consumer. When you digest protein, you are digesting the carbon chains and other molecules, more or less including the altered DNA. There's no way of knowing what effect that NEO MEAT - especially if it's RAW, is going to have on you. For all we know, the xenogenic vectors could infect the consumer. If growth hormones can effect our milk and then give small children breasts, imagine what retroviruses in our raw food could do? Salmon is usually served raw... Am I the only one that thinks it would be awesome if GMO foods end up bestowing superpowers on people? Highly unlikely scenario, but I think it would kick a**.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2010 2:50 pm
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/10/06/gmo-salmon-one-step-closer-to-fda-approval.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:42 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 11:17 pm
Obscurus Michael Noire GMO food needs to be labeled as such. That doesn't mean I won't buy it, but some things need to be known for what they are. The changes in DNA for a species destabilize what nature intended, and only some of the time is that new species genetically stable. The rest of the time, the product can cause serious problems for the consumer. When you digest protein, you are digesting the carbon chains and other molecules, more or less including the altered DNA. There's no way of knowing what effect that NEO MEAT - especially if it's RAW, is going to have on you. For all we know, the xenogenic vectors could infect the consumer. If growth hormones can effect our milk and then give small children breasts, imagine what retroviruses in our raw food could do? Salmon is usually served raw... Am I the only one that thinks it would be awesome if GMO foods end up bestowing superpowers on people? Highly unlikely scenario, but I think it would kick a**. possibly more likely to bestow super-virus. this article doesnt speak on GMO in particular but im fairly certain that this article is bearing good news!! http://www.naturalnews.com/030219_pancreatic_cancer_tumors.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
