except chihuahuas, poodles, and dachsunds still contain only canine DNA. A better example would be mules, pluots, and tangeloes but still not quite accurate. The craze of GMO's isn't in using DNA that the species already has, it's in injecting new DNA, when the consequences aren't or possibly can't be fully known.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
Because there are absolutely no scientifically valid studies showing GMO foods to be linked to any increased health risk whatsoever. Only large quantities of reactionary FUD being spread by people who can't think logically.
ZV
ZV
lozina
Lifer
- Sep 10, 2001
- 11,711
- 8
- 81
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,122
- 1,594
- 126
I'm sorry but what makes ANYONE think that labeling GM foods in Europe has ANYTHING to do with offering choices or public health? It is politically motivated economics pure and simple.
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
So because the FDA says corn that's been soaked in RoundUp chemicals is "safe", I should eat it? Aside from the fact that many FDA officials used to work for Monsanto (company of GM RoundUp Ready crops)? Do you really believe the FDA is looking out for your best interests?
But back on topic, this about having a choice, which we currently do not have. I don't care if you like to eat crops that have been drowned in chemicals or not, you shouldn't be forced to eat this stuff. W/out labels, we don't have a choice which is the whole point of this topic.
Peters said the FDA applies a double standard because it allows companies to use terms, such as "fat-free" and "cholesterol- free," but not "GMOfree." "We not only have no mandatory labeling, the FDA has put barriers in the way of voluntary labeling. As a result, we have mandatory purchasing of GM foods," he said.
McGarity said the FDA's policy favoring voluntary labels on GM foods is inconsistent with its mandatory labeling requirement on irradiated foods.
Text
daniel1113
Diamond Member
- Jun 6, 2003
- 6,448
- 0
- 0
If you truly believe that statement, I feel sorry for you, as I find it hard to believe that you can trust anyone. What a terrible way to live.
Sure you do. Start growing your own crops. Problem solved.
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
In general, GMO food is much much cheaper to produce than organic. Even with the GMO backlash in Europe, it should still be much cheaper unless the EU has placed a huge tariff on GMO seeds. But yeah, there probably is a smaller selection for GMO food there, since the farmers know they won't make money off it (due to low demand).
So is your issue with GM foods, pesticides, or both?
I personally don't care if they label them or not, so I have no problems with people wanting them labeled as such myself. I'll still buy GM and non-GM foods either way.
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,402
- 8,574
- 126
all food is genetically modified. none of it resembles whatsoever that which was originally cultivated by humans millenia ago.
edit: if you really want to avoid bogeyman food, i believe FDA organic is not 'gmo' whatever that term means. of course, it also isn't irradiated to kill bacteria because the enviro-nuts think that the radiation stays on the food.
edit: if you really want to avoid bogeyman food, i believe FDA organic is not 'gmo' whatever that term means. of course, it also isn't irradiated to kill bacteria because the enviro-nuts think that the radiation stays on the food.
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
More GM, because you're altering DNA which then goes into the human body. Although completely killing every living plant cell in a field with RoundUp, except for a GM resistant seed is not something I want to eat. So excessive levels of pesticide use is also of concern to me.
it's not the DNA that will harm you, it's the possible proteins or protein by products from the DNA that could harm you.
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
Yep, in a nutshell. As a result, there are several types of potential health effects that could result from the insertion of a novel gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety assessors are production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition, and antibiotic resistance (Bernstein et al., 2003).
Text
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
OP, I think this pretty much sums it up. It's like organics - we don't need to label all non-"organic" foods as such, because if it WAS organic it would be labeled to take advantage of people who are willing to pay a premium for organics. I have no doubt that the cheez-its on my desk are not made with organic cheese.
Same goes for GM foods. If the label doesn't say it's NOT GM then it probably is.
So if you're that concerned, only buy labeled non-GM foods.
And I'll enjoy my pizza with a side of Round Up.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 20
- 81
I have seen that theory that part of the reason that there are so many food allergies so recently is that it may be due to odd compounds in genetically modified foods. If only a small portion of the population is affected, then a potentially toxic substance may still be passed as being totally safe, and thus not warrant any kind of labelling, or at least enough to get the politicians in a huff about it. It has happened before, a number of times, where a "safe" product is widely used before it is discovered that it can be either unhealthy, or outright dangerous. Of note is of course DDT, but on a lesser scale, the new flack over multipurpose contact lens solutions possibly allowing for the growth of fungus.
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Yeah, most likely if it's soy or corn based. Rice, however is still safe. Sucks but there isn't a trader joes or whole foods around.
Surely you have farmer's markets near you? Many of the farmers have similar philosophies and agricultural practices of the certified products that you'd find in Whole Foods, etc. for a lot cheaper; plus, you're supporting someone local.
It's not just about provable health effects on the consumer. I prefer organic foods and non-GMO foods because I know that the production of these products has fewer detrimental effects on complex natural systems. These systems support all of us, and they are deteriorating as a result of large-scale monocultures. GMO is a method for agribusiness to reduce the deleterious effects that are endemic to this type of farming, as are most synthetic pesticides and fertilizers.
I buy local/organic/non-GMO when possible because I beleive it is the right thing to do. Not because I am concerned about growing breasts from eating it (that's a job for the plastics industry).
I buy local/organic/non-GMO when possible because I beleive it is the right thing to do. Not because I am concerned about growing breasts from eating it (that's a job for the plastics industry).
For the most part.
GM food is tested and retested before being sent to the market, but there is a chance although slight that some GM foods will be altered in a way makes the food bad for you.
"Organic" food is there because it uses less artificial pesticides and it tends to taste better.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter