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.
Never let evidence get in the way of liberal pseudo-science.
This is a nonsense comment, since the original post is about major new evidence that the anti-GMO hysteria is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Well, under the current set of circumstances regarding GMO, I would not advocate human trials at all, given the results of animal testing
.....
The better question is, why do you ignore these issues, and advocate human testing? Are dead animals insufficient warning?
Why are you ignoring the fact that this new research looked at 27 years of livestock records, including mortality records, and found no difference in death rates between animals fed non-GMO and GMO feeds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by caLa310
GMOs are banned in the EU.
They won't even ALLOW LABELING in the US.
This is incorrect. First, GMO corn has been grown in Spain for years, and 2 varieties are now allowed to be grown in France. And GMO potatoes are grown in Germany, Sweden and the Czech Republic. In addition the EU Register of Authorized GMOs lists more than 48 approved items, including sugar beets, soybeans, rape oilseed (canola), etc. So the claim that GMOs aren't allowed in Europe has not been true for years, yet it's quoted as fact in nearly every GMO debate. This is part of the difficulty in trying to discuss the matter rationally, when so much of what people believe about GMOs are based on misinformation.
As a sidebar, I think it is interesting to note that on average it costs Europeans twice as large a slice of their income to buy food as it does Americans. As another sidebar, anti-GMO laws passed without scientific basis, purely on fear of the new, are beginning to fall globally. The evidence that GMOs are safe continues to grow, and eventually rational thought and reason will triumph over the latter-day Luddites who oppose GMO technology.
And finally, mandatory GMO laws are not Constitutional in the US. This was settled in federal court in 1995, IIRC. Nearly 20 years later people are still whining about this ruling, but the Constitution is the Constitution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHitTheHighNotes
The vast majority of independent studies on GMO's conclude that they aren't safe and add absolutely no additional health benefits to anyone. GMO's are harmful to our planet, humans, and animals, it's a dangerous technology that has been created and allowed to exist because of corporate greed and a government who's benefiting from said corporate greed.
No, there actually is no convincing evidence that any of that is true. You can't prove a single thing you said. That's all simply anti-science rhetoric. And as more and more research concludes that GMOs are not harmful, and that in fact they hold promise to solve all kinds of agricultural and health issues, rational thought and credible scientific will triumph over the misinformation campaign your comment represents.
And laughably, I can tell from the comments that many of those opposing what this study reveals haven't even bothered to read the Forbes article about the study.
The vast majority of independent studies on GMO's conclude that they aren't safe and add absolutely no additional health benefits to anyone. GMO's are harmful to our planet, humans, and animals, it's a dangerous technology that has been created and allowed to exist because of corporate greed and a government who's benefiting from said corporate greed.
That's the diluted version of the truth. But the straight, undiluted version, however hard it may be for most to accept, is that these harmful things are a deliberate act. Eventually one must dispense with the common perceptions and excuses that greed and or incompetence is at the heart of these actions.
When considered on an individual basis, that might seem reasonable ... greed and money. But when one takes into account the preponderance of the evidence, another picture emerges.
We have chemical aerosals being deployed in the skys overhead ...
We have our food chain being genetically altered ...
We have fluoride being added to our drinking water ....
We have chemicals bombarding our environment ....
We have pharmaceutical drugs whose side effects can be way worse than the malady for which they are prescribed ...
We have vaccines loaded with nuerotoxins .... viruses ... mycoplasmas ...
We have genetically modified food ....
We have food animals that are fed genetically modified feed ....
We have food animals pumped full of antibiotics ...
We have antibiotic resistant bacteria from overuse of antibiotics ....
We have a medical system that kills more patients each year than cancer ...
We have an explosion of autism, and other chronic disease in children ... in spite of the claims of the healthcare establishment's modern day successes ...
We are fatter, and sicker, and suffer more disease than ever before ... even infant mortality rates are increasing ..in spite of the claims of medical advancements ....
Is all of this a product of corporate greed and government incompetence? Just a long line of coincidences and bad luck?
Or are we seeing the hidden solution to the not so hidden idea of overpopulation?
This is a nonsense comment, since the original post is about major new evidence that the anti-GMO hysteria is wrong.
Why are you ignoring the fact that this new research looked at 27 years of livestock records, including mortality records, and found no difference in death rates between animals fed non-GMO and GMO feeds?
This is incorrect. First, GMO corn has been grown in Spain for years, and 2 varieties are now allowed to be grown in France. As a sidebar, I think it is interesting to note that on average it costs Europeans twice as large a slice of their income to buy food as it does Americans. As another sidebar, anti-GMO laws passed without scientific basis, purely on fear of the new, are beginning to fall globally. The evidence that GMOs are safe continues to grow, and eventually rational thought and reason will triumph over the latter-day Luddites who oppose GMO technology.
No, there actually is no convincing evidence that any of that is true. You can't prove a single thing you said. That's simply anti-science rhetoric. And as more and more research concludes that GMOs are not harmful, and that in fact they hold promise to solve all kinds of agricultural and health issues, rational thought and credible scientific will triumph over the misinformation campaign your comment represents.
What would you know about rational thinking? You reject independent studies showing the harmful effects, while accepting at face value the safety claims coming from the source of this bio-warfare assault on the planet, plants, animals and humans.
Of course, if one is oblivious to the harm already being inflicted upon human health by these big pharmaceutical and chemical corporations .... it's not so surprising you'd miss this one too.
Every major international science body in the world has reviewed multiple independent studies—in some cases numbering in the hundreds—in coming to the consensus conclusion that GMO crops are as safe or safer than conventional or organic foods. But until now, the magnitude of the research on crop biotechnology has never been cataloged. In response to what they believed was an information gap, a team of Italian scientists summarized 1783 studies about the safety and environmental impacts of GMO foods—a staggering number.
The researchers couldn’t find a single credible example demonstrating that GM foods pose any harm to humans or animals. “The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of genetically engineered crops,” the scientists concluded. <snip>
This is by far the most intelligent comment in this entire thread. I recommend everyone go back and read it again, because when taken with the research study I cited in my OP, this effectively nails the coffin shut on comments that there is no proof that GMOs are safe.
One University study reports on 27 years worth of livestock history, 100 billion animals being fed a trillion times and concludes there are no differences between animals fed GMO or non-GMO feeds.
The second is meta-study of 1738 previous studies which have shown no health or environmental hazards from GMOs.
Seriously, it is time for the anti-science activists to just sit down and shut up now. All ur rguments R belong to us!
I'm assuming you can read. So read ... and maybe your concussion will clear.
The fact that you keep resorting to personal bashing and insults discredits you as being anyone to believe in this debate. You wouldn't need that crutch if you could actually prove your points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
What would you know about rational thinking? You reject independent studies showing the harmful effects, while accepting at face value the safety claims coming from the source of this bio-warfare assault on the planet, plants, animals and humans.
I could disassemble all ten of the studies listed in your link for their obvious flaws, but it's not even worth the time, because the inclusion of #4 proves the list is garbage. Listing the Seralini Rat Tumor paper as a credible piece of independent research is... as a previous poster so aptly put it... farcical. This paper was thoroughly discredited by mainstream researchers within two days after publication, and was subsequently outed as a fraud from inception, and censured by the French agency for Agriculture.
Anybody referring to this bogus French study as credible research... when it is actually a textbook case on how to invent false scientific data... cannot be trusted in any way. It is the Seralini study itself that is toxic.
Whenever I hear someone use the Seralini study as a plausible reference it's immediately clear that they don't know what they are talking about.
This is by far the most intelligent comment in this entire thread. I recommend everyone go back and read it again, because when taken with the research study I cited in my OP, this effectively nails the coffin shut on comments that there is no proof that GMOs are safe.
One University study reports on 27 years worth of livestock history, 100 billion animals being fed a trillion times and concludes there are no differences between animals fed GMO or non-GMO feeds.
The second is meta-study of 1738 previous studies which have shown no health or environmental hazards from GMOs.
Seriously, it is time for the anti-science activists to just sit down and shut up now. All ur rguments R belong to us!
Some of us don't get care whether GMO's are safe-that is not the problem but it is still a major issue IMO. I don't want my money to unknowingly support nationless corporations such as Monsanto that have infiltrated our Government and public health organizations. Label it and all problems will be solved. Claims of inflated food prices due to labeling are completely bogus.
This is by far the most intelligent comment in this entire thread. I recommend everyone go back and read it again, because when taken with the research study I cited in my OP, this effectively nails the coffin shut on comments that there is no proof that GMOs are safe.
One University study reports on 27 years worth of livestock history, 100 billion animals being fed a trillion times and concludes there are no differences between animals fed GMO or non-GMO feeds.
The second is meta-study of 1738 previous studies which have shown no health or environmental hazards from GMOs.
Seriously, it is time for the anti-science activists to just sit down and shut up now. All ur rguments R belong to us!
Most intelligent comment=comment you agree with.
The hard cold truth is ... the often touted 1700 studies showing no safety concerns is a deliberate obfuscation of the facts and the data from those studies.
Others have reviewed the same data, and found much evidence showing there is danger. Same studies, and same facts ... just totally opposite conclusions.
Your side makes claims, and the other side cites facts.
Other facts not mentioned ... Monsanto's first product was the artificial sweetener, saccharine, and you don't need to be the most informed person on earth to know about the health effects of artificial sweeteners. Another of Monsanto's creations was DDT, now banned in most countries. Then we have the infamous "agent orange" for which Monsanto and Dow Chemical produced for the US military to be used in Viet Nam.
Wow, these boys at Monsanto have a great history f producing healthy stuff, don't they?
Looks like good, trustworthy Monsanto doesn't like scientists who don't like GMO.
This is the new scientific method ... either find the results we want, or else.
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.
