|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
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: |
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 HFCSsugar 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) Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Is there a specific definition of GMO food? Or, perhaps a specific method of GMO that is associated with the tainted foot? quote: 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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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: 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: 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: 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: 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 loadReduction in nutritional value Lower crop yields Destruction of the ecosystem Possible digestive ailments and allergies What's the benefit? Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : clrtyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
... 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, : clrtyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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, : clrtyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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" Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Big ag outspent advocates of GMA labelling 20:1 in the election
Site Not Configured | 404 Not Found
quote: 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: 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: 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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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.by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
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: 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: Note that is not just the cost of labeling but the cost of conversion to non-GMO ingredients. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆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)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024