GMOs

Moss · 12-07-2014, 07:37 PM

I think with the world population growth, climate issues, and evolving pests, GMO's are going to be somewhat of a necessary evil. If we are careful about it they don't have to be an evil but greed usually wins out in these situations.

DwnWthVwls · 12-07-2014, 07:38 PM

What we can do now and what we could do 30 years ago is different. It's one of those things that's constantly evolving. Based on what you've said we may have an understanding of the effects of long standing GMOs but there is no way to tell what the effects of present and future GMOs can have.

**Frownland** · 12-07-2014, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

What we can do now and what we could do 30 years ago is different. It's one of those things that's constantly evolving. Based on what you've said we may have an understanding of the effects of long standing GMOs but there is no way to tell what the effects of present and future GMOs can have.

There haven't been any long term studies on the causal relationship between iPhones and glaucoma, and even though there are no signs of a relationship in the short term, I'm still skeptical. Boycott iPhones!

William_the_Bloody · 12-07-2014, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

That rat cancer paper has been retracted after it didn't stand up to peer review. As for the cross pollination, it doesn't really affect neighbouring farms. There hasn't been a single case where a farmer has been sued due to cross pollination. Any cross pollination that would occur would be so miniscule that it would be difficult to notice. The case of Schmeiser, the famous intellectual property rights case with Monsanto, was not the product of cross pollinating. 95 percent of his crops had the anti-herbicide gene, which makes cross pollination out of the question as it can affect up to 5% of crops and that's being generous.

This post is sponsored by Monsanto Company.

There are swaths of misinformation about GMOs out there. I live in California so I get to see the worst of the ignorance.

Fair enough, think of me as the uniformed layman whose too busy with his career to research GMO's, but I'm still concerned about their possible link to cancer.

I realize that many environmentalists take their ideology to an almost religious fervor, (Frakenfood ect) but are you stating in a round about way that there are absolutely no peer reviewed scientific tests that link GMO's to cancer?

I mean after all this is the primary argument against them, and if they have been debunked than their is no point in resisting them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

you have the whole wheat gluten debacle

I read recently that sucralose causes lymphonia in rats at extremely high doses.

The way they test GMO's does not adequately reflect the effects of long term consumption. GMO's may not produce any negative effects in clinical trials but I don't know if that necessarily translates to long-term.

We're the same nation that previously thought cigarette smoking, high alcohol consumption and fast food were okay.

That is why I would like to have GMO products labeled in the supermarket. I think this is a reasonable thing to ask, although I imagine the lobbying power to prevent this is immense with all the investment and jobs tied to the GMO industry.

On the other hand, I don't think you can halt a multi million dollar industry that creates thousands of jobs & economic prosperity on a what if...scenario. There has to be concrete scientific evidence to support the claim that GMO's are harmful to our well being. Cell phone studies have at least produced that.

DwnWthVwls · 12-07-2014, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

There haven't been any long term studies on the causal relationship between iPhones and glaucoma, and even though there are no signs of a relationship in the short term, I'm still skeptical. Boycott iPhones!

While I get the point your trying to make that's just a bad argument. Cellphones haven't changed that much. Every GMO is made of something different and as we know from chemistry even the slightest change in chemical composition can have drastically different interactions with the same thing.

**Frownland** · 12-07-2014, 07:53 PM

@william_the_bloody

Yup, that's the only study showing any link. It's the MMR-Autism study equivalent of the anti-GMO movement that it's proponents hold to heart like the bible even though it's been thoroughly debunked. I see the resistance as an ideological one rather than one based on the actual research: many just won't be swayed no matter how many studies there are.

@DWV

It's not like they're coming up with new GMOs every day. Not to mention that this is a biological matter and DNA is consistent across species.

Sparky · 12-07-2014, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

^That last line is hardly an equivalent to the GMO field. Also

A Survey of Long Term GM Food Studies | Smilodon's Retreat

GM crops and the rat digestive tract: a critical review. - PubMed - NCBI
On risk and regulation: Bt crops in India. - PubMed - NCBI

You can still find studies to fulfill any viewpoint.

I dug around some more, and I agree the evidence is way more compelling than I thought previously though; you did open my mind up

Risk, regulation and biotechnology: The case of GM crops. - PubMed - NCBI
A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. - PubMed - NCBI

I eat genetically modified foods all the time, I have a vested interest in them being O.K.

DwnWthVwls · 12-07-2014, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

@DWV

It's not like they're coming up with new GMOs every day. Not to mention that this is a biological matter and DNA is consistent across species.

1) Biology and Chemistry go hand-in-hand.

2) It's not a matter of DNA. DNA is just a small portion of what our bodies and other living things are made of. I'm not arguing against you that current GMOs are safe, but I think you are being as bullheaded as the people insisting they are dangerous by denying the potential negative effects they could produce.

3) Sure not everyday but I'm pretty sure not a day goes by when they aren't enhancing or mid-development of new GMOs. That's kind of how they make their money. They don't develop something and say "Well my work here is done, let's watch the bank account go up".

**Frownland** · 12-07-2014, 08:20 PM

I was mainly referring to gene splicing, which is the most recent development in GMO production. I honestly don't know how often they're coming up with new methods of creating GMOs, but I think they're largely focusing on how to use gene splicing for other uses.

I'm open to new ideas, once there's any evidence of any negative effects of GMOs, I'll begin to be more weary of them. Until then, I see no reason to worry.

DwnWthVwls · 12-07-2014, 08:31 PM

Well I can't comment on the risks of gene splicing. I know nothing about it. I'll take your word for it until I'm motivated enough to do my own research. Good discussion though, I hope some others join in

12-07-2014, 07:53 PM	#16 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	@william_the_bloody Yup, that's the only study showing any link. It's the MMR-Autism study equivalent of the anti-GMO movement that it's proponents hold to heart like the bible even though it's been thoroughly debunked. I see the resistance as an ideological one rather than one based on the actual research: many just won't be swayed no matter how many studies there are. @DWV It's not like they're coming up with new GMOs every day. Not to mention that this is a biological matter and DNA is consistent across species. __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x Last edited by Frownland; 12-07-2014 at 08:11 PM.

12-07-2014, 08:20 PM	#19 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	I was mainly referring to gene splicing, which is the most recent development in GMO production. I honestly don't know how often they're coming up with new methods of creating GMOs, but I think they're largely focusing on how to use gene splicing for other uses. I'm open to new ideas, once there's any evidence of any negative effects of GMOs, I'll begin to be more weary of them. Until then, I see no reason to worry. __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x

12-07-2014, 07:37 PM	#11 (permalink)
Moss Scuttle Buttin' Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boulder Colorado Posts: 972	I think with the world population growth, climate issues, and evolving pests, GMO's are going to be somewhat of a necessary evil. If we are careful about it they don't have to be an evil but greed usually wins out in these situations.