Page 1 of 3 [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

11 Aug 2015, 8:45 pm

Here are some tropes promoted by the anti-GMO crowd, as detailed in This Article:

Quote:
1. The most common trope the anti-GMO folks use is what we might call the Monsanto Card. (Monsanto = Satan & Hitler combined.) Anybody who writes anything that supports GMO products or doesn't condemn GMO research and products is identified as a shill for Monsanto ...
The fear-mongers are likely to label me as a shill for Monsanto just for starting this thread. :roll:

Quote:
2. GMOs cause allergic reactions and autoimmune disorders! Pamela Ronald, internationally respected plant geneticist at the University of California, Davis: "Not likely. After 16 years of cultivation and a cumulative total of 2 billion acres planted, no documented adverse health or environmental effects have resulted from commercialization of genetically engineered crops." ...
The fear-mongers have also tried to link GMOs to Autistic Spectrum Disorders, Schizophrenia, and other perceptive developmental disorders. They have failed, of course.

Quote:
3. GMOs are not tested properly; we're guinea pigs for the GMO manufacturers!. Ric Bessin, Extension Entomologist University of Kentucky College of Agriculture writes: "Federal food law requires premarket approval for food additives, whether or not they are the products of biotechnology. FDA treats substances added to food products through recombinant DNA techniques as food additives if they are significantly different in structure, function or amount than substances currently found in food. However, if a new food product developed through biotechnology does not contain substances that are significantly different from those already in the diet, it does not require premarket approval....
The fear-mongers have resorted to outright lies to push their agenda. Are they blind to the facts, or are they simply denying the real and valid evidence that refutes their claims?

Quote:
4. The Monsanto Protection Act proves the government is in cahoots with Monsanto to poison our food supply!. There is no such thing as the "Monsanto Protection Act." Those who refer to it have distorted the law signed into effect by president Obama. The law was called the "Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013." ... the bill allows scientific research to continue.
So, if there are no facts to support their claims, the fear-mongers will fabricate their own unsupportable "facts".

Quote:
5. GMOs Will Harm the Environment!. The attempt to defend this claim has two aspects. One argument is the appeal to fear that GMO will unleash frankenmonsters throughout the environment ... Crops with a gene that makes them impervious to a pesticide or that kills pests are not a threat to take over the countryside and reduce farmland to dust. The other arm of this trope is to point to some specious example where the anti-GMO folks claim the environment has already been ruined ...
Dire predictions, anyone? How many of you remember the dire predictions that you would go blind from crossing your eyes, running with scissors, or being curious about sex? Did any of those predictions ever come true?

A final word on the companies that are the true sources of corporate irresponsibility regarding GMOs:
Michael Gerson, of the Washington Post wrote:
"There is no credible evidence that ingesting a plant that has been swiftly genetically modified in a lab has a different health outcome than ingesting a plant that has been slowly genetically modified through selective breeding ... Chipotle, Whole Foods and those who follow their examples are doing real social harm.

They are polluting public discourse on scientific matters.

They are legitimizing an approach to science that elevates Internet medical diagnosis, social media technological consensus and discredited studies in obscure journals.

They are contributing to a political atmosphere in which people pick their scientific views to fit their ideologies, predispositions and obsessions.

And they are undermining public trust in legitimate scientific authority, which undermines the possibility of rational public policy on a range of issues."
Amen, brother. Amen!

...

For further reading, try "Persistant Anti-GMO Myths", by Steven Novella.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

11 Aug 2015, 9:58 pm

Vitamin A deficiency is a tragic example of the cost here. Hundreds of thousands of children dead every year, and more blinded or left dangerously susceptible to illness. It could be largely ameliorated with golden rice; the great satan Monsanto donated a number of patents royalty-free so that it could be. But no, fat rich Westerners are too afraid of GMO crops to let poor starving Africans eat them.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

12 Aug 2015, 6:33 am

Orwell wrote:
Vitamin A deficiency is a tragic example of the cost here. ... fat rich Westerners are too afraid of GMO crops to let poor starving Africans eat them.
OMG! A conspiracy!

Seriously, it seems more likely that the gullible Anti-GMO Mob is being manipulated to serve the will of the Global Fat-Cat Elite. I mean, selling guns and ammo to those nations is more lucrative than giving away healthy food, right?



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

12 Aug 2015, 7:53 pm

Image

This is how corn looked like before selective breeding. GMO and selective breeding are two sides of the same coin; both are inherently harmless--and both are solutions to food shortage. The only difference is that GMO is faster and a lot more efficient.


_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1024
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

14 Aug 2015, 7:16 am

Unfortunately, the real battle is against irrational fear of science and technology.

The excesses and disasters of the post-WWII chemical industry give this baseless fear some sense of legitimacy, but it is ultimately based in ignorance and incoherent emotion.

The real message on the anti GMO side is that Dr. Frankenstein is working on your food, tinkering with the laws of God and Monsanto has built the industrial machinery of the Krel and we will all be destroyed by monsters from the Id if we don't shut them down before it's too late!

Those images and tropes are powerful adversaries.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

14 Aug 2015, 9:20 am

Adamantium wrote:
... The real message on the anti GMO side is that Dr. Frankenstein is working on your food, tinkering with the laws of God and Monsanto has built the industrial machinery of the Krel and we will all be destroyed by monsters from the Id if we don't shut them down before it's too late! ...
The motivation seems to be to convince the ignorant rabble that the "Certified Organic" label makes stunted, twisted, and blighted vegetables worth twice as much as normal vegetables.

So that a farmer who is too lazy to take good care of his crops can increase his profit margin on a lesser yield by declaring that his veggies were organically grown.

I tell you, it's a racket, and the anti-GMO sheeple are too brainwashed to see it.



Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1024
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

14 Aug 2015, 10:35 am

And doesn't it look mouthwatering:
Image

That wonderful look alone has got to be worth a 150% markup.

Tip for careful cosnumers: always check your produce for pests. It's only really pesticide-free if it's crawling with nutrient-rich life. Next time you take a bite, remember--it's not just produce, it's an ecosystem.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 10:42 am

I just prefer natural food and dislike the connection between GMO food and pesticides....i mean genetically altering food to survive extreme pesticides which can harm other natural plant life and probably have other unpleasant environmental effects is not something I can support.

As for GMO causing autism, anyone who is not 100% opposed to GMO in all its forms being a minion of monsanto and all that kind of stuff cannot say any of that plays in really. I feel my reasons are fairly solid and not too far fetched for taking an issue with the GMO thing. If people want gmo food and there is demand sure it should be available, but I think it should be labeled as such so someone like me who doesn't want it has the option to avoid it.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 10:53 am

Adamantium wrote:
And doesn't it look mouthwatering:
Image

That wonderful look alone has got to be worth a 150% markup.

Tip for careful cosnumers: always check your produce for pests. It's only really pesticide-free if it's crawling with nutrient-rich life. Next time you take a bite, remember--it's not just produce, it's an ecosystem.


Probably best not to eat those ones....and IDK I have eaten lots of fresh fruit/veggies from peoples non pesticide gardens throughout my life and none of it looked like that. Its called picking the fruit on time and obviously if you find a rotted one with bugs eating it then probably count that one as a loss. Also in northern Minnesota there are strawberries that grow wild....and amazingly they aren't entirely bug infested either. Pests do have predators, and various plants have their own mechanisms to resist various pests. That said I don't think its 'evil' to ever use any kind of pesticide...but pesticides proven to harm the environment or suspected to be playing a role in the decline of bees should not be used. Pesticides that will kill food producing plants that haven't been genetically modified to withstand said pesticide is disturbing to me...don't people already put enough disgusting crap into the earth? And more close to home grapes grow around where I live they are smaller than the ones you get at the store but much of the time quite healthy and edible not crawling with bugs inside and out.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 11:02 am

Fnord wrote:
So that a farmer who is too lazy to take good care of his crops can increase his profit margin on a lesser yield by declaring that his veggies were organically grown.


No they have to actually be organic....if he just is too lazy to take good care of crops and just claims them as organic, and then they are found not to be up to organic standards then no, he could not label them as organic just to increase his profit margin with a lesser yield. Though I imagine growing organic takes more effort/less laziness than GMO crops since without the harsh pesticides more care has to be taken to make sure your crops don't get destroyed or infested...because if you want any yield the crops have to look healthy.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 11:13 am

Kurgan wrote:
Image

This is how corn looked like before selective breeding. GMO and selective breeding are two sides of the same coin; both are inherently harmless--and both are solutions to food shortage. The only difference is that GMO is faster and a lot more efficient.


Selective breeding does not sound so bad...also it seems more like the purpose of GMO is to give certain companies monopoly on the crops/food grown throughout the world, so people will have to depend upon them for food....when their toxic pesticides these crops have been made to withstand and political lobbying effectively stops organic and/or general non GMO food from growing. Seems 'we're helping world hunger' is a cute cover for the true intent here. I don't doubt their are ignorant/brainwashed people on the anti-GMO side who just wanted a bandwagon to jump onto...but I think there are plenty of those in the 'Don't even question GMO its all positive and good, and Monsanto is really looking out for us all.' crowd.


_________________
We won't go back.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

14 Aug 2015, 11:19 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
I just prefer natural food and dislike the connection between GMO food and pesticides....

You do know that organic farmers use pesticides too, right? They happen to use pesticides that are less effective in protecting against pests and potentially more dangerous to human consumers because they eschew the scientific progress that's been made to optimize on both of those goals. And GM technology can be used to develop crops with less need for pesticides and fertilizers, minimizing the environmental costs of agriculture.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

14 Aug 2015, 11:21 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
it seems more like the purpose of GMO is to give certain companies monopoly on the crops/food grown throughout the world, so people will have to depend upon them for food....when their toxic pesticides these crops have been made to withstand and political lobbying effectively stops organic and/or general non GMO food from growing. Seems 'we're helping world hunger' is a cute cover for the true intent here. I don't doubt their are ignorant/brainwashed people on the anti-GMO side who just wanted a bandwagon to jump onto...but I think there are plenty of those in the 'Don't even question GMO its all positive and good, and Monsanto is really looking out for us all.' crowd.

Monsanto != GMO. Opposing GMO because of dislike for Monsanto makes as much sense as refusing to use anything that relies on electricity because Edison had some harsh business tactics. And to the extent that Monsanto and other biotech companies are engaging in questionable business practices, that's an issue to be addressed by proper regulation, not by outright banning an entire class of technology.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 11:38 am

Orwell wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I just prefer natural food and dislike the connection between GMO food and pesticides....

You do know that organic farmers use pesticides too, right? They happen to use pesticides that are less effective in protecting against pests and potentially more dangerous to human consumers because they eschew the scientific progress that's been made to optimize on both of those goals. And GM technology can be used to develop crops with less need for pesticides and fertilizers, minimizing the environmental costs of agriculture.


Yes I am quite aware they also use pesticides...but I was more referring to the specific pesticides they design GMO crops to withstand due to their harsh/powerful chemical properties that is likely damaging to any natural plant life, pretty sure organic farms don't use those ones.

And IDK I guess I see no reason to blindly trust that there is no downside whatsoever to GM technology being used on food, when I have seen some evidence to the contrary...and just in personal experience I find organic foods to taste better than non organic foods. Also I don't like that its so hush, hush, I mean why does there even have to be legislation to force food to be labeled as what it is? Why is there a fight being fought against having to label GMO food as GMO...that is kind of fishy.

If GMO is truly without a doubt the way to go...you'd think corporations that sell/produce GMO food would proudly label it as such...but instead the government has to pass legislation to make them label it accurately? something fishy there, points to there maybe being something wrong about it.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

14 Aug 2015, 11:45 am

Orwell wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
it seems more like the purpose of GMO is to give certain companies monopoly on the crops/food grown throughout the world, so people will have to depend upon them for food....when their toxic pesticides these crops have been made to withstand and political lobbying effectively stops organic and/or general non GMO food from growing. Seems 'we're helping world hunger' is a cute cover for the true intent here. I don't doubt their are ignorant/brainwashed people on the anti-GMO side who just wanted a bandwagon to jump onto...but I think there are plenty of those in the 'Don't even question GMO its all positive and good, and Monsanto is really looking out for us all.' crowd.

Monsanto != GMO. Opposing GMO because of dislike for Monsanto makes as much sense as refusing to use anything that relies on electricity because Edison had some harsh business tactics. And to the extent that Monsanto and other biotech companies are engaging in questionable business practices, that's an issue to be addressed by proper regulation, not by outright banning an entire class of technology.



Did I say anything about banning...or state that I oppose GMO soley because of dislike for Monsanto? Seems like you are taking things out of context. I do dislike that it seems they have an underlying goal of having a monopoly on the worlds crops and food...one organization having that much power isn't a good thing even if there are positive aspects of genetically modifying food which personally don't see why plants need to be taken into a lab and drastically altered by humans when there is selective breeding of crops and such to improve their yield or create maybe bigger variaties of a certain fruit. So yeah I dislike the idea of a large corrupt corporation having a monopoly on the worlds food which it seems like they are going for. And I even said if people want GMO food and there is demand for it, then yes it should be available...never suggested banning it, of course there should be regulations. Also the pesticide thing does concern me...I mean creating a pesticide most plants cant withstand that can spread by going airborne, and then genetically altering crops to withstand that pesticide just seems a good way to decrease the competition further strengthening the monopoly on the worlds food.


_________________
We won't go back.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

14 Aug 2015, 11:47 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
Yes I am quite aware they also use pesticides...but I was more referring to the specific pesticides they design GMO crops to withstand due to their harsh/powerful chemical properties that is likely damaging to any natural plant life, pretty sure organic farms don't use those ones.

See, this is the exact opposite of true. Agricultural scientists have spent decades developing modern pesticides that will be as specific as possible - meaning they will be effective in killing pests while posing less danger to humans and beneficial plant/animal species than the older pesticides that organic farmers still use, which are basically crude poisons that kill anything.

Quote:
And IDK I guess I see no reason to blindly trust that there is no downside whatsoever to GM technology being used on food, when I have seen some evidence to the contrary

No one's asking anyone to blindly trust. You can trust the mountains of evidence accumulated over the last several decades. You can trust every major scientific body in the world. You can get a biology degree (I have one of those) so that you understand what exactly is meant by GMO, at which point you'd realize that there is no inherent threat in GM technology.

Quote:
Also I don't like that its so hush, hush, I mean why does there even have to be legislation to force food to be labeled as what it is? Why is there a fight being fought against having to label GMO food as GMO...that is kind of fishy.

Because the labeling issue is never about consumer information; it's only a cheap scare tactic on the part of anti-GM Luddites.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH