Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: GMO's: a boon to mankind, clearly

Posted 1 year ago on May 14, 2013, 9:41 p.m. EST by freemarket5555 (-182)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I can't find one credible piece of science that shows GMO's as bad for health.

Anyone have a true science link showing GMO's as bad?

68 Comments

68 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

GMO's have no benefits except the patenting of living organisms for corporate control of lifeforms.

Show me any evidence that GMO's have any use other than spraying roundup on everything, creating dead lands covered in mono-crops growing on petro-fertilizers. That counterproductive short-term stupidity and the copyrighting, trade-marking, and patenting of living things, for corporate control and profit$.

That is what GMO's are for, and what they do,. they actually solve no known problems other than corporate control of life.

BTW that is not a "free market" when massive corporations claim ownership of life-forms,. get a clue.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I heard Monsanto has new Seed that is Agent Orange Resistant (Dioxin) according to Jeffery Smith. I guess Monsanto thinks Agent Orange is a Benefit to Mankind. Or they might be planning for some huge War or Catastrophe.

They will sell the Toxic Chemicals for War, then sell the Seeds for future crops to the loser of the war (control). Roundup Resistant Corn, Soy, Sugar Beets with BT Toxin which then gets Sprayed with Glyphosate (Roundup). Or another crop that gets sprayed with Agent Orange. Nice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bt_toxin

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Create demand satisfy supply - YEP.

[-] -1 points by wittlelittlecloud (-83) 1 year ago

GMOs can have many benefits. They are the future. We have been modifying the genetics of foods for centuries through planned breeding, GMOs are just that but in the lab. Tomatoes were poisonous before we bred them to be comestible. Broccoli didn't even exist in nature, we bred it from a flower.

The problem is the control of GMOs through patents, not GMOs themselves.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Selective plant breading and Genetic Modification are NOT equal.

"GMOs can have many benefits." - please elaborate, what are these benefits you speak of ?

Manipulating the DNA of an organism to claim to OWN this life-form, under patent law, does not count as a benefit. (unless you include corporate power a benefit?)

Manipulating DNA so the seed of a plant are not viable for the next years crops in not a benefit.

Manipulating the DNA of an organism to make it resistant to a patented chemical herbicide so you can kill all plants but your own is not a benefit.

There is more than enough food already being produced to more than feed the world. It is only being controlled, and horded by a corrupted corporate/capitalist system that favors profits over lives.

[-] -1 points by hamletandcornell (-27) 1 year ago

I don't believe in owning patents for gene modifications. I also don't believe in making plants that are not viable for next years crop for the sole purpose of making profit; it can be useful when testing new genes modifications so that the plant doesn't spread uncontrollably. I also don't believe in modifying plants so they can withstand a pesticide you can then sell to make money.

These are all bad applications of GMO's. They give GMO's a bad name. The reason they are done is no so much because they are possible, but because they make a lot of money for the big capitalist business that is Monsanto.

Every type of science has bad and good applications. It depends who controls what will be made.

The benefits are near endless.

First, just like we tailored food for ages using cross breeding to remove poison from tomatoes, to create broccoli, etc... GMO's permit the new creation of foods, and permits us to do this with much more control. We could, for example, control the exact amount of Vitamin A in some plant. Golden Rice is an example of a great idea.

Another benefit is to control or eliminate diseases. Mosquitos have been engineered to stop Malaria and Dengue fever. Both sicknesses which cause many deaths each year.

The more we understand about science, the more we can create useful applications. The more we research and know about GMO's, the more applications will be dreamed up. We never had this much control. It's much better than the trial and error type of cross breeding.

I'm against Monsanto for their business practices. However, being inherently against GMO's is foolishness and ignorance. It's a whole field of research. It would be like being against electricity, or nuclear research. Science moves along. What's important is proper testing, and making sure that scientists from all over the world have access to research and tests. We must open-source GMO's to get them out of the hands of big corporations.

The danger is not science, it's capitalism.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

While I think I can see where you seem to be coming from on this issue,. I still must disagree. There is simply no need to manipulate life on a genetic level in a lab, as I have said; "more than enough food already being produced", this is a solution without a problem. This is why it is being used for the most part for corporate control and profits, at the expense of people.

Instead of the techno-fix we can simply work with natural systems in balance.

Permaculture is the best philosophical and practical model I have come across in this regard. This as all wee need to produce more food and natural materials than we need.

[-] -1 points by hamletandcornell (-27) 1 year ago

We manipulate life by cross-breeding all the time. Doing in the lab offers more precision and control. Permaculture is great and I encourage it. I also encourage properly researched GMO's. In any case, they cannot be stopped. People are working on them all around the planet. We just made some bacterias that can eat oil. The application is environmental, to eat oil spills in the ocean. There are so many application, especially on the bacterial level. Primitivism is dead, being a technophobe will get you nowhere. Humans will progress to the next level.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

"I never saw no miracle of science That didn't go from a blessing to a curse I never saw no military solution That didn't always end up as something worse..."

Simple is better, cross-breading is WAY different than genetic splicing in a lab! You can see not possible bad outcomes? Terminator seed passing their "terminator" technology into the wild, plants that grow for a year then never again, is not a great advancement of anything. It is a terrible danger to life.

[-] -3 points by hamletandcornell (-27) 1 year ago

Sure, the possibly bad outcomes from any field of scientific research. Vaccines, nuclear fission and fusion, electricity, cars, etc... That's why we need rigorous testing. Being scared of bad outcomes from technology is simply being a technophobe. There are things much worst than GMO's. There's a lot of fear mongering against them that is absolutely baseless. For example, many people refer to studies on a very specific gene modification to claim that all GMO's are bad. That's pseudoscience. In fact, anti-GMO's stances are based on the left's version of pseudoscience, comparable to the right version of Global Warming Denial and Creationism.

You can see not possible bad outcomes? Terminator seed passing their "terminator" technology into the wild, plants that grow for a year then never again, is not a great advancement of anything. It is a terrible danger to life.

You think this because you don't understand science. It doesn't work like in the movies. Things progress slowly and are tested very rigorously before being put into the wild. You're just spreading anti-GMO fear mongering and that's just bad for everyone. We need to be logical and scientific in our claims.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Why do you make wild claims and accusations you have no way of knowing anything about? My level of understanding of "science" is not the issue, and is something you have no data on. It is very unscientific to make clams with zero data.

Apparently you are not paying much attention to the reality, in the real world the corporations are now the ones writing the regulations that effect them, and where once meant to protect the people and planet. The same corporations are the ones that do the actual lab testing for safety, and then submit these results to the now useless regulators for "approval". Your claims that Genetically Manipulated organisms are "tested very rigorously before being put into the wild" is pure poppycock.

Corporate genetic manipulations of living things is not a left /right issue at all; people in both of the (silly) partisan camps opposed and support this corporate disaster.

It is not fear mongering to point out that this technology is not needed and need not be used. The only real benefits of this mutilation of life is for corporate control not for us humans or our planet.

Permaculture, Degrowth, Slow Money, Relocalization, etc. are real human level technologies that work NOW and will make life better for us, and all life. Support what works now, not in some promised sci-fi future that never comes. We need no techno-fix,. only cultural shift.

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

"Eating genetically modified corn (GM corn) and consuming trace levels of Monsanto's Roundup chemical fertilizer caused rats to develop horrifying tumors, widespread organ damage, and premature death."

That's the conclusion of a shocking new study that looked at the long-term effects of consuming Monsanto's genetically modified corn. The study has been deemed "the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats," and was led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen. It was the first ever study to examine the long-term (lifetime) effects of eating GMOs, and was published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal and was presented at a news conference in London in Sept 2012

The study is entitled, "A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health." Read the abstract here:

http://www.ijbs.com/v05p0706.htm

That abstract include this text. Note: "hepatorenal toxicity" means toxic to the liver.

"Our analysis clearly reveals for the 3 GMOs new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent. Effects were mostly associated with the kidney and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, although different between the 3 GMOs. Other effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. We conclude that these data highlight signs of hepatorenal toxicity, possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn. In addition, unintended direct or indirect metabolic consequences of the genetic modification cannot be excluded."

Here are some quotes from the researchers:

"This research shows an extraordinary number of tumors developing earlier and more aggressively - particularly in female animals. I am shocked by the extreme negative health impacts." - Dr Michael Antoniou, molecular biologist, King's College London.

"We can expect that the consumption of GM maize and the herbicide Roundup, impacts seriously on human health." - Dr Antoniou.

"This is the first time that a long-term animal feeding trial has examined the impact of feeding GM corn or the herbicide Roundup, or a combination of both and the results are extremely serious. In the male rats, there was liver and kidney disorders, including tumors and even more worryingly, in the female rats, there were mammary tumors at a level which is extremely concerning; up to 80 percent of the female rats had mammary tumors by the end of the trial." - Patrick Holden, Director, Sustainable Food Trust.

Hey, freemarket. Check out these pictures and then go have yourself a big ol' bowl of GM corn flakes, buddy:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2205509/Cancer-row-GM-foods-French-study-claims-did-THIS-rats--cause-organ-damage-early-death-humans.html

http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/topics/technology-and-supply-chain/monsanto-weedkiller-and-gm-maize-in-shocking-cancer-study/232603.article

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Thank U 4 being so concise and on topic.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

You're welcome, DK. Pesticides are poisons, pure and simple. It's not that hard to see.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Just hard to see/accept 4 the blind GREEDY - & supporters/followers/lackeys.

It is not that they do not know - they just can't admit it - bad for profits.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Well, let me think for a minute. Hmmm, would surgeons have a vested interest in the proliferation of tumor-inducing genetically-modified foods? Would Monsanto have a vested interest in downplaying it? It's always the money.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I ran across this awhile back - it seems to make a whole lot of sense - If one considers it 4 a moment:

GREED THE #1 CAUSE OF DISEASE/DEATH/DESTRUCTION IN THE WORLD.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Yeah, I remember seeing that a time or two lately, heheh.

But a completely dead-on assessment.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

There R those who would deny it. Blind? or Paid?

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Both, I would think. Sometimes in the same package, although I'm not implying that freemarket is of that group.

But I'm also not implying that he's not. ;-)

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

But I'm also not implying that he's not. ;-)

LOL

Shall we leave it to the judgement of history?

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Heheh, yes, history shall judge.

Although he's doing a damn good job of showing what kind of person he is in his short time here.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Determined asshole?

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

More asshole than determined. I thought I'd heard it all on here until "shine my shoes, boy." Sheesh!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (4282) from St Louis, MO 23 minutes ago

You got that right. About as low as you can go. A ban-worthy offense, I think.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

May your observation/recommendation come true.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

There was another one equally as offensive, but i don't remember it right off. Oh well, you probably saw it too. Something about shining his car, maybe?

Doesn't matter. He's anti-OWS anyway. Off with his fucking head! heheheh.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Too sad to even be absurdly or even perversely funny.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

You got that right. About as low as you can go. A ban-worthy offense, I think.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (4292) from St Louis, MO 4 minutes ago

Very true. Sometimes they can be so 'fully in the moment' they're blinded.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

THAT - IS - A - VERY REAL - DANGER.

As a pacifist ( lover of life ) will not go off - unless extremely pressed/provoked.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (4292) from St Louis, MO 4 minutes ago

Yep. I'm a pacifist at heart, but sometimes I wish I weren't.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

I hear ya - when a pacifist goes off - it can be likened as to an explosion - as a pacifist does not "go off" for any shallow reason - and IS fully in the moment when it happens.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Very true. Sometimes they can be so 'fully in the moment' they're blinded.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (4292) from St Louis, MO 1 minute ago

Oh yeah, it was definitely another disparaging remark from freemarket. No doubt.

Not off with his head? Well, I'm always open to suggestions.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

I truly am not - Bloodthirsty - but some just beg - 2 B run through a wood-chipper.

Don't ya think?

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Yep. I'm a pacifist at heart, but sometimes I wish I weren't.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (4292) from St Louis, MO 0 minutes ago

There was another one equally as offensive, but i don't remember it right off. Oh well, you probably saw it too. Something about shining his car, maybe?

Doesn't matter. He's anti-OWS anyway. Off with his fucking head! heheheh.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

Actually the same asshole I think = freemarket5555

Off with his fucking head!

Well - something really unpleasant anyway.

[-] 4 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Oh yeah, it was definitely another disparaging remark from freemarket. No doubt.

Not off with his head? Well, I'm always open to suggestions.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 1 year ago

Seralini's study has utterly been debunked by peer reviewed research. He has not been able to duplicate his results and no one else has either.

I know what hepatorenal toxicity is, I am a surgeon.

[-] 3 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

If you are really a surgeon I would hope that you would know that there is plenty of peer reviewed research that is absolute garbage.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 1 year ago

I can buy one poorly handled review, but several?

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Peer reviews have their own set of problems, freemarket:

http://advan.physiology.org/content/31/2/145.full

So, personally, if I were to have to choose between two conflicting stories, I'd have a tendency to "follow the money."

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 1 year ago

So you are just guessing? You aren't really investigating for the truth?

It's this simple: if Seralini and Pusztai were right, they should have been able to duplicate their results. They haven't.

You might be too young but back in the 80's, the University of Utah published a paper on cold fusion. It took about 2 weeks for Unis all over the world to cast the results in question. Utah had to retract their paper.

There are enough places where GMOs are not liked,, yet not one has been able to duplicate either Seralini or Pusztai.

Why?

[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Here ya go

http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3b.pdf

No offense but it doesnt take science to realize you dont want to eat things that dont die when doused with round up like every other living thing. And you CERTAINLY dont want to eat things with RoundUp inside of them.

Were you one of the guys in the 50's that was saying smoking was perfectly healthy?

[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

No comment?

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

how about spraying Roundup... or DDT all over the map.... is that good for health >....

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 1 year ago

The stupidity I have to deal with. DDT isn't used anymore. And it isn't used for farming for fucks sake. African countries are PLEADING to be allowed to use DDT BTW.

A link for you

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/11DDT.html?pagewanted=all

I am the most well read person on this site, clearly.

Roundup may be a risk, for sure, but that isn't what is being claimed. It is being claimed that the plants themselves are toxic. To that, there isn't a shred of proof, peer reviewed.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

From Your Link - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/magazine/11DDT.html?pagewanted=all

As malaria surges once again in Africa, victories are few. But South Africa is beating the disease with a simple remedy: spraying the inside walls of houses in affected regions once a year. Several insecticides can be used, but South Africa has chosen the most effective one. It lasts twice as long as the alternatives. It repels mosquitoes in addition to killing them, which delays the onset of pesticide-resistance. It costs a quarter as much as the next cheapest insecticide. It is DDT.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

DDT isn't used anymore.

Not in the USA - but it is still used.

peer reviewed.

& reported by Monsatan?

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 1 year ago

Is it used for farming? LMAO.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

U provided the Link - DDT is still being used. Does not matter if it is going onto crops - it is going into peoples homes.

Chew on that U defective one.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

3 yrs old, but still relevent.

http://www.ijbs.com/v06p0590.htm

[-] -1 points by wittlelittlecloud (-83) 1 year ago

They aren't. We've been modifying food genetically through planned breeding for centuries. Tomatoes, bananas, broccoli, etc... all these are very different than the originals. Broccoli didn't even exist. Tomatoes were originally poisonous. Bananas had too many seeds to be eaten. The list goes on.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

SHIT HEAD - But U Probably Hear That a LOT.

Still worth a repeat - SHIT HEAD

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

He simply asked for a link to a scientific study showing GMO's are bad and you call him a shit head? WTF? Why troll like this?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Defending your own BS again trashy? Cross pollination is not genetically altered plants as in what Monsatan is doing.

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

Who's thrasy? And I'm not freemarket5555. I'm me.

Cross pollination is not genetically altered plants as in what Monsatan is doing.

Of course it is different? Your point? Does that make them automatically dangerous or give you the right to call the OP a shit head? WTF?

Are you against science? The OP was asking for scientific evidence and you troll him for that? I don't get it.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

BS again trashy - SHIT HEAD

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

What is your problem?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

trashy

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

Who or what is trashy? Why do you troll this place?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Why do you troll this place?

tommylee

No Profile Information Private Messages

Information

Joined May 30, 2013

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Nope - R U actually a new user?

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

STINKLE - U corpoRATist shill

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (22325) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

clearly ?

Hell U cannot recognize Ur self - let alone anything else.