GMO labels? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

GMO labels?


Yes to labels, no to ban.
  54% (13)
Yes to labels, yes to ban.
  41% (10)
No to labels, no to ban.
  4% (1)


Total Votes : 24
(last vote on : 7/27/2012 11:51:08 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message

MrBukani -> GMO labels? (7/19/2012 2:38:30 AM)

Do you want labels for Genetic Modified Organisms?

And should GMO's be banned cause of the dangers?

California will vote soon on this.

What do you think of GMO's?




Moonhead -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 4:44:51 AM)

I'm pretty firmly opposed. There's a slight problem with the poll, though, as labelling is often unclear, or in some cases, actively concealed on the packaging. Also hasn't there been bleating about waivers for food packagers who mix GM foodstuff with organic (or at least less science fictional) produce in the same processed foods?



DesideriScuri -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 4:55:35 AM)

Watch "Food, Inc." 90% of all soybeans in the US are GMO (Monsanto's RoundUp Resistant Gene). If your neighbors have GMO crops and you have non-GMO crops from the same family, how are you going to ensure that your non-GMO plant wasn't pollinated from GMO plant?

Can any seed honestly be considered "non-GMO?" In a certain light, Man has been modifying the genomes of plantings for pretty much ever. Pollinate a rose bush with pollen from a different rose bush (in a controlled environment), and you now have a GMO rose bush.




Moonhead -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 5:18:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Watch "Food, Inc." 90% of all soybeans in the US are GMO (Monsanto's RoundUp Resistant Gene). If your neighbors have GMO crops and you have non-GMO crops from the same family, how are you going to ensure that your non-GMO plant wasn't pollinated from GMO plant?

You can't. That was why there was such objection to the first commerical usage of GM crops in the wild thirty years ago. Do try to pay attention.

quote:

Can any seed honestly be considered "non-GMO?" In a certain light, Man has been modifying the genomes of plantings for pretty much ever. Pollinate a rose bush with pollen from a different rose bush (in a controlled environment), and you now have a GMO rose bush.

No, you have a cross pollinated rose bush. That isn't a GMO because it was done through selective breeding, which is a rather different state of affairs. For a start, you can do that with a brush yourself, rather than needing a clean room and an electron microscope. It's a bit depressing that you need it pointing out that you've just made an equivalency of almost mind numbing falsity.



MrBukani -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 7:15:59 AM)

Crossbreeding is a natural process that men has done for thousands of years. Thats how we got our wheats , corn and rice today. GMO's mean they insert genes from organisms that cannot cross in nature. Like they have put salmon genes in tomatoes. BT cotton and corn is inserted with Bacillus thuringiensis genes. This is unnatural with all the dangers that come with fuckin with the natural order of things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacillus_thuringiensis

I understand it's not a perfect poll moonhead, the world is like me not perfect....[:D]
Nature on the other hand is perfect and I don't like to mess with perfection.





DomKen -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 8:46:40 AM)

The lack of knowledge expressed in this thread is stunning.

First off Wheat and corn, Do you know why their are no wild wheat or corn? Because they were both created by man inserting the genes of one species of cereal grass into the genome of another distantly related species of cereal grass. By any reasonable definition of GMO all corn and all wheat qualify.

We've all been consuming Bt based insecticide for decades with no significant problems. As a matter of fact Bt derived insecticides are even allowed on organic produce. Inserting the gene(s) that makes the toxin into crop plants simply makes the plant produce something we would otherwise be spraying onto it.

People should become well educated on a subject before believing hype against it.



thompsonx -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 8:55:59 AM)

quote:

If your neighbors have GMO crops and you have non-GMO crops from the same family, how are you going to ensure that your non-GMO plant wasn't pollinated from GMO plant?


That as one of the scams that monsanto was running. Plant "round up ready soybeans" in a field and when the wind blew some into a neighboring field the legal punks from monsanto would sue the farmer for illegally possessing their seed and wind up confiscating his farm.
You do seem to approve of this sort of behaviour?



MrBukani -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 9:29:30 AM)

Crossbreeding is not the same as genetic modification of organisms, DomKen. So you are claiming they have been inserting genes from a worm into wheat and corn for centuries?

Yes you can crossbreed two wheats and come up with a new wheat.
You cant crossbreed a worm with a wheat, can you?
You need modern biotechnology for that, where they can insert any genetic material in foreign non compatible bodies.
I will give a link later so you can see for yourself.

BTW you can read in the post above yours I already said we have been crossbreeding for thousands of years, right?

And another one for your info update. Europe has been fighting against GMO's for a long time. America eats bacillus thuringiensis soy and corn, not me. Hungaria just destroyed all GMO crops. France is the hardliner against GMO contamination...


The Gene Gun.This is a one minute movie explaining how GMO's are made. I don't think they had this technology thousands of years ago. Or maybe aliens gave us wheat and corn. Who knows?



DomKen -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 3:05:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

Crossbreeding is not the same as genetic modification of organisms, DomKen. So you are claiming they have been inserting genes from a worm into wheat and corn for centuries?

Yes you can crossbreed two wheats and come up with a new wheat.

Let me clear this up for you, again.

At one time their was no such thing as wheat. There were two plants, T urartu and some species of the genus Aegilops. We grew both and at some point there was an event where the two crossed. This was only possible in the presence of people. The resulting plant was not able to spread its seeds so it would have died out if not for our intervention. The two plants were not closely related beyond both being in the family ofcereal grasses. This was not crossbreeding where the breeder was looking to preserve some traits from both parents. This was the entire genome of both plants being mergd into what was an entirely new organism.

The same thing occured with corn but the plants involved were even less closely related.

So if man creating the conditions in which genese from 2 unrelated organisms merge into a single new organism is a GMO then all wheat and all corn are GMO's.

Bt based insecticides are very common in Europe. There is no way you have not consumed any. So if you're that clueless on such a basic fact of this subject why should anyone believe anything else you claim?



kalikshama -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 3:58:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

If your neighbors have GMO crops and you have non-GMO crops from the same family, how are you going to ensure that your non-GMO plant wasn't pollinated from GMO plant?


That as one of the scams that monsanto was running. Plant "round up ready soybeans" in a field and when the wind blew some into a neighboring field the legal punks from monsanto would sue the farmer for illegally possessing their seed and wind up confiscating his farm.
You do seem to approve of this sort of behaviour?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeiser

Monsanto said that because they hold a patent on the gene, and on canola cells containing the gene, they have a legal right to control its use, including the replanting of seed collected from plants with the gene which grew accidentally in someone else's field. Schmeiser insisted his right to save and replant seed from plants that have accidentally grown on his field overrides Monsanto's legal patent rights.



MrBukani -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 4:10:09 PM)

So you still have no clue about the difference between crossbreeding and GMO's Ken?
Maybe you're one of the Monsanto clowns.
There are far less BT crops in Europe. And I avoid eating corn and soy. Our wheats are pretty clean.
Why should we believe you?

But it's obvious on whose side you are.
The side of the chemical companies who pollute our foodsupply.
At least I am happy you love eating BT's. Cause in 2 generations your offspring will be sterile and your poisened genepool will vanish from the face of the earth.
Thank you.



DomKen -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 4:41:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

So you still have no clue about the difference between crossbreeding and GMO's Ken?
Maybe you're one of the Monsanto clowns.
There are far less BT crops in Europe. And I avoid eating corn and soy. Our wheats are pretty clean.
Why should we believe you?

But it's obvious on whose side you are.
The side of the chemical companies who pollute our foodsupply.
At least I am happy you love eating BT's. Cause in 2 generations your offspring will be sterile and your poisened genepool will vanish from the face of the earth.
Thank you.

Define GMO in such a way that it does not include all wheat and all corn. You can't.

As to Bt, once more the Bt derived insecticides are pervasive in Europe. No matter what you eat you've eaten some of it.



Musicmystery -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 7:55:02 PM)

For crying out loud, the two of you are arguing semantics, and you both know it.

Yes, cross-breeding is genetic modification. No, that's not what genetically modification means in this instance. You both know that. Knock if the fuck off.

Now, whether introducing genes through means other than cross-breeding is safe, and whether cross-breeding itself proves it's safe (or not), and whether the cat being out into the wild already means nothing can or should be done -- fine, argue away.




DomKen -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 8:12:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

For crying out loud, the two of you are arguing semantics, and you both know it.

Yes, cross-breeding is genetic modification. No, that's not what genetically modification means in this instance. You both know that. Knock if the fuck off.

Now, whether introducing genes through means other than cross-breeding is safe, and whether cross-breeding itself proves it's safe (or not), and whether the cat being out into the wild already means nothing can or should be done -- fine, argue away.



No. I'm pointing out that the GMO panic is stupid and not about anything real.

And hybridization with polyploidism is not crossbreeding in the way that term is usually used.

Should gene spliced organisms be tested for safety and efficacy? Yes, it is an emergent and imperfect science and the testing is stringent enough that very few such organisms have entered commercial use.

Should products that contain those products be labeled if found safe enough for the food stream? No. That implies there is something wrong with these crops when they are far more safety tested than traditional crops.



Iamsemisweet -> RE: GMO labels? (7/19/2012 10:01:10 PM)

Are you kidding? Why is it so hard to understand that cross breeding and hybridizing are not the same as extracting DNA from one organism and inserting it in another? Statements like your rose bush example just make you sound more ignorant than you usually do, DS. Anyone have anything credible to say on the subject?
For the record, I voted yes on labeling, but no on a ban. GMO crops have their uses, but people should have a right to choose. DS's point about cross contamination is correct, though, and this also needs to be addressed.
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


Can any seed honestly be considered "non-GMO?" In a certain light, Man has been modifying the genomes of plantings for pretty much ever. Pollinate a rose bush with pollen from a different rose bush (in a controlled environment), and you now have a GMO rose bush.






MrBukani -> RE: GMO labels? (7/20/2012 1:54:40 AM)

It's easy to put the wool over somebodies eyes. Genetic Modified Organisms is a term planted by the industry not me. When you breed a bastard dog you modify its genetic make up but you do not call it a GMO.
Putting genes from a salmon into a tomatoe or a bacteria like BT in corn is not crossbreeding. Have you ever seen a salmon fuckin a tomatoe? Yes GMO's have uses for the future. But tests and scientists show BT's are dangerous to health. Secondly Monsanto is trying to patent all seeds by buying up companies. Then they push the patented seeds on farmers. If you refuse the next BT crop field will pollinate and they will claim that too. In this way they destroy original strains. India used to have over a thousand varieties of cotton strains. Now they only have one left on a large scale BTcotton. Soon all the original landraces will be gone and Monsanto will have a monopoly on all seeds. That's the plan. Monopolies, besides all healthrisks are communist or fascist,wichever way you wanna look at it. Cause you have no choice anymore. A Monsanto ally is now in charge of your FDA. So the FDA is no longer impartial. But just watch this movie and many other sources online and judge for yourself.


Scientists Under Attack FULL Documentary GMO



DomKen -> RE: GMO labels? (7/20/2012 2:48:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

It's easy to put the wool over somebodies eyes. Genetic Modified Organisms is a term planted by the industry not me. When you breed a bastard dog you modify its genetic make up but you do not call it a GMO.
Putting genes from a salmon into a tomatoe or a bacteria like BT in corn is not crossbreeding. Have you ever seen a salmon fuckin a tomatoe? Yes GMO's have uses for the future. But tests and scientists show BT's are dangerous to health.

You're still not defining GMO. And you just lied when you claimed there were studies showing Bt plants were dangerous to our health.

How about instead of spouting nonsense you actually engge on the subject or simply give up and go away?



MrBukani -> RE: GMO labels? (7/20/2012 3:17:18 AM)

Want the definition? go google.
Want proof of science showing BT is dangerous, watch the documentary.
Spouting nonsense?
What is your interest in protecting Monsanto?
Do you have shares?[:D]
Why do you care so much about definitions. If I would ask you the definition of a liberal, americans would say they are left wing, in europe they are right wing.
The point is most people want to label according to the poll and even ban it.
Do you want corporations patenting seeds?

And to be more clear crossing two different plants is crossbreeding.
putting animal or bacterial genes into plants is GMO. I made that point before. But just like I pointed out first about thousands of years of crossbreeding, you didnt read that. I think.
So what's so good about Bt corn, tell me please?
That weeds and bugs get resistant to them, so we have to spray more chemicals on our food?



Moonhead -> RE: GMO labels? (7/20/2012 3:23:54 AM)

A few cites about the possible long term effects of GM plants.

UK anti GMO site
Obviously American GPs know nothing about genetics and are paranoid luddites
Most of the reason for the apparent lack of studies is that Monsanto weren't keen on having the stuff properly tested in the first place...

Yep. Exactly the same as hybridising two cereals to produce wheat, obviously.



lulubell -> RE: GMO labels? (7/20/2012 5:30:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

The lack of knowledge expressed in this thread is stunning.

First off Wheat and corn, Do you know why their are no wild wheat or corn? Because they were both created by man inserting the genes of one species of cereal grass into the genome of another distantly related species of cereal grass. By any reasonable definition of GMO all corn and all wheat qualify.

We've all been consuming Bt based insecticide for decades with no significant problems. As a matter of fact Bt derived insecticides are even allowed on organic produce. Inserting the gene(s) that makes the toxin into crop plants simply makes the plant produce something we would otherwise be spraying onto it.

People should become well educated on a subject before believing hype against it.



I knew those indians had a real way with corn but I never knew they were genetically engineering it. That is very interesting.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125