Jump to content

Are GMOs safe? An excellent article from Slate


AUDub

Recommended Posts





Regarding the earlier comments about processed meats, the most problematic ingredient from a health standpoint in such products is salt. Processors use way too much of it. I suspect there are regulations on salt in our future.

One of the more noticeable ingredients - at least to me - is phosphate. Phosphate caused the meat to retain moisture and greatly enhances tenderness. The flavor effects are less noticeable to most people - partly due to the excess salt - but I find it a real turn off. Phosphate is also the primary active ingredient in the "solution" injected into fresh then frozen turkeys, chicken and other meats. I find it very noticeable but it's probably overlooked by most or even considered to be natural.

Anyway, back to GMOs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will add to my comments from my comments in the other thread that after about a week, my wife had some mild detox symptoms associated with, what we assume, from eating "clean".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we have people here that are against GMOs? think they are a plot to kill mankind? :)

I would like the labels, not to avoid it but because I'd like labels for everything. If possible I'd like a label that lets me know the last thoughts of the chicken I am about to eat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GMOs in seed are good in my opinion. They enable crops to survive pests without much (if any at all) pesticides. I don't like what they are doing to meat in instances but I don't eat much of it anyway. I think there are too many people that are against GMO as the news brings up the scary stories that are sometimes half baked. But take a look at the good in crops that GMO has brought over the years and I think the science is behind allowing us to be able to produce enough to feed the world (yes I know that there are people in the world that don't have enough to eat) but there is enough grown in the world to feed them. There are a ton of food that we eat that is genetically modified that we don't realize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we have people here that are against GMOs? think they are a plot to kill mankind? :)

Where is TheBlueVue? We used to get into it about modern medicine all the time. Wouldn't shock me if he did.

I would like the labels, not to avoid it but because I'd like labels for everything. If possible I'd like a label that lets me know the last thoughts of the chicken I am about to eat.

But the point of the labels is to encourage people to avoid it. Look at what happened in Europe, for example. Lack of choices, higher prices, and an increase in the use of pesticides, all because GMO foods are shunned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GMOs in seed are good in my opinion. They enable crops to survive pests without much (if any at all) pesticides. I don't like what they are doing to meat in instances but I don't eat much of it anyway. I think there are too many people that are against GMO as the news brings up the scary stories that are sometimes half baked. But take a look at the good in crops that GMO has brought over the years and I think the science is behind allowing us to be able to produce enough to feed the world (yes I know that there are people in the world that don't have enough to eat) but there is enough grown in the world to feed them. There are a ton of food that we eat that is genetically modified that we don't realize.

There is a downside to GMO seeds also. If the development of mono-cultures is required to feed the human population, that's more of a statement of dwindling resources and over-population than it is of long term agricultural progress.

Just like all things in nature, diversity is the key to robust systems. Lack of diversity in agriculture is ultimately an invitation for a collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One can go to crop rotation, which has always been a good thing. However, monoculture, at least on an annual basis, is now pretty much unavoidable. The day of the 40-acre, one man one mule farm is gone forever. Modern farming equipment is engineered with monoculture in mind, as are many pesticides.

GMO products shouldn't concern consumers as much as imported products, many of which come from countries that have few or no rules about growing food in human waste, using toxic products and so forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

And lest you forget, look at the effect it has had in Europe. The unfair stigma has been very harmful. GMO foods are essentially non-existent as a result of the decision to label them. Food prices are higher and variety is limited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest NC1406

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

Ben you seem to have knowledge on this subject. Can you explain/expand on the highlighted portion of your statement? Not questioning your statement, just not sure I understand exactly what you are referring to. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

Ben you seem to have knowledge on this subject. Can you explain/expand on the highlighted portion of your statement? Not questioning your statement, just not sure I understand exactly what you are referring to. Thanks.

An example, the infamous Lenape potato.

This is a fine example of the difference in testing standards between GMO and traditionally bred foods. While genetically engineered foods are tested extensively before they hit the market, testing is virtually nonexistent with traditionally bred foods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

And lest you forget, look at the effect it has had in Europe. The unfair stigma has been very harmful. GMO foods are essentially non-existent as a result of the decision to label them. Food prices are higher and variety is limited.

Well, let's hide all information that people might freak out about then :) If harm has or might in the future come from knowledge then...

Why let the public know anything right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

And lest you forget, look at the effect it has had in Europe. The unfair stigma has been very harmful. GMO foods are essentially non-existent as a result of the decision to label them. Food prices are higher and variety is limited.

Well, let's hide all information that people might freak out about then :) If harm has or might in the future come from knowledge then...

Why let the public know anything right?

It's absolutely useless except to uneccesarily stigmatize, which is the goal. This isn't about informing the public. This is to scare them away from GMO's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

I guess you forgot the example I brought up earlier where a government was willing to let their citizens starve in the midst of a food shortage as a result of such foolishness. Again, why don't you demand labels on foods produced through traditional breeding techniques? Things created using the old methods with the potential to cause harm actually have hit the market before a mistake was realized.

Don't see people bitching about that, though. :rolleyes:

And lest you forget, look at the effect it has had in Europe. The unfair stigma has been very harmful. GMO foods are essentially non-existent as a result of the decision to label them. Food prices are higher and variety is limited.

Well, let's hide all information that people might freak out about then :) If harm has or might in the future come from knowledge then...

Why let the public know anything right?

It's absolutely useless except to uneccesarily stigmatize, which is the goal. This isn't about informing the public. This is to scare them away from GMO's.

Tobacco companies could have really used a guy like you in the past. :hellyeah:

And something that's purpose is actually informing the public of a fact... you can't say that isn't about informing the public, at least not while making sense. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tobacco companies could have really used a guy like you in the past. :hellyeah:

Oh, FFS. How childish can you get? :rolleyes:

Don't roll me up with those death dealers.

In my view, labeling requirements are appropriate when there is undisputed scientific evidence that a food component is damaging, which, for example, is the reason for warning labels on cigarettes.

And something that's purpose is actually informing the public of a fact... you can't say that isn't about informing the public, at least not while making sense. :lol:

There are real world consequences to propagating the bull**** spread by the fear mongers. Consequences that could kill people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tobacco companies could have really used a guy like you in the past. :hellyeah:

Oh, FFS. How childish can you get? :rolleyes:

Don't roll me up with those death dealers.

In my view, labeling requirements are appropriate when there is undisputed scientific evidence that a food component is damaging, which, for example, is the reason for warning labels on cigarettes.

And something that's purpose is actually informing the public of a fact... you can't say that isn't about informing the public, at least not while making sense. :lol:

There are real world consequences to propagating the bull**** spread by the fear mongers. Consequences that could kill people.

I'm just ******* with u man:) typing stuff up as I talk football with cousins over skype.

Just keeping this going for fun since we already recognized each others positions early on. I can't speak for the masses but for myself, I like knowing everything about the stuff I consume. I also know the damage that can come from fear mongering IE: my vaccine analogy. IE: your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tobacco companies could have really used a guy like you in the past. :hellyeah:

Oh, FFS. How childish can you get? :rolleyes:/

Don't roll me up with those death dealers.

In my view, labeling requirements are appropriate when there is undisputed scientific evidence that a food component is damaging, which, for example, is the reason for warning labels on cigarettes.

And something that's purpose is actually informing the public of a fact... you can't say that isn't about informing the public, at least not while making sense. :lol:

There are real world consequences to propagating the bull**** spread by the fear mongers. Consequences that could kill people.

I'm just ******* with u man:) typing stuff up as I talk football with cousins over skype.

Just keeping this going for fun since we already recognized each others positions early on. I can't speak for the masses but for myself, I like knowing everything about the stuff I consume. I also know the damage that can come from fear mongering IE: my vaccine analogy. IE: your point.

I keep going back to the Europe example, but when the labels were placed using a similar excuse, the end result was as I've repeated. Less choice, more expensive food. And are those citizens there any more informed than they were before?

Cal-Berkley estimated the attempted proposition in Cali would have raised the price of food annually for the average family by $400. But as long as people are "informed" I guess it's OK. ;)

EDIT: Correction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the labels. Consumers should be he ones making the choice.

They'll do more harm than good.

Instead of providing people with useful information, mandatory GMO labels would only intensify the misconception that so-called Frankenfoods endanger people's health...

That's a s*** excuse really, there's tons of stuff you can make that argument for. But it is always better to me to give out the most information and accept that tards will be tards, than to keep everyone in the dark about anything you think the "people" wouldn't like.

Technically speaking, there is an infinite amount of useless information that could be included. We can't include it all. So what's your suggested criteria for deciding what useless information must be included?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just thankful to God the package of Bryan's Pork BBQ I bought the other day is "gluten-free"!

I know this because it said so right there on the label, in huge letters. Seriously.

;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just thankful to God the package of Bryan's Pork BBQ I bought the other day is "gluten-free"!

I know this because it said so right there on the label, in huge letters. Seriously.

;D

I had a bottle of gluten free water today after I finished mowing grass. I feel healthier already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just thankful to God the package of Bryan's Pork BBQ I bought the other day is "gluten-free"!

I know this because it said so right there on the label, in huge letters. Seriously.

;D

I had a bottle of gluten free water today after I finished mowing grass. I feel healthier already.

I wouldn't surprise me if it said so on the label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...