Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the insidious GMO threat (and it affects HFCS two ways ... )
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 115 (739851)
10-28-2014 12:20 PM


insidiously infiltrating into virtually all prepared foods in the US ...
Private video on Vimeo
The password is GMOs2014
It is about an hour long, time well spent.
9 basic foods are almost all GMO (unless organic or certified GMO free), and the top offenders are
corn - especially in HFCS
sugar beets - especially in HFCS
soy - especially in baby formula
About 90% of US crops of these plants are GMO.
Share with your friends ... (hi friends)
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-28-2014 12:44 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 16 by Taq, posted 10-29-2014 6:20 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 3 of 115 (739855)
10-28-2014 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by New Cat's Eye
10-28-2014 12:44 PM


Would you summarize it a bit?
A host of diseases and birth defects are becoming increasingly associated with GMO tainted food and overall they are showing a dangerous trend.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-28-2014 12:44 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Stile, posted 10-28-2014 2:20 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 5 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-28-2014 2:33 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 6 by Genomicus, posted 10-28-2014 2:39 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 115 (739921)
10-29-2014 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Stile
10-28-2014 2:20 PM


Is there a specific definition of GMO food?
Or, perhaps a specific method of GMO that is associated with the tainted foot?
quote:
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.
Seems like a very vast scope to me.
Indeed. I think we need to distinguish crops that produce more nutrients, crops that are neutral to biological needs, and crops that increase the toxic load on food.
Is it possible that GMO is just fine, and some large possible-close-to-monopoly companies are using poor "genetic engineering techniques" to produce a bad product?
What I see with Monsanto et a is the production of a product that then allows more of their other products to be used, increasing their profits. That the companies are more driven by profit than by public good, and have engaged in some dubious behaviors to protect that profit rather than look for more neutral solutions.
Getting rid of all GMOs because of a lot of tainted food seems like getting rid of all cars because of a lot of bad DeLoreans.
But getting rid of the bad DeLoreans would be a good idea. If farmers cannot sell their GMO produce outside the US -- increasingly the case -- then it certainly looks like GMOs are bad DeLoreans from a market perspective alone.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Stile, posted 10-28-2014 2:20 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 10-31-2014 12:40 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 10 of 115 (739923)
10-29-2014 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Genomicus
10-28-2014 2:39 PM


Right off the bat, the video starts making erroneous arguments. It's just the same, tired anti-GMO rhetoric that biotechnologists -- armed with plenty of scientific data -- have consistently eviscerated.
But are they taking into account ALL the effects on the ecology and long term trends. Are the studies by independent 3rd party research facilities?
I don't know where to begin my critique of this video. How about at 10:27, where the paper "Cytotoxicity on human cells of Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac Bt insecticidal toxins alone or with a glyphosate-based herbicide" was referenced? One of the authors of the paper is Gilles-ric Sralini -- of the notorious Sralini affair, and author of numerous retracted papers.
Retracted by the publishers under pressure from the GMO companies? Glyphosate based products are becoming increasingly scrutinized as being behind some pernicious effects on the overall ecology. Would you drink it?
Or what about at 12:14, "Toxic pesticides from GM food crops found in unborn babies." The original study is "Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada." It's an error-laden paper, and has been critiqued rather extensively. See here: If you record noise, you don't get music - you get nonsense. - Biology Fortified Inc.
Same comment as above.
IF these products are so gosh-darn safe, then why is there any resistance to GMO labeling of products -- shouldn't they be PROUD of their usage?
GMOs, genetically engineered crops: Oregon State University scientist Steve Strauss explains how they work -- science Q&A (links, video) - oregonlive.com
This strikes me as insufficient reason to make wholesale changes. Argument from authority rather than facts.
OPB
This strikes me as more balanced
quote:
But labeling advocates say that GE crops haven’t been around long enough for scientists to know about long-term health effects. They first appeared on a commercial scale in the mid-1990s.
They’re increasing the toxic load in the food chain for us, said seed farmer Morton.
That’s an accurate statement, considering that most of the commercially grown GE crops are farmed because they are either herbicide-resistant, produce natural pesticides to kill insects or do both. GE crops have allowed farmers to use more herbicides by volume, and those chemicals can appear in food.
The studies that show GMO foods have less nutrient value in them are also a concern -- if there is no benefit to the dietary value then what good are they? and if they produce food of lower nutritional value then why should anyone bother with them. If the purpose is not to produce better food then why do we need them?
‘Blood test for plants’ boosts crops
quote:
Yoder, who sells his crops at farmers markets in Columbus and Delaware County, only recently started cultivating these acres, situated in a generous valley bordering a small creek, which for years had alternated between corn and beans, along with the usual lineup of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer.
You have to nurse your crops like a baby, every day, or they will start dying out. We couldn’t do what we needed to do. There were dead spots where the chemical residue was, Yoder said.
The soil left behind was poor in nutrients. The soil was not healthy. You have to look at the whole picture.
The Amish Farmers Reinventing Organic Agriculture - The Atlantic
quote:
Kempf is the unlikely founder of Advancing Eco Agriculture, a consulting firm established in 2006 to promote science-intensive organic agriculture. The entrepreneur’s story is almost identical to Zook’s. A series of crop failures on his own farm drove the 8th grade-educated Kempf to school himself in the sciences. For two years, he pored over research in biology, chemistry, and agronomy in pursuit of a way to save his fields. The breakthrough came from the study of plant immune systems which, in healthy plants, produce an array of compounds that are toxic to intruders. The immune response in plants is dependent on well-balanced nutrition, Kempf concluded, in much the same way as our own immune system. Modern agriculture uses fertilizer specifically to increase yields, he added, with little awareness of the nutritional needs of other organic functions. Through plant sap analysis, Kempf has been able to discover deficiencies in important trace minerals which he can then introduce into the soil. With plants able to defend themselves, pesticides can be avoided, allowing the natural predators of pests to flourish.
Zook: Well, there was a big psychological block that I had to get through. I’d see a couple bugs out there and feel like I immediately had to do something about it. But, I learned that if I sit back, things will often take care of themselves. That first summer for instance, we saw a lot of horn worms. Before that, I would have sprayed them right away, but this time I waited and a bunch of wasps came along and killed them. Once I saw that, I started getting really excited.
Morin: So, when you use a pesticide you’re killing the predators too, right?
Zook: Right. You’re killing the entire ecosystem.
Morin: Have all of your problems disappeared?
Zook: I wish I could say that, but not entirely. We’re not living in the Garden of Eden yet. The issues I had before have disappeared, but we still have some other issues that we’re working on. One of the main things that has improved is how it feels to farm. Before, if I applied fungicide on my tomatoes, I had to wait three to seven days before I could reenter the area. Now, it’s so nice to just walk in my field any day of the week and not worry a bit. That in itself is huge. The other thing is, when I used to mix these skull-and-cross-bones chemicals to put in my sprayer, I’d have to be suited up. The children would be around and I’d say, Now, get in the house. It’s not safe. Now though, if the children want to help, it’s fine. If I want to mix the solutions better, I’ll just put my hand in a stir it around.
Curiously I note how this ties in to discussion on whole biom approach in the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) thread.
Might get to more of this video later.
Please do, but also consider providing information on the actual overall benefits.
Indian Farmers Growing Record Yields With No GMO Crops or Pesticides
quote:
Indian Farmers Growing Record Yields With No GMO Crops or Pesticides
Contrary to claims by Monsanto and government conspirators, we can indeed meet the world’s hunger without the use of genetically modified seed and manufactured chemicals. Bumper crops of rice, potatoes, and wheat are being grown in India using methods of Agroecology.
Agroecology is a dynamic agricultural approach that uses scientific information and local knowledge to produce practical methods that are low-cost and ecologically sound. This is quite a contrast to the one size fits all approach of GMO crops and chemical inputs being peddled by Monsanto and friends.
A particular kind of agroecology called System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is being applied in India to produce the record-setting yields.
SRI is basically a change in the management of plants, soil, water and nutrients for irrigated rice. Seedlings are planted at a younger stage and spaced farther apart to encourage greater root and canopy growth and to increase yield per plant. These principles have more recently been applied to other crops like wheat, sugar cane, and millet, where it is known as System of Crop Intensification (SCI).
So we have multiple sources saying that better results are obtained through non-GMO crops.
The GMO program on the other hand seems to try to make the ecosystem sterile for all living organisms other than the crop, and it does this by increasing the toxic load both in the plants and in the chemicals sprayed on the plants. While sprayed on pesticides and fungicides can (in theory) be washed off, the ones planted into the crops remain to travel through our digestive system -- where we depend on a jungle of organisms to pre-digest our food.
The correlation of intestinal digestive problems and diseases and food allergies and GMO foods done by taking people with problems off GMO products and observing improvements.
Especially in one case in S. Africa where farm workers ate GMO corn and had numerous health problems, were taken off the GMO corn and fed non-GMO corn, and the problems went away, then were taken off the non-GMO corn and fed GMO corn, and the problems re-occurred, and then were again taken off the GMO corn to non-GMO corn and again improved. The only variable is whether the corn is (toxic loaded) GMO or non-GMO.
Animals given a choice will eat non-GMO seeds/corn/etc over GMO versions sitting side by side.
If farmers need to use hazmat suits to tend their crops, how does it become magically safe to consume once it hits the market shelf?
Increased toxic load
Reduction in nutritional value
Lower crop yields
Destruction of the ecosystem
Possible digestive ailments and allergies
What's the benefit?
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Genomicus, posted 10-28-2014 2:39 PM Genomicus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by NoNukes, posted 10-29-2014 12:01 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 18 by Taq, posted 10-29-2014 6:26 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 20 by Genomicus, posted 10-29-2014 7:50 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 13 of 115 (739934)
10-29-2014 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by NoNukes
10-29-2014 12:01 PM


... Some "GMO" stuff has only the most tenuous relationship to the GMO process as make segregation meaningless. Is there really any difference at all between sugar from sugar beets and sugar from sugar cane? Yet labeling would require the makers of Super Sugar Crisp cereal to track sources of sugar, segregate them and to make sure that kettles used to prepare non-GMO food never used sugar beet sugar despite the fact that sucrose is sucrose.
And yet it can be done and is being done for products containing peanuts and other allergens with labels that say "may contain peanuts or peanut products" so the infrastructure is already there in that regard.
Not that long ago this was not an issue, so I don't see this as a major issue.
Whether their reasons are legitimate or not, some want to avoid GMO products. Manufacturer's want to avoid being labeled as icky for reasons that are not scientific.
Again, the same process came into the market place to identify organic products as would apply to non-GMO, and we are seeing products getting certified to be GMO free. So whether they want it or not they can either identify products with GMO or have all products not labeled non-GMO regarded as including GMO.
So stalling about labeling is just taken as evidence that they are hiding the effects of products that have questionable value compared to non-GMO foods.
It's the way the tobacco industry behaved, where it took years to get to the truth.
The resistance to label does have some legitimate explanations.
So said the tobacco industry. It took the Surgeon General of the US to get labels about health effects on cigarettes.
People should be able to know what they are eating.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by NoNukes, posted 10-29-2014 12:01 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by NoNukes, posted 10-29-2014 10:36 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 31 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 10-31-2014 12:58 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 14 of 115 (739935)
10-29-2014 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by New Cat's Eye
10-29-2014 12:55 PM


there will be labeling
Then what kind of access are people going to have to the non-GMO stuff?
Curiously I can go to my local market a block away and buy products that are labeled either organic or GMO-free. I can also buy cereal that lists cane sugar in their ingredients. Having the information in the labels is not even a minor problem imho.
There will be labeling. The question is whether the GMO industry will be willing to provide the information or whether all products not certified non-GMO will be lumped in with them regardless of their content.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2014 12:55 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2014 5:55 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 115 (739938)
10-29-2014 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by New Cat's Eye
10-29-2014 5:55 PM


Re: there will be labeling
You have to have the segregation infrastructure in place first. So who is going to pay for it?
Those same objections were raise not that long ago about the labeling of organic food versus non-organic food.
That infrastructure is available and in place now for organic foods.
Curiously people are willing to pay more for foods labeled organic.
The same will apply to certified non-GMO.
You can also get an ap for your phone (fooducate) that identifies food that is GMO free and "likely to contain GMO"
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2014 5:55 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-29-2014 7:40 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 41 of 115 (740601)
11-06-2014 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
11-03-2014 2:27 PM


general reply not just to Tempe 12ft Chicken
Big ag outspent advocates of GMA labelling 20:1 in the election
Site Not Configured | 404 Not Found
quote:
The claim: Labeling GMOs would increase food costs.
The counter:
A new report by the Consumers Union found that labeling GMOs would cost each consumer just $2.30 annually. [Mainstream] manufacturers in the United States are spending millions of dollars not to label GMO-containing products, says Steven Hoffman. These manufacturers are labeling the very same products for foreign markets that require labeling. In these markets, prices have not been raised.
Manufacturers alter and redesign their labels all the timethe only reason a GMO labeling bill would raise prices is if these manufacturers reformulated to non-GMO supply, Hoffman continues.
As for creating separate storage and packaging lines, There are farmers that separate GMO and non-GMO ingredients now, says Steven. The opposing side is making a very big deal about the cost of doing business because they really have nothing else to reach for.
The claim: There are existing GMO labeling systems (such as USDA Organic and Non-GMO Project Verified)
The counter:
Most people in America don’t realize that 80 percent of grocery products contain GMOs, says Hoffman. Consumers get to know calorie content, fat content and salt content. But a fundamental way that affects the very genetics of food production we don’t get to know about?
Additionally, the opposing side argues that labeling would only confuse consumers. But we think the American consumer is smarter, says Hoffman. And parents across America that don’t know about Non-GMO Project Verified and USDA Organic should have the right to know [about GMOs] when they’re buying baby formula.
Each shopper is entitled to transparencyregardless of his or her involvement in the natural products industry.
So I fail to see any concrete valid reason to oppose labeling.
http://earthweareone.com/...at-gmos-are-terrible-infographic
What disturbs me is the transfer into gut bacteria causing digestive problems:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dlt2sv0VNI
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dlt2sv0VNI
People with significant digestive problems put on non-GMO diets clear up or improve within weeks.
We are NOT a lab experiment for how much can be tolerated so that big corporations can make more profits without significant benefit to the consumer. This is like the pill industry trying new drugs with minimal (pro-industry) testing.
All I need to do is google\bing gmo digestive issues to get 3,780,000 result
gmo digestive issues - Search
Top pick:
Could GMOs Be Behind Your Digestive Problems? | GreenMedInfo | Blog
quote:
Could GMOs Be Behind Your Digestive Problems?
Meanwhile, the 20-year unofficial experiment here in America on many unsuspecting consumers has not yielded a sizeable number of provable studies as to the definitive health impact caused by GMOs in our food supply. And make no mistake, they're in our food supply. Genetically modified organisms are in an estimated 80% of the processed foods in our grocery stores, and some say they're responsible for the growing number of people suffering from a wide variety of symptoms, particularly digestive issues.
Take the alleged possibility of a connection between GMO foods and intestinal hyperpermeability, or leaky gut syndrome, for example. Leaky gut syndrome results when tight junctions, which help to maintain a barrier in the gut, are altered or damaged, and unwanted toxins, microbes, undigested food or even waste pass into the bloodstream. These out-of-place substances trigger an immune reaction. It is a somewhat new and only partially understood phenomenon, but it appears to be presenting more frequently. A host of issues could be to blame for it (including any of the many suboptimal foods that are common in the SAD, Standard American Diet), but the fact that the condition has been on the rise since GMOs were introduced into our food supply is suspect.
Test yourself to see if your symptoms improve
If you're one of the growing number of people suffering from leaky gut syndrome, digestive disorders, chronic inflammation, or even general malaise, consider doing your own experiment. For three months, make it a point to eat only organic, non-GMO food and see if at the end of that time your health issues improve. Many people find their symptoms disappear after only a few weeks.
At the North Florida Spine and Wellness Institute here in Tallahassee, Florida, Dr. David Hartz, DC, has seen an increasing number of patients with widespread symptoms ranging from Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) to Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue, allergies and Autism, among others.
"One of the many toxins we find that are negatively impacting people's health are Genetically Modified Organisms", says Dr. Hartz. "Many people have no idea how GMOs negatively affect their health until they remove those foods from their diet and until they deal with the toxins accumulated in the body--in tissues, organs, cellular and intracellular levels--and positive changes begin to occur."
Read More:
American Academy of Environmental Medicine:
Position Paper on Genetically Modified Organisms
Institute for Responsible Technology:
10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs
North Florida Spine and Wellness Institute, Tallahassee, Florida:
Tallahassee Chiropractic and Designed Clinical Nutrition
http://www.optimumhealthnaturally.net
As the video in Message 1 pointed out there are a host of diseases, mostly in the digestive tract, that have been on the rise during the period that GMOs have been on the rise.
Now we also have increased chemical load (preservatives, food color, other additives) during the same period, but removing these from the diets of afflicted people does not produce the same dramatic improvement results that removing GMOs have produced.
American Academy of Environmental Medicine:
Position Paper on Genetically Modified Organisms
quote:
... safety assessment of GM foods has been based on the idea of "substantial equivalence" such that "if a new food is found to be substantially equivalent in composition and nutritional characteristics to an existing food, it can be regarded as safe as the conventional food."4 However, several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.
There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation as defined by Hill's Criteria in the areas of strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility.5 The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.2,6,7,8,9,10,11
Specificity of the association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation. 6,11 Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). 7,8,10 Changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen have also been documented. 6,8,10 A recent 2008 study links GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn.8 This study also found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signaling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth9 and disruption of the intestinal immune system.6
Regarding biological gradient, one study, done by Kroghsbo, et al., has shown that rats fed transgenic Bt rice trended to a dose related response for Bt specific IgA. 11
Also, because of the mounting data, it is biologically plausible for Genetically Modified Foods to cause adverse health effects in humans.
Now this kind of effect may not be that much of a concern to you, however I have a challenged immune system due to my lymphoma and the treatments I have had for that (currently in remission) and I initially made a diet change to remove all sugars, gluten and starches from my diet as much as possible, and I have now added GMOs to the list of foods to avoid -- because I do not need to help the cancer kill or weaken me. Since dumping GMOs I have enjoyed the longest period of remission to date, and I see no reason to change back.
There is an ap for smartphones (Fooducate) that allows you to check food products for a number of factors, including GMO content.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-03-2014 2:27 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-06-2014 12:31 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 50 by herebedragons, posted 11-06-2014 2:02 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 42 of 115 (740603)
11-06-2014 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Taq
10-29-2014 6:20 PM


The day we started selectively breeding cultivars they became GMO's. I don't see why we should draw an arbitrary line between selective breeding of new naturally occurring variants and directly manipulated genomes.
This is the standard line from the GMO companies ... but it is not correct: WE did not modify those organisms, we only selected the mutations that produce better crops for our particular taste\use. The goal was improved food value.
Genetic modification is defined by injecting or shooting bits of DNA to actively cause mutations with the hope that one will be "useful" (while additional effects are ignored).
Most of them have centered on making the crops toxic to pests or resistant to herbicides (which the GMO companies also make, so more could be used on unintended plant growth - weeds). This affects the ecosystem of the farmland in ways that are not good.
Very little is done to improve the food value, it is only "useful" to corporate profits.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Taq, posted 10-29-2014 6:20 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-06-2014 2:12 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 43 of 115 (740606)
11-06-2014 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
10-31-2014 1:11 AM


Re: Not all GMOs are alike -- some include poisons inside the food
There has been an increase in the amount of herbicide used, but along with this there is a reduction of the insecticides used in the growing process. Overall, pesticide use is down ...
Because the toxins are built into the crop rather than sprayed on (where they can be washed off). Because they are internal they cannot be washed off, and you are stuck with consuming them ... or not eating that product.
Curiously, I choose the latter course as better for my health and welfare.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 10-31-2014 1:11 AM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-06-2014 1:53 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 44 of 115 (740609)
11-06-2014 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Taq
10-30-2014 6:38 PM


Re: Not all GMOs are alike
Since you don't incorporate the genes of your food into your genome, I don't need to worry about becoming resistant to Roundup.
Yay, I can kill all the bacteria in my gut that breaks down food so it can be digested (as happens in all animals ... ) ... but I don't need to worry because it won't affect my spermies.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Taq, posted 10-30-2014 6:38 PM Taq has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 57 of 115 (740676)
11-06-2014 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
11-06-2014 1:53 PM


Re: Not all GMOs are alike -- some include poisons inside the food
And I did not even list all of them from that page, much less the total number of scientific bodies that support the introduction of GM crops. I think I will throw my trust in these guys rather than a Yogic flyer with his job history in swing dance instruction and who also peddles his own all natural products.
Nice ad hominem argument ...
Show me how taking people off GMO food makes their digestive dysfunction clear up is not caused to removing GMOs from the diet and you might have an argument. Good luck with that.
When the only variable is GMO corn or non-GMO corn, for example, I have a problem with studies claiming there is no cause for concern.
That's the bottom line for me: clear direct line evidence of harm, solved by switching from GMO to non-GMO.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-06-2014 1:53 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-06-2014 4:20 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 63 by Taq, posted 11-06-2014 6:56 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 69 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-07-2014 12:43 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 59 of 115 (740682)
11-06-2014 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by New Cat's Eye
11-06-2014 4:20 PM


Re: Not all GMOs are alike -- some include poisons inside the food
Show me how taking people off GMO food makes their digestive dysfunction clear up is not caused to removing GMOs from the diet and you might have an argument. Good luck with that.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
People eating GMO corn have digestive problems.
They change to non-GMO corn the problems go away.
They return to GMO corn and have digestive problems return.
They go off and they go away.
Curiously I call that a clean direct line of causation with only one variable -- or are you saying that the information is lies?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-06-2014 4:20 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Genomicus, posted 11-06-2014 5:21 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 62 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-06-2014 5:52 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 68 by Theodoric, posted 11-07-2014 10:19 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 61 of 115 (740685)
11-06-2014 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by herebedragons
11-06-2014 2:02 PM


more of same
Personally, my major concern with GMO foods is the relatively few companies who will soon have a virtual monopoly on our food supplies. The power and influence these companies have in Washington is tremendous to say the least. They are every bit as powerful and influential as Big Pharm. That simply makes me uncomfortable.
And I grew up with the Tobacco industry publishing all kinds of studies showing that their product was safe -- they were the big bad corporations before BigPharm and now BigAg.
Call me unreasonably skeptical if you must, but I see the same pattern being acted out here with GMOs.
So for Round-Up Ready crops, is it the fact that they have been genetically modified that is the problem or is it the fact that they retain glyposhate in the plant tissue that is the problem. ...
Both. The increase in herbicide load is as bad - imho - as the built in pesticide. We did not evolve to eat chemicals.
Personally I find there is a lot more flavor in non-GMO products so they are worth extra cost in my book on that count alone. This also includes non-GMO fed poultry etc.
As far as GMOs transferring DNA to gut bacteria and that somehow happens differently than it would happen with other organisms (bacteria are already known to have the ability to take up bits of free DNA), I would be curious as to what this mechanism is. How does a genetically modified organism enhance or facilitate horizontal transfer?
Not quite what I was saying: the toxins kill the gut bacteria in the pest bugs and cause their guts to become leaky. These are the same intestinal problems that some people have complained about, and which are resolved by going to non-GMO diets.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by herebedragons, posted 11-06-2014 2:02 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 11-06-2014 7:00 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 66 by herebedragons, posted 11-06-2014 9:54 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 70 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 11-07-2014 12:45 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 76 of 115 (740963)
11-08-2014 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by herebedragons
11-06-2014 9:54 PM


risk
I don't think it is necessarily unreasonable to be skeptical. But rather than taking the position that genetically modified food is bad as a whole, address the events themselves; each genetic modification is a unique event and needs to be considered on its own.
Agreed. The ones that concern me in food are those that include toxins or that allow higher doses of toxins to be used during crop growth. They also concern me from a biological perspective as they are causing more virtually sterile areas for all other organisms. The effects on bees and butterflies, etc.
Personally I find there is a lot more flavor in non-GMO products so they are worth extra cost in my book on that count alone. This also includes non-GMO fed poultry etc.
I would be willing to bet that this "more flavor" is related to processing rather then the use of GMO products. So much of our food is highly processed. Food producers that make the effort to use non-GMO products probably take more care in processing.
Yet I don't eat highly processed foods. Way too many additives imho. The ingredients list in my peanut butter is "organic peanuts" and nothing else. Yogurt is organic from non-GMO fed cattle.
We just changed to Empire Kosher Chicken because it is all natural, organic, free-roaming, antibiotic free and 100% vegetarian fed poultry, with no growth hormones added:
quote:
Empire Kosher produces the best tasting and highest quality truly natural, socially responsible, and strictly kosher poultry products for a diverse range of customer needs and preferences. Empire Kosher chicken and turkey are not only for those who keep kosher for religious reasons; Empire Kosher is the best option for any consumer who wishes to eat healthy and safely, buy responsibly, promote worker and animal rights, protect the environment, and support local farmers and their communities.
This is the way real chicken tastes -- not the water-added, GMO fed, cage grown factory chickens you get in the normal supermarket shelves. We happily pay the slightly higher cost because the taste is so much better, it's like a different kind of bird.
Anti-GMO propaganda has a lot in common with climate change deniers - bad science, exaggerated claims, and scare tactics.
or vaccinations or Teabag Politics ....
My mom (PhD psychiatrist) joked that just because you are paranoid doesn't mean you are not being followed.
To me the issue is risk, and it seems to me that there is lower risk with non-GMO foods. There is lower risk in getting vaccinations imho, and lower risk in doing things to deal with climate change. Other people are free to make other assessments ... IF they have the information on what's in the food.
Here's what Jerry Greenfield had to say about the cost of labeling:
quote:
Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder on Knowing Your GMOs: Changing a Label Costs "Essentially Nothing"
Jerry Greenfield, co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, discusses the company’s campaign for a successful genetically modified food labeling measure in its home state of Vermont, as well as one in Oregon where it renamed one of its ice cream flavors as "Food Fight Fudge Brownie" that ultimately failed to pass on Tuesday. "We are really proud of the ingredients we use," Greenfield says. "It is just so hard to imagine that other food companies wouldn’t want to tell consumers what is in their food." Ben & Jerry’s plans to complete its transition to all non-GMO ingredients by the end of the year. "That transition to all non-GMO ingredients is not going to raise the cost of a pint at all to a consumer. So it can be done." ...
Note that is not just the cost of labeling but the cost of conversion to non-GMO ingredients.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by herebedragons, posted 11-06-2014 9:54 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by herebedragons, posted 11-09-2014 10:48 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024