The bad science checklist of GMO opponents (Representatives, Mexican, weapons)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And besides there is a valid label already in use that shows a food is GMO free, if that is something that concerns you - the Organic label.
Why on earth would GMOs be prohibited from being labeled USDA Organic? Quite the contrary, many such foods lend themselves very well to being grown organically as they reduce or eliminate the need for pesticides
On November 5, Washington State will cast their votes for the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act." Your support is urgently needed
The “NO on 522” campaign has already raised more than $11 million—nearly four times the amount raised by the pro-labeling camp. Monsanto alone has donated $4.8 million to the anti-labeling campaign
-----------------------
"......as they reduce or eliminate the need for pesticides"--- because GMOs include pesticides! The food contains pesticides (genetically, not externally), and it doesn't go away when they food is harvested.
Why on earth would GMOs be prohibited from being labeled USDA Organic? Quite the contrary, many such foods lend themselves very well to being grown organically as they reduce or eliminate the need for pesticides
Because GMO (transgenic) seed is produced in a laboratory, the seed/plant itself could not exist through natural reproduction means. The methods to grow it are ancillary in this case because the organism itself is artificial and synthetic, not organic or natural.
Similar to how organic, natural pesticides and fertilizers can be used in organic growing; but artificial, synthetic ones cannot. They're both "chemicals", but how they are derived is completely different.
the organism itself is artificial and synthetic, not organic or natural.
No, it is not. A GMO food is made 100% of naturally occurring genes. The difference is that instead of a farmer mixing plants in his garden, a scientist with a PHD is using a lab to do it. The end product is a better version of the original, using naturally occurring genes that have great benefits to society
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissingAll4Seasons
They're both "chemicals"
This is the most ignorant statement I've heard in a long time
why, so people can avoid it? There's no good reason to label GMO foods, it's the same thing farmers have been doing for generations when they bred certain seeds together. It's taking beneficial genes from one plant and putting it in another. This fearmongering is out of control. If we're going to do something about feeding 6 Billion+ people in the future (most of whom are dirt poor), we're going to need more GMO foods, not less
This is ridiculous. They get big patent dollars. No reason to hide it.
Especially, if you think "they are feeding the world most of which is dirt poor."
Not the same as traditional hybridization at all. Who claims this? Besides you?
Whether GMOs are safe or not is not relevant. LABEL and let the consumer decide. Some of us do not want to support the Multi-National Corporations with ugly histories that profit off GMO food and would rather buy our food freshly and locally-the way it is intended.
Is this free-market Capitalism? Paying off politicians, Michael Taylor bouncing from VP at Monsanto to the Head of the FDA, slithering through Congress the Bill known as the "Monsanto Protection Act", suing indebted farmers for all they're worth?
I don't care how emphatically these shills scream at the top of their lungs that GMOs are safe and Monsanto will save the World. I do not want to support disgustingly evil Corporations and should not be unknowingly forced to. Point. Blank. Period.
Because GMO (transgenic) seed is produced in a laboratory, the seed/plant itself could not exist through natural reproduction means. The methods to grow it are ancillary in this case because the organism itself is artificial and synthetic, not organic or natural.
Similar to how organic, natural pesticides and fertilizers can be used in organic growing; but artificial, synthetic ones cannot. They're both "chemicals", but how they are derived is completely different.
there are a slew of plant products that were derived by bombarding the mother plants with radiation to induce desirable mutations.
seedless watermelons .....GMO
Tangerine.....GMO
grapefruit....GMO
every strawberry you ever ate......GMO...they are all hybrids
you like bread and rolls.....Wheat; most modern and ancient wheat breeds are themselves hybrids. Bread wheat is a hexaploid hybrid of three wild grasses; durum (pasta) wheat is a tetraploid hybrid of two wild grasses......geneticly modified from the original state
^^Expanding the definition of GMO does not substantiate why we should allow a Multi-National Corporation with a checkered past to monopolize the World's food supply.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
