"but, but, derp, they sued some farmers. Therefore, using some form of illogic, the conclusion is that GMO foods are evil."
/counterargument from facts.
If GMO is so good youd think they would want to label every product with it.
Oatmeal - "NOW MADE FROM 100% GMO FOOD STUFFS"
You mean except for the fact that the whole point is there is no difference to the end consumer between GMO and non-GMO food.
GMO is all about increasing yields etc.
The slogan would be "GMO, just as good as "regular" food", which is not exactly a very good advertising slogan.
Either way we as a consumer have a right to know and choose. Choice is good.
So basically you just hate Monsanto, and it has nothing to do with food safety.
I recommend you purchasing 100% Organic foods that will be free of Monsanto. But every food corporation should not be required to track the monsanto content of their food to appease irrational people like you.
Like I said genetics is not a well understood science, long term trends and effects are not available, yet you don't want to allow people the freedom to know what they are eating.
That's a blanket hogwash statement. Well-understood in what way? Genetics is a huge area of research, some parts better understood than others. Regardless, that statement says nothing to give any reason that consumers need to fear for their health and safety with GMO food.
That's a blanket hogwash statement. Well-understood in what way? Genetics is a huge area of research, some parts better understood than others. Regardless, that statement says nothing to give any reason that consumers need to fear for their health and safety with GMO food.
Nope it's about giving consumers the right to choose what they consume.
Why do you want to remove choice from the consumer in knowing what they eat?
<trap>
I want to choose to only eat food that was picked by a female, not food that was picked by males. I think my food should be labeled so I can be given that choice. If I want to avoid crops that were picked by males, do you think I should not be given the choice?
</trap>
You have no answer. Because if you say, "yes", you look like a moron. If you say "no, that's stupid, because it doesn't matter whether a male or female picked the food" - that EXACTLY the point everyone else has been making about GMO food - IT DOESN'T MATTER.
Like I said genetics is not a well understood science, long term trends and effects are not available, yet you don't want to allow people the freedom to know what they are eating.
And you don't want to do that because you feel protecting corporate profit supersedes an individuals right to make a choice.
And while some areas of genetics may be well understood, long term consumption of various gmo foods is not one of them.
Since I'm seeing tons of circular arguments I'm going to bring up a point only slightly mentioned. People say GMO foods are bred for increased yield. To which I say only sometimes. Many of the crops have similar yields to old crops but it adds something like herbicide or pesticide resistance. In one case roundup ready soybean Monsanto sells you the seed and the herbicide roundup. Saying that crop has increased yields due to less weed competition seems on its face disingenuous. What I see is a company using GMO to maximize profit.
I know I'll get attacked for posting that but it doesn't take a genius to connect the dots. Its all about profit. They are a corporation and that's what matters to then at the end of the day. Money.
And trust me when I say roundup is far more environmentally destruction than pretty much any organic way of farming. I've had personal experience as a nurse with the health effects of roundup on a human being and let's just say its not pretty. It is why I don't use the stuff.
Why would you even think that consumption of various GMO foods would have more long term consequences than new hybrid foods?
And why aren't people fight for special labels for new hybrid foods?
Profit.
Gee, I thought the motivation of farming was to breath in all the dust. Or, the motivation of farming was long hours of toil. Or the motivation of farming was because you like seeing fields that are a uniform color. Profit. Hmmm, I never thought that farmers would want that.
Because its possible to introduce genetic material that would not occur from cross breeding species.
It's also does not account at all for long term consequences of introducing genetically modified species into the wild.
And then fight tooth and nail to ensure consumers can't distinguish their products from other products.
We are all still waiting for you to show their is a real distinction between their products and other products from the perspective of the food consumer.
And this is inherently more dangerous why?
I don't know if it's more dangerous, I do know the long term effects are not well understood.
And this has what to do with the consequences of humans consuming GMO plants?
None but this topic isn't solely about that. As many have stated there are other issues with companies like Monsanto outside of the end product.
Let's call this what it is.
You think labeling unfairly portrays a GMO food, affecting adoption and profits.
I think people knowing what they are eating is more important, especially in light of other business practices Monsanto and other GMO producers have engaged in.
We are all still waiting for you to show their is a real distinction between their products and other products from the perspective of the food consumer.
So labeling it GMO is all about hating Monsanto.
Yeah that sounds completely rational
I think GMO food is beneficial to society and will be more beneficial in the future.
Adding labels to food in an attempt to irrationally retard adoption of GMO is detrimental to society.
As I am not a shareholder in Monsanto I am not concerned for their profits.
And you have not shown a single shred of evidence to suggest people should care if food is GMO or not.
I don't mind engaging you in your circular discussions on occasion.
Until you put words in my mouth despite me stating to the contrary I do not hate Monsanto. So now your being a twit and we can't have any real discussion about it.
I think you could label food by which corps create it, that would let me know who I wanted to support with my money.
So don't label it GMO, just label it Monsanto.
No hatred but I don't like their business practices and would prefer not to support them by buying their products.
None but this topic isn't solely about that. As many have stated there are other issues with companies like Monsanto outside of the end product.