Serious Question

[chillywilly2]

Personally...I grow as much of my own food as I can, and collect my own seeds or buy them from people that do, I also shoot as much meat as I can and buy the rest from reputable farms that I know.

You can't cover all the bases but you cover as many as matter to you

 

[hasenpfeffer]

I can see both sides of this debate. Ultimately though, there will be so much crap on lables that nobody will read them anymore. Kind of like the user agreement when you download an app.

As far as mandating is concerned, I would have to know how genetically modified is being defined before I could make a case for or against it.

 

[ImSinister]

The truth, as is often the case, lies somewhere in the middle of the debate. Is the GMO being done by Gregor Mendel or Dr. Moreau? It seems that people believe there is a potential large difference between grafting plants together to create a new variations and re-constructing the DNA molecules in a lab to create some new thing. I don't really know but I think we have about three centuries of testing on the former and very little on the latter.

While I support labeling to promote giving the consumer information I am against fear-mongering.

 

[islandman]

Alas, I did not misunderstand. Those who believe as you do are a pet peeve of his, about which he expounds at length. I suppose I could greet him with, "Some guy on the internet who took a few pre-med classes undergrad says you're wrong, so there!" next time I see him, but instead I'll continue to defer to his position and knowledge.

KRC: I see him every few days; I'll ask about the trouple. I had never heard of it...

If you're going to see him, ask him to write out his argument and C&P here.

Of course, that would mean you'd have to say, "Hey, can you tell me again what you told me before? I want to make sure I understood it."

Thanks.

 

[chillywilly2]

Alas, I did not misunderstand. Those who believe as you do are a pet peeve of his, about which he expounds at length. I suppose I could greet him with, "Some guy on the internet who took a few pre-med classes undergrad says you're wrong, so there!" next time I see him, but instead I'll continue to defer to his position and knowledge.

KRC: I see him every few days; I'll ask about the trouple. I had never heard of it...

He acts like he knows everything...if he knows so much, why is he called a reseacher?....Hmmmm?

 

[KRCummings]

He acts like he knows everything...if he knows so much, why is he called a reseacher?....Hmmmm?

Because he didn't find it the first time?

 

[chillywilly2]

Because he didn't find it the first time?

Nope

 

[KRCummings]

Nope

Come on, that was funny.

 

[chillywilly2]

Come on, that was funny.

So was that...now guess again

 

[dolf]

i couldn't be bothered to read the thread. i'm just in it for bg awesomeness and mutant lemons.

 

[Liar]

The problem with 'genetically modified' on a label are the irrational connotations. It brings up images of flourescent pigs and corn cobs with spleens, when reality is much more mundane. I n that spirit, think all foods that hasn't been douched in pesticides should be labled "may contain bugs". Not a big deal, but technically true, and sounds scary.

 

[warrior queen]

'Genetically modified' is probably the wrong label.
As people have pointed out, almost all food has been genetically modified at some point.
Perhaps a label stating that a food has been 'Gene spliced' would be more accurate.

 

[CHNOPS]

If you're going to see him, ask him to write out his argument and C&P here.

Of course, that would mean you'd have to say, "Hey, can you tell me again what you told me before? I want to make sure I understood it."

Thanks.

If it's important to you to feel that your undergrad class in fruit fly genetics qualifies you as a geneticist, feel free. I'm no one to take away your dreams.

 

[CHNOPS]

'Genetically modified' is probably the wrong label.
As people have pointed out, almost all food has been genetically modified at some point.
Perhaps a label stating that a food has been 'Gene spliced' would be more accurate.

Everything with genes, is gene-spliced.

 

[koalabear]

I had read one of the biggest arguing points was how a company (Monsanto) would modify a food to be highly resistant to its Roundup, then of course you'd have to use Roundup as you bought their seeds, then the food grown would absorb tons of the stuff, making its way to your plate. For extra flavor of course. ---- Of course when it comes to the money portion of it, those that contribute the most to campaign funds get the most in return by way of laws and regulations. Corporations rule buster, better believe it. All hail Monsanto! Or I could just be full of shit.

Close but read up some more. The plants have been altered to produce their own herbicide, which is then consumed by the people. Now if they can just GMO people.

 

[Sean]

My problem with GMO's isn't the technology involved in making plants insect or disease resistant, it's the fact that the likes of Monsanto are patenting crops and genomes that have been around for centuries. They're also introducing strains that are deliberately sterile so you have to buy seeds every year. Anyone want to guess what the outcome of that will be when they cross with native varieties?

 

[koalabear]

My problem with GMO's isn't the technology involved in making plants insect or disease resistant, it's the fact that the likes of Monsanto are patenting crops and genomes that have been around for centuries. They're also introducing strains that are deliberately sterile so you have to buy seeds every year. Anyone want to guess what the outcome of that will be when they cross with native varieties?

Which is it, sterile or not.

 

[islandman]

If it's important to you to feel that your undergrad class in fruit fly genetics qualifies you as a geneticist, feel free. I'm no one to take away your dreams.

I'm okay with being proven wrong. I just rather it be by the guy who knows his stuff than the guy who stood in the same room as the guy who knows his stuff, hence the request for a written explanation. Shouldn't be much ado given that you interact with him frequently.

 

[Sean]

Which is it, sterile or not.

You don't think genes from sterile organisms can get into wild plants? I'd stick to sucking bigot cock, if I were you.

 

[koalabear]

You don't think genes from sterile organisms can get into wild plants? I'd stick to sucking bigot cock, if I were you.

Sterile Hybrids have been around for 40 years. Try to keep up boy. It won't matter when the bees are killed off, you'll always have Monsanto.

 

[KRCummings]

He acts like he knows everything...if he knows so much, why is he called a reseacher?....Hmmmm?

Because he didn't find it the first time?

RE-search.

He didn't find it the first time.



Man, I really waste my A material on you fuckers.

 

[warrior queen]

Everything with genes, is gene-spliced.

Fine - call it 'Mammalian gene-spliced product' for friuts and veges crossed with animal/fish, 'Vegetable gene-spliced product' for meats crossed with fruits and veges, etc, etc.
Whatever. It just needs to be CLEARLY labelled as to what manipulation has been done.

Crossing 2 different pumpkins to achieve a hybrid isn't anywhere near as dangerous as crossing entirely different species.

 

[Phelia]

To answer the question, they shouldn't need to be labeled. It would be like saying "this is food." Makes me think of the carcinogenic building materials warnings you see in CA - nobody even pays attention to them any more. There's no point. I think it's smart to want more info on genetically modified crops - the truth is nuanced. It's not all good or all bad. It's been around for a number of years now and there's a lot of science on it. The consensus is that there's really no reason to think it's unsafe, or any more or less safe than what we've been doing for a long time, anyway. Most of the scariest and most propagandized studies have been refuted. The real contentions are with the way humans and corporations are misusing the technology, like pesticide resistances that might have been prevented by simply turning over the types of crops. That just means GMO technology needs to be improved, not that it needs to be condemned.

It actually does work that way. Genetic material controls proteins, which in turn forms the basis for a cell's functions. So, while it is true they would add apple DNA to the fish to change the flavour, they cannot do so with absolute surety that that same DNA won't turn on or off other proteins inherent to the fish. Scientists can't know the full ramifications of their modifications for at least 8 generations - for animals, don't know how many cycles for plants - and even then, that's under lab conditions. Add environmental factors and you've just compounded the risk.

More to the point, you've watched enough bad SyFy shows about crossing snails with alligators to know that you don't want to fuck with that shit.

The novel proteins thing was for potential allergens, right? And I thought the concern for that was a little overblown. I just know what I've read in articles, though. I haven't drilled down into it. I did take undergrad genetics, and I don't remember the eight generation figure. What's that from?

My problem with GMO's isn't the technology involved in making plants insect or disease resistant, it's the fact that the likes of Monsanto are patenting crops and genomes that have been around for centuries. They're also introducing strains that are deliberately sterile so you have to buy seeds every year. Anyone want to guess what the outcome of that will be when they cross with native varieties?

I agree with this. My biggest issues with biotech developments in agriculture are the way giant corporations are using it as a cudgel, but that's what they always do and have always done. The patenting thing - what a mess.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

RE-search.

He didn't find it the first time.



Man, I really waste my A material on you fuckers.

I read an article online claiming that corporate honey is not really honey. The article wasn't clear at all about what's in those jars labeled honey. Do you have any info on that?

 

[KRCummings]

I read an article online claiming that corporate honey is not really honey. The article wasn't clear at all about what's in those jars labeled honey. Do you have any info on that?

Fuck, I don't know. I eat a lot of honey so now I'm all worried. What the fuck do you mean it's not honey!?!