US sues the WTC and the EU over genetically modified food ban

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Guess they would rather starve to death then eat GM food. I say let them.

GM has nothing to do with hunger in present day Africa. You might as well say, "They don't stack rocks in 3 piles, let them starve"

 

[Wag]

Right- we're not talking about Africa specifically, but world hunger. The situation is only going to get worse. There simply isn't enough land available to support the nutritional need of the world's growing population.

Expect to see more diseases like SARS, AIDS, Monkey Pox and other untreatable Plagues ravage 3rd world countries. Scary prospect but evolution will do its work.

 

[Moonbeam]

Guess they would rather starve to death then eat GM food. I say let them.
---------------------------------
Another compassionate God loving Christian conservative speaking out, or just another generalized ass hole?

We are moving quickly to life on the Nebuchadnezzar

Tank: Here you go, buddy. Breakfast of champions.
Mouse: If you close your eyes it almost feels like you're eating runny eggs.
Apoc: Yeah, or a bowl of snot
Mouse: Do you know what it really reminds me of? Tasty Wheat. Did you ever eat Tasty Wheat?
Switch: No, but technically, neither did you.
Mouse: That's exactly my point. Exactly. Because you have to wonder now. How did the machines know what Tasty Wheat tasted like. huh?. Maybe they got it wrong. Maybe what I think Tasty Wheat tasted like actually tasted like oatmeal or tuna fish. That makes you wonder about a lot of things. You take chicken for example, maybe they couldn't figure out what to make chicken taste like, which is why chicken tastes like everything. Maybe couldn't figure out...
Apoc: Shut up, Mouse.
Dozer: It's a single cell protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs.

You are merely a work unit of the company. Food, its source, its taste will all be provided to you by machines. You will be told how your food tastes. You will believe. All the infinite variety of the planet will be swept away and you will be its crop. Welcome to the real world. A world where the wool has been pulled over your eyes. You poor sad bastards are even entertained by your fate.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Wag
Right- we're not talking about Africa specifically, but world hunger. The situation is only going to get worse. There simply isn't enough land available to support the nutritional need of the world's growing population.

Expect to see more diseases like SARS, AIDS, Monkey Pox and other untreatable Plagues ravage 3rd world countries. Scary prospect but evolution will do its work.

yes i did mention asia in my original post, but people cant seem to get past Africa. Suprised at the legs on this one.

Yes the EU ban does contribute to this, a few members have laid out the various reasons. Someone mentioned the cost, why did those offered the seeds for free not accept them? yes, you can increase your yield a decent %, now you have more to sell after you feed yourself, but your product is now not allowed in your only market. What if the genetically modified crop is not a food source but a raw material sold for export to generate revenue for food?


I can show you many instances in which EU trade policies and financial protectionism has led to the suffering of millions worldwide, we just freed 27,000,000 more from it in Iraq.....

a dog will always choose fresh water out of the tap over a bowl that had been drawn from the same tap the day before, still the same water, and a mouse will do every bit of cocaine you give it until it dies, you sure you want to trust their judgement? Maybe there is something natural that is equally as destructive they are lured to in the natural product, perhaps that substance causes cancer in humans but is not found in the GM food...


where is any scientific evidence that GM foods are harmfull to people or the environment?

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
where is any scientific evidence that GM foods are harmfull to people or the environment?

http://www.mercola.com/2002/jan/23/gm_food.htm

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Alistar7
where is any scientific evidence that GM foods are harmfull to people or the environment?

http://www.mercola.com/2002/jan/23/gm_food.htm

my bad, i thought legitimate was inferred by my request, nice site though, that guys got a few screws loose, like his view on irradiated meat...

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
I don?t have any children, but this process still angers me greatly. U.S. government officials have taken it upon themselves to ignore the warnings of many well-respected scientists and purchase irradiated beef for school children.

the EU has irradiated food for a long time, and I can personally vouch for the safety in the process, its done everday here in the US on every can of similac sold.

That study you pointed out means nothing, why does the dog choose the fresher water?

 

[Wag]

Says the doctor who invented the "no grain diet".

Why anyone would want to take credit for that is beyond me...

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: lozina
I just recently heard about a simple experiment done on genetically engineered foodswith mice or something. In first experiment he had a group of mice with two piles of food. Both piles were the same type of food but one pile was genetically engineered. The mice overwhelmingly chose food from the un-modified pile. In the next experiment they had one group eating normal food and the other had only genetically modified food to eat. They noticed the group eating GM food was lazier and underweight. I think it was on a Gary Null radio program but I'll try to find a web link to it.

heard this also

Thank god we aren't mice!

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Alistar7
where is any scientific evidence that GM foods are harmfull to people or the environment?

http://www.mercola.com/2002/jan/23/gm_food.htm

my bad, i thought legitimate was inferred by my request, nice site though, that guys got a few screws loose, like his view on irradiated meat...

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
I don?t have any children, but this process still angers me greatly. U.S. government officials have taken it upon themselves to ignore the warnings of many well-respected scientists and purchase irradiated beef for school children.

the EU has irradiated food for a long time, and I can personally vouch for the safety in the process, its done everday here in the US on every can of similac sold.

That study you pointed out means nothing, why does the dog choose the fresher water?

Geez you're picky... try this site from a PhD

next time I'll try to find one with fancy flash animations for ya

http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/pusztai.html

He highlights (taken from the site):

Genetically modified (GM) crops and food are being grown and consumed by the public, even though:

• there is little scientific study about their health risks

• safety test technology is inadequate to assess potential harm

• they can carry unpredictable toxins

• they may increase the risk of allergenic reactions

 

[Alistar7]

and if you actually read it instead of selecting picking out another persons opinion you would have seen this gem:

"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"

ok, so now my question is answered, thank you, there is no evidence that shows any damaging effects.

thats funny you call my insistence on discussing things on a factual basis as being "picky"....

 

[Alistar7]

Which just means they are cheese eating irrational fear monkeys acting in protectionist fashion.....

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
and if you actually read it instead of selecting picking out another persons opinion you would have seen this gem:

"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"

ok, so now my question is answered, thank you, there is no evidence that shows any damaging effects.

thats funny you call my insistence on discussing things on a factual basis as being "picky"....

That's a neat skill, taking things out of context. You'll have to teach me that someday. However for now let's go back to the context of that statement. If you read the first part: "How can the public make informed decisions about genetically modified (GM) foods when there is so little information about its safety? The lack of data is due to a number of reasons, including: " Then in one of it's reasons it brings up the point which you so carefully cut out. The point of that is, in case you didn't understand, is how can we stamp the GM foods as good for people when we
do not know much about it. That's a very important point. I'm sure if we knew enough about Asbestos before we starting commercializing it we wouldn't have had so many problems with asbestos litigation recently.

And please continue reading the article, there's ALOT of content to why you actually shouldn't brand GM foods as safe yet. Don't worry, reading is fun!

 

[Alistar7]

"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"


keep spining, doesnt change that one fact, there is no accepted actual scientific evidence that can prove either way.......

I asked for the scientific evidence, you produced two opinion pieces, one which actually stated the answer I was seeking, thanks again for proving me right.....

 

[Alistar7]

pot calling the kettle black, out of context, not everyone is the master such as you, look what you selectively copied parts of and missed the one vital line that answered the real question at hand...

 

[Alistar7]

my question:

"where is any scientific evidence that GM foods are harmfull to people or the environment?"

the answer:

"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"

special thanks to lozina for finding the link, you get a free bowl of GM US subsidized rice.....

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
pot calling the kettle black, out of context, not everyone is the master such as you, look what you selectively copied parts of and missed the one vital line that answered the real question at hand...

The main idea of his paper was "We need more and better testing methods before making GM foods available for human consumption.".

When you're playing with human lives you shouldn't approve anything unless they are thoroughly studied. Are you endorsing approving things for mass human consumption when they are not proven safe?

 

[B00ne]

Let me reiterate: we dont know enough, before BSE nobody would have thought that a single Protein that is folded differently than normal could kill u by dissolving your brain? by simply ingesting said protein I might add

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"


keep spining, doesnt change that one fact, there is no accepted actual scientific evidence that can prove either way.......

I asked for the scientific evidence, you produced two opinion pieces, one which actually stated the answer I was seeking, thanks again for proving me right.....

Perhaps your argument is better served along other lines. Imagine a drug company going to the FDA and suggesting their drug ought to be marketed because no one showed it was harmful. No, the standard is safe and effective. Introducing a new form of life into the environment should require a similar standard. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you will never stuff it back in.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Guess they would rather starve to death then eat GM food. I say let them.
---------------------------------
Another compassionate God loving Christian conservative speaking out, or just another generalized ass hole?

We are moving quickly to life on the Nebuchadnezzar

Tank: Here you go, buddy. Breakfast of champions.
Mouse: If you close your eyes it almost feels like you're eating runny eggs.
Apoc: Yeah, or a bowl of snot
Mouse: Do you know what it really reminds me of? Tasty Wheat. Did you ever eat Tasty Wheat?
Switch: No, but technically, neither did you.
Mouse: That's exactly my point. Exactly. Because you have to wonder now. How did the machines know what Tasty Wheat tasted like. huh?. Maybe they got it wrong. Maybe what I think Tasty Wheat tasted like actually tasted like oatmeal or tuna fish. That makes you wonder about a lot of things. You take chicken for example, maybe they couldn't figure out what to make chicken taste like, which is why chicken tastes like everything. Maybe couldn't figure out...
Apoc: Shut up, Mouse.
Dozer: It's a single cell protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs.

You are merely a work unit of the company. Food, its source, its taste will all be provided to you by machines. You will be told how your food tastes. You will believe. All the infinite variety of the planet will be swept away and you will be its crop. Welcome to the real world. A world where the wool has been pulled over your eyes. You poor sad bastards are even entertained by your fate.

Guess you could just say I'm an asshole. If anyone starves to death in Europe, I guess you know whose hands will carry the blood now don't we...


Another compassionate tree-huggin flower-child hippy speaking out, or just another generalized dumb ass?

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Alistar7
"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"


keep spining, doesnt change that one fact, there is no accepted actual scientific evidence that can prove either way.......

I asked for the scientific evidence, you produced two opinion pieces, one which actually stated the answer I was seeking, thanks again for proving me right.....

Perhaps your argument is better served along other lines. Imagine a drug company going to the FDA and suggesting their drug ought to be marketed because no one showed it was harmful. No, the standard is safe and effective. Introducing a new form of life into the environment should require a similar standard. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you will never stuff it back in.

and once the FDA agrees it is released.... still no evidence after 10 years of use here of any negative consequences......

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: Alistar7
"In fact, no peer-reviewed publications of clinical studies on the human health effects of GM food exist"


keep spining, doesnt change that one fact, there is no accepted actual scientific evidence that can prove either way.......

I asked for the scientific evidence, you produced two opinion pieces, one which actually stated the answer I was seeking, thanks again for proving me right.....

Perhaps your argument is better served along other lines. Imagine a drug company going to the FDA and suggesting their drug ought to be marketed because no one showed it was harmful. No, the standard is safe and effective. Introducing a new form of life into the environment should require a similar standard. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you will never stuff it back in.

and once the FDA agrees it is released.... still no evidence after 10 years of use here of any negative consequences......

From a health point of view, I am not really worried about food safety. Releasing a whole new set of genes into the environment is more of a concern. No one really understands what will happen with that. This is where I think the evidence for safety lacks rigor. More needs to be done here.

 

[Wag]

Clearly there needs to be testing done- nobody's arguing with that.

The beef is that people are starving now, and members of the EU are preventing those people from getting the food they need.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Wag
Clearly there needs to be testing done- nobody's arguing with that.

The beef is that people are starving now, and members of the EU are preventing those people from getting the food they need.

Why dont they eat non GM food? The EU is not stopping that. The premise of the thread is wrong.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: ConclamoLudus

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: lozina
I just recently heard about a simple experiment done on genetically engineered foodswith mice or something. In first experiment he had a group of mice with two piles of food. Both piles were the same type of food but one pile was genetically engineered. The mice overwhelmingly chose food from the un-modified pile. In the next experiment they had one group eating normal food and the other had only genetically modified food to eat. They noticed the group eating GM food was lazier and underweight. I think it was on a Gary Null radio program but I'll try to find a web link to it.

heard this also

Thank god we aren't mice!

lol if it were true america would be doomed, u have no idea how much your food is already ge.

as for people thinkign everything should be studied until theres 0% chance of failure... get a grip. nothing is 100% in technology. airbags came out before they were perfect, they saved thousands of lives, yet they killed a few. they were improved based on mistakes, as with all technology. doesn't mean you don't use it.

alternative is to use normal crops with more pesticide, which are KNOWN to be bad, not just irrationally feared. pesticides are bad for both enviroment and people. somehow i don't see the EU banning all pesticides until research has proven 110% that they cause zero harm to both people and enviroment. they are irrational.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Right- we're not talking about Africa specifically, but world hunger. The situation is only going to get worse. There simply isn't enough land available to support the nutritional need of the world's growing population.

When did socialism arrive at AT? I guess you are proposing Americans decrease their consumuption of meat b/c said consumption is incompatible with a sustainable future?

I missed something somewhere . . . can someone provide actual evidence that people are starving due to EU GM-food bans?

UQ, you mentioned someone blaming Bush. I hold him responsible for misuse of the bully pulpit. He manages the trifecta of misinforming the American public, damaging our nation's credibility, and confirming suspicions that he's incompetent to speak about topics beyond bombing someone or cutting taxes.

There are multiple reasons for hunger and starvation. The vast majority of those reasons existed when GMF was sci-fi. A good example is North Korea. It is a horribly disorganized state that lacks basic planning capacity, diverts vital resources from food production, occupies land which is below the arable mean, and lacks sufficient quality and quantity of water. Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) would have a difficult time creating a NK capable of feeding its population.

China and India have much better planning but far greater populations. GMF, properly managed, could conceivably assist these countries in coming closer to food self-sufficiency but introducing a bad gene (Terminator or possibly just an unfortunate consequence of Mother Nature + science's best guess) may destroy productive ecosystems and lead to millions of deaths.

All of the above assumes all forms of GMF is safe for human consumption. In actuality what has been established to date is that GMF is not horribly unsafe to consume as a minor component of the diet.