Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    2:40 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Are GMO foods safe? Back to Topics
flyboyUT

Champion Author
Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 5, 2013 1:47:22 PM

Shoddy and biased research was used to try and show they are not it seems. More deception by environmentalists to get the answers they want it seems.
.
.
>>>GMO opponents use a lot of shady evidence to try to demonstrate that genetically modified organisms are bad for human health, but no evidence is more infamous than the study looking into the “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” in 2012. And fortunately for science, technological progress and Facebook arguments everywhere, the journal that originally published this study has printed a retraction after an investigation of lax research practices.
.
.
.
The retraction of this study is a victory not only for proponents of GMOs and scientific innovation, but also a blow against the use of junk science and research. New technologies will always have naysayers and fearmongers following their development. The showboat, pseudoscientific attacks by anti-GMO activists have the same intentions as Thomas Edison filming the electrocution of a circus elephant, to scare the hell out of people about a new technology.

With the battle for GMO labeling beginning in the United States and already raging in Europe, consumers need to be armed with the facts, not junk science. And when even the journal that published the original GMO tumor study has published a study showing that GMOs cause no harm to humans, the anti-GMO activists begin to look like they have very little evidence to stand on. GMOs can not only help to more efficiently grow crops, but also can help to lower food costs and bring nutrient enhanced food to people starving in third world countries.<<<

We need honest discussions of matters like this - not politically motivated junk science.

REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2014 4:39:05 PM

fly I'm one ahead of ya. I took a liberty. Didja see the little winky?

It's duly noted that you zeroed in on that and skipped over the actual messages. ;-P
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2014 4:29:07 PM

Mini - read again what I said -
.
.
.
there is a rather large difference between my statement of "I fear for you" and your statement of "fear me"..
.
.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2014 12:09:20 PM



Congrats on the Bundy Ranch outcome.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 10:59:34 PM

flyboyUT: "Remember at one time you said you bought into the AGW fears too."

Bingo! Guess what? I *also* bought into the belief that there was nothing wrong with GMO!

On both counts, it was only after doing research that I had a sea change in understanding.

Disillusionment is a good thing.

Bon Appétit. ;-)

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 11:07:49 PM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 10:57:58 PM

flyboyUT: "And the arguments and quasi religious fervor that says AWG is real is just exactly like the arguments, quasi religious fear and hatred of GM tech. If yo cant see the similarities mini I fear for you."

Well fly, AGW believers fear me also. You both have a lot more in common than you'd ever want to admit. ;-)


[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 11:02:10 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 10:39:05 PM

And the arguments and quasi religious fervor that says AWG is real is just exactly like the arguments, quasi religious fear and hatred of GM tech. If yo cant see the similarities mini I fear for you.

Remember at one time you said you bought into the AGW fears too.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 9:56:23 PM

Flyboy, the things both AGW and GMO have in common are: There is more money, more government, more college professors, more media, that push both. They're both pushed by the Council on Foreign Relations, and the United Nations. They're both a part of Agenda 21. Our government is bound and determined for both to succeed, because that's the goal. Again, on both issues - as I have said - the media are in line.

None of that can eliminate the dissenting information that we know about, on both issues. Only apologists dismiss dissenting data as invalid or irrelevant. (I bring up both, because *you* brought up the other, down below.)

Whether you like it, or can admit, or not - it doesn't matter - you're a pawn for the fascist goal of one-world government in the New World Order.

-----------

My organic tomato/garlic/pepper-marinated organic baked chicken breast and asparagus tonight were delicious.

Bon Appétit! ;-)

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 10:05:48 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 9:38:53 PM

Well it seems this person thinks they are safe.
.
.
>>>I am the dean of the University of Arizona College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. I tell all our research scientists that we aren't hired to prove our preconceptions or to advocate. We don't set policy. Our job is to do the best science and to provide unbiased data. We also use our scientific expertise to review what others have done.

My aim here is to give you the most accurate information we have so that you can make your own decisions.

How can we know what is the safest and most nutritious food for our families?

Genetically modified crops contribute to American families paying less for the safest food in the world than families in any other country. The crops are part of the most efficient, effective and environmentally sustainable agricultural production systems worldwide. They are considered by the world's scientific bodies, non-governmental organizations and conservation groups to be part of our environmentally sustainable future.

Genetically modified crops provide the same nutrition as, or even more than, conventional crops, but they do not contribute to increased allergies. If potential food allergens are introduced into a food that normally does not carry that allergen, then the food label must declare this. The Food and Drug Administration requires scientific evidence that no potential allergen was introduced into genetically modified products.

Genetically modified crops can use water more efficiently and effectively. Because they don't require soil tillage, genetically modified crops decrease fuel use and soil erosion. Insecticide use in Arizona has decreased by more than 80 percent since genetically modified cotton was introduced.<<<
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 8:22:55 PM

SAVMOR, besides all the other problems with Sygenta, for the health of you and your husband, I hope you don't live near Sygenta crop fields.

Despite their widespread rejection by people around the world Syngenta continues to develop and market GM crops. Syngenta currently markets crops that are either herbicide tolerant or insect resistant. The following problems are associated with herbicide tolerant or insect resistant GM crops.

Herbicide Tolerance [37]
Gene transfer to related wild species may take place, creating herbicide tolerant ‘super weeds’. This depends on the proximity of species with which the crop can successfully hybridise.

The crop itself may become a problem weed, either by spreading from the field or when seed shed at harvest emerges in the following crop (so-called ‘volunteer’ weeds). This is considered inevitable by many weed specialists.
The increased use of the specific herbicide a crop is made tolerant to, will encourage the emergence of resistant weeds through selection pressure.
Neighbouring organic or non-GM crops may be pollinated by the GM crop, leading to genetic contamination with the foreign genes. Levels of acceptable contamination have not been set and organic farming standards are likely to demand zero levels.

The widespread use of broad spectrum herbicides (like glufosinate or glyphosate) will lead to fields being efficiently cleared of weeds, thus removing some of the remaining food sources for farmland birds and other wildlife. The use of pesticides and herbicides is already thought to have contributed to the dramatic decline in farmland bird species in the UK.
Herbicide use patterns will change and although amounts may be reduced overall in terms of weight and volume (in large part because broad spectrum herbicides are more potent), the use of the specific herbicides that crops are being made resistant to will increase dramatically.
Insect resistance [38]

Insects will become resistant to the inbuilt insecticide and cause crop failures. In the USA, ‘refuges’ - where non-insect resistant crops are grown - of up to 40% of the crop area are being recommended to avoid this.
Knock-on effects on the food web by destroying non-target insects. Studies have shown that lacewings and monarch butterfly larvae can be harmed.
Gene transfer to related wild species may take place, creating insect resistant ‘super weeds’. This depends on the proximity of species with which the crop can successfully hybridise.

Neighbouring organic or non-GM crops may be pollinated by the GM crop, leading to genetic contamination with the foreign genes. Levels of acceptable contamination have not been set and organic farming standards are likely to demand zero levels.

The majority of Syngenta’s GM crops are sold in the USA. Syngenta is the only company to commercially market a GM crop within the EU. A single variety of GM insect resistant maize known as Event 176 or Compa CB is the only GM crop variety to have gained approval for commercial growing in the EU prior to the start of the moratorium on new GM crop varieties.
In the UK one of the crop lines being grown as part of the government sponsored farmscale trials, a herbicide tolerant (RoundUp Ready) sugar beet known as line #77 or T9100152 is a joint project between Monsanto and Syngenta.[39]
Back to top
5.12 Future GM crops

Whilst Syngenta is actively involved in the introduction of first generation GM crops (see current GM crops above), perhaps the greatest threat they pose is through the development of the next generation of GM crops, crops that have perceived benefits to customers. Many of these new technologies are being developed less because the company has great altruistic intentions than because it sees them as a method for dissipating public and regulatory opposition to GM crops.

Syngenta has been at the forefront of developing crops with altered nutritional characteristics. The company recently announced its intention to seek regulatory approval for the introduction of a new GM rice in Japan. The rice has been modified to remove a protein responsible for allergic reactions and is being aimed at kidney dialysis patients in Asia who cannot eat normal rice because of an intolerance to the cereal's high protein content. Michael Pragnell chief executive of Syngenta talking about the GM rice said

‘It's a niche market, but it's a latch-lifter, the regulators either have to become less fastidious or deny benefits to patients. We are pursuing these markets not because we will make a fortune, but because it will introduce some regulatory tension.’[40]

A similar motive is behind Syngenta’s intention to collaborate in a project to give away vitamin A enhanced rice (also known as ‘Golden Rice’) to farmers in the global south.[41] Vitamin A deficiency is a major cause of irreversible blindness in the global south. Critics of the Vitamin A rice point out that it does not address the underlying causes of vitamin A deficiency: mainly poverty and lack of access to a diverse diet. In the short-term, measures such as supplements (pills) and food fortification are cheap, effective and safe alternative sources of vitamin A.[42] Food campaigners the ETC Group describes Golden Rice as a ‘Flag of Convenience’ under which biotech companies are trying to win support for GM crops.[43]
Like many controversial transnational companies, Syngenta has been doing its best to make its name and business activities appear to be inextricably linked to the concept of ‘sustainable development’. This was heightened by the build up to the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in September 2002. Syngenta also funds the Syngenta Foundation which ‘devotes its resources to promoting economically and ecologically sustainable agriculture throughout the world. Our work focuses on poverty-oriented agricultural research and development.’[44]
Syngenta and GURTs

Syngenta is a world leader in the development for commercial use of crops incorporating Genetic Use Restriction Technologies, or GURTs. GURTs enable biotech companies to retain control and ownership over their products even after they have been sold to farmers. The best known of these technologies, often known as 'Terminator' technology, is used to make crops that generate sterile seed, forcing farmers to return to the biotech company to buy new seed every year. Another GURTs application - 'Traitor' technology - enables the control of particular plant characteristics. For example, a characteristic such as plant ripening can be switched on and off with the application of a proprietary (or biotech company licensed) chemical. If commercialised, GURTs will lock farmers across the world into a cycle that stops them saving seed and forces them to buy new patented seed and/or switching chemicals from biotech companies every year. In 2000 one of the outcomes of COP 5 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity was a call for a ban on the field-testing of GURTs crops and a moratorium on their development until their impact has been fully assessed.

Despite the promises of both of its predecessor companies, Astra-Zeneca and Novartis, to not develop technologies that would prevent farmers from growing second generation seed, Syngenta has continued to patent and develop GURTs. A report compiled for Action Aid in 2000[45] identified that of all the companies involved in agricultural biotechnology Syngenta held the largest number of GURTs patents (36 of 71 patents). Amongst these patents are techniques that control the following characteristics in staple food crops: crop disease susceptibility (unless treated with chemicals), crop fertility, crop flowering, crop sprouting and crop aging. In recent years Syngenta's UK research and development centre at Jealotts Hill near Bracknell, Berkshire has been home to several GURTs field trials.[46]
Back to top
5.2 Pesticides

Whilst Syngenta’s GM crops have attracted lots of attention recently, the majority of their business still comes from the sale of pesticides.

Paraquat [47]
‘The only highly toxic herbicide of the post-war years’ - World Health Organisation on Paraquat [48]
Syngenta has attracted criticism for its continued manufacture and sale of the insecticide Gramoxone or paraquat. A number of countries in Europe and in the global south have banned or resticted the use of the chemical. Workers and farmers regularly exposed to paraquat experience serious problems with their health. The high toxicity of the chemical and the lack of antidote leads to serious ill-health, and even death, from exposure.
‘When I started handling the pesticides I experienced headaches. … When I used Gramoxone in particular my nose bled. I used to get severe pains on the left side of my stomach’.

‘After spraying, I had very bad headaches, felt nausea, giddiness and chest pains.’

- Women sprayers on palm oil estates, Malaysia. [49]
Alongside health risks there are also concerns about the impact of the chemical on the environment. Research indicates that it ‘is persistent and accumulates in soil. Studies indicate that paraquat has adverse effects on mammals, birds, fish and amphibians. In Sweden we believe that, for the environment and for health, the only safe use is no use,’ said Göran Eklöf of SSNC.[50] Despite the concern voiced about the continued use of Paraquat, Syngenta has recently built a new manufacturing facility for the chemical in China and intends to expand the market for it.

Exploiting Pesticide Licensing Loopholes

Syngenta has been discovered exploiting loopholes in European pesticide licensing regulations which have allowed them to import seeds treated with chemicals unlicensed for use in the UK....(read more at link above)
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 8:02:00 PM


Savmor... Then why did people crab about a master Aryan race?



[Edited by: timothyu at 4/12/2014 8:02:33 PM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 8:01:44 PM

SAVMOR: "I do not see anything wrong or dangerous about GMO's"

1.1 GM potatoes damaged rats
1. Rats were fed potatoes engineered to produce their own insecticide.
2. They developed potentially precancerous cell growth in the digestive tract, inhibited development of their brains, livers and testicles, partial atrophy of the liver, enlarged pancreases and intestines and immune system damage.
3. The cause was not the insecticide, but in all likelihood was the process of genetic engineering.
4. GM foods on the market—which were created with the same process—have not been subject to such an extensive testing protocol.

1.2 Rats fed GM tomatoes got bleeding stomachs, several died
1. Rats were fed the GM FlavrSavr tomato for 28 days.
2. Seven of 20 rats developed stomach lesions (bleeding stomachs); another 7 of 40 died within two weeks and were replaced in the study.
3. The tomato was approved despite unresolved safety questions by FDA scientists.

1.3 Rats fed Bt corn had multiple health problems
1. Rats were fed Monsanto's Mon 863 Bt corn for 90 days.
2. They showed significant changes in their blood cells, livers and kidneys, which might indicate disease.
3. Although experts demanded follow-up, Monsanto used unscientific, contradictory arguments to dismiss concerns.

1.4 Mice fed GM Bt potatoes had intestinal damage
1. Mice were fed either GM potatoes engineered to produce the Bt-toxin or natural potatoes spiked with Bt-toxin.
2. Both diets created abnormal and excessive cell growth in the lower part of their small intestine (ileum).
3. Similar damage to the human small intestine might result in incontinence or flu-like symptoms, and may be precancerous.
4. This study overturns the assumptions that Bt-toxin is destroyed during digestion and is not biologically active in mammals.

1.5 Workers exposed to Bt cotton developed allergies
1. Agricultural laborers in six villages who picked or loaded Bt cotton reported reactions of the skin, eyes and upper respiratory tract.
2. Some laborers required hospitalization.
3. Employees at a cotton gin factory take antihistamines everyday.
4. One doctor treated about 250 cotton laborers

1.6 Sheep died after grazing in Bt cotton fields
1. After the cotton harvest in parts of India, sheep herds grazed continuously on Bt cotton plants.
2. Reports from four villages revealed that about 25% of the sheep died within a week.
3. Post mortem studies suggest a toxic reaction.

1.7 Inhaled Bt corn pollen may have triggered disease in humans
1. In 2003, approximately 100 people living next to a Bt cornfield in the Philippines developed skin, respiratory, intestinal reactions and other symptoms while the corn was shedding pollen.
2. Blood tests of 39 people showed an antibody response to Bt-toxin, which supports—but does not prove—a link.
3. The symptoms reappeared in 2004 in at least four other villages that planted the same corn variety.
4. Villagers also attribute several animal deaths to the corn.

1.8 Farmers report pigs and cows became sterile from GM corn
1. More than 20 farmers in North America report that pigs fed GM corn varieties had low conception rates, false pregnancies or gave birth to bags of water.
2. Both male and female pigs became sterile.
3. Some farmers also report sterility among cows.

1.9 Twelve cows in Germany died mysteriously when fed Bt corn
1. Twelve dairy cows died on a farm in Hesse Germany, after being fed a diet with significant amounts of a single GM corn variety, Bt 176.
2. Other cows in the herd had to be killed due to some mysterious illness.
3. Syngenta, the producers of Bt 176, compensated the farmer for part of his losses, but did not admit responsibility for the cow deaths.
4. In spite of demands by the farmer and even public protests, no detailed autopsy reports were made available.

1.10 Mice fed Roundup Ready soy had liver cell problems
1. The liver cells of mice fed Roundup Ready soybeans showed significant changes.
2. Irregularly shaped nuclei and nucleoli, an increased number of nuclear pores and other changes, all suggest higher metabolism and altered patterns of gene expression.
3. The changes may be in response to a toxin.
4. Most of the effects disappeared when GM soy was removed from the diet.

1.11 Mice fed Roundup Ready soy had problems with the pancreas
1. Mice fed GM soy showed changes in the synthesis and processing of digestive enzymes.
2. The production of alpha-amylase, a major digestive enzyme, dropped by as much as 77%.
3. This, combined with other pancreatic changes, suggests that GM soy may interfere with digestion and assimilation, as well as alter gene expression.

1.12 Mice fed Roundup Ready soy had unexplained changes in testicular cells
1. The structure and gene expression pattern of testicle cells of mice fed Roundup Ready soybeans changed significantly.
2. The cause for the changes is unknown, but the testicles are sensitive indicators of toxins.
3. Some of the changes might possibly influence adult fertility as well as the health of the offspring.
4. Mouse embryos from GM-fed mothers did show a temporary decrease in gene expression.

1.13 Roundup Ready Soy Changed Cell Metabolism in Rabbit Organs
1. Rabbits fed GM soy for about 40 days showed significant differences in the amounts of certain enzymes in their kidneys, hearts and livers.
2. A rise in LDH1 levels in all three organs suggests an increase in cellular metabolism.
3. Changes in other enzymes point to other alterations in the organs.

1.14 Most offspring of rats fed Roundup Ready soy died within three weeks
1. Female rats were fed Roundup Ready soy starting before conception and continuing through pregnancy and weaning.
2. Of the offspring, 55.6% died within three weeks compared to 9% from non-GM soy controls.
3. Some pups from GM-fed mothers were significantly smaller and both mothers and pups were more aggressive.
4. In a separate study, after a lab began feeding rats a commercial diet containing GM soy, offspring mortality reached 55.3%.
5. When offspring from GM-fed rats were mated together, they were unable to conceive.

1.15 Soy allergies skyrocketed in the UK, soon after GM soy was introduced
1. In a single year, 1999, soy allergies in the UK jumped from 10% to 15% of the sampled population.
2. GM soy was imported into the country shortly before 1999.
3. Antibody tests verify that some individuals react differently to GM and non-GM soy varieties.
4. GM soy also has an increased concentration of a known allergen

1.16 Rats fed Roundup Ready canola had heavier livers
1. The livers of rats fed GM canola were 12-16% heavier than those fed non-GM varieties.
2. The liver is a chemical factory and primary detoxifier for the body.
3. Heavier livers may indicate liver disease or inflammation.
4. If this were caused by oil-soluble toxins, they may be present in canola oil.

1.17 Twice the number of chickens died when fed Liberty Link corn
1. The death rate for chickens fed Chardon LL GM corn for 42 days was 7%, compared to 3.5% for controls.
2. GM-fed chickens also had more erratic body weight and food intake, and less weight gain overall.
3. The study was designed so that only huge differences would be statistically significant.
4. The results were therefore dismissed without follow-up.

1.18 GM peas generated an allergic-type inflammatory response in mice
1. In advanced tests not normally part of GM crop evaluations, protein produced by GM peas generated a dangerous immune response in mice.
2. That "same" protein, when produced naturally in beans, had no effect.
3. The GM peas produced a subtle, hard-to-detect difference in the way sugar molecules attached to the protein, which likely caused the problem.
4. The response in mice suggested that the GM peas could provoke inflammatory or allergic reactions in humans; commercialization of the peas was therefore cancelled.
5. This type of subtle but dangerous change in the GM protein would rarely, if ever, be detected in the safety assessments typically used to approve GM crops.

1.19 Eyewitness reports: Animals avoid GMOs
1. When given a choice, several animals avoided eating GM food.
2. In farmer-run tests, cows and pigs repeatedly passed up GM corn.
3. Animals that avoided GM food include cows, pigs, geese, squirrels, elk, deer, raccoons, mice and rats.

1.20 A GM food supplement killed about 100 people and caused 5,000-10,000 to fall sick
1. One brand of the supplement L-tryptophan created a deadly US epidemic in the 1980s
2. The company genetically engineered bacteria to produce the supplement more economically.
3. Their product contained many contaminants, five or six of which were suspected as the cause of the disease.
4. Discovering the epidemic required multiple coincidences, suggesting that adverse reactions to GM foods may be hard to identify.

http://responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/65-health-risks/1notes
Profile Pic
SAVMOR
Champion Author Idaho

Posts:6,763
Points:1,533,895
Joined:Jun 2005
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:59:29 PM

Here in Idaho Syngenta helps make crops more efficient, helps the farmers have more robust plants so the plants can reach their full potential for larger and healthier crop yields and crops that are more resilient to pests and herbicides. Genetic modification is everywhere and in we humans who have evolved into what we are today. Companies like Syngenta are just escalating the process by making healthier seeds. I do not see anything wrong or dangerous about GMO's
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:55:16 PM

flyboyUT: "Ahhhhh Mini - I follow the truth where ever it leads."

Be truthful fly - you're protecting your paradigm.

flyboyUT: "Time will tell Mini. I bet you a icecream sandwich or something that in the future we will find that AGW is a fanciful hoax right along with the belief that GM food is bad for us."

How much time do you have? Since the gubment is pushing both, it may be a long time.

We already know the frauds from scientists with AGW. And we know the shenanigans with biotech and pharmaceutical industries. GMO and AGW have the same thing in common - they're both multi-billion dollar industries, and those in charge of the studies are the beneficiaries to favorable outcomes by the government, they get a pass, rather than being scrutinized. There is not one without the other. They're intertwined. It is fascism.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 8:00:24 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:52:20 PM


Reputable data needs to come from a reputable source and as the last 60 years has shown, one does not exist.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:49:29 PM

Ahhhhh Mini - I follow the truth where ever it leads. On the GM thing so far it leads to the position of safety is proven so far. \Now if in the future it is shown that a GM food or all of them are a health hazard I will join you in trying to have them removed from the food chain. Until then I feel that the most reputable data shows that they are safe to eat. But I find it interesting that those who are crying the most about GM foods are eerily similar in outlook to those who are proponents of AGW. Same religious fervor and take no prisoners attitude.

Time will tell Mini. I bet you a icecream sandwich or something that in the future we will find that AGW is a fanciful hoax right along with the belief that GM food is bad for us.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:42:45 PM

flyboy, the writer of your Forbes article is a liberal and a tireless lobbyist for GMO and biotech industry.

Jon Entine [author, TV News producer, business & sustainability consultant]... born in Philadelphia...graduated from Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut in 1974 with a B.A. in philosophy. Entine co-directed the presidential primary campaign for Senator George McGovern in Sullivan County in New Hampshire in 1972. After graduation, he became the assistant director for the re-election campaign of Father Robert Drinan, a liberal Democratic Congressman from suburban Boston. He currently lives in Cincinnati.

Entine worked for ABC News as a writer, assignment desk editor, and producer in New York City and Chicago from 1975-1983 for various ABC News programs, including the ABC Evening News, 20/20 and Nightline. He took a leave of absence from ABC News in 1981-1982 to study at the University of Michigan under a National Endowment for the Humanities fellowship in journalism.
Entine joined NBC News in New York in 1984 as a special segment producer for NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, where he worked until 1990. He became Brokaw’s long-time producer.

-----------------------
Didja get that? He campaigned for McGovern and another liberal Democratic Congressman, worked at liberal media ABC and NBC. Now he's now a Sustainability Consultant! <-- That's straight from the United Nations' Agenda 21!

What else would a tireless lobbyist for biotech industry say? ROFLOL.
"Genetic Literacy Project." Catchy name. And overtly transparent. ;-P
SMH

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 7:49:57 PM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:20:13 PM

The real political left, who are really in charge... LOVE Monsanto and GMOs.

Sylvia Burwell, replacement for resigning Kathleen Sebelius, ran Common Core, Bill Gates vaccines and GMOs in Africa

Burwell was also a director of the industry-colluding group Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), a front group for pushing GMO dominance into developing nations. As GM Watch reports (5), “On October 12, 2010, representatives from the Seattle based group ‘AGRA Watch’ joined colleagues from South Africa and Kenya to critique the actions of the Gates foundation and its Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) colluding with industry to promote GMOs and pressure African countries to legalize them.”

Sylvia Burwell also worked closely with AGRA’s chief financial officer, Alexander Friedman, founder and president of Accelerated Clinical, a “biotechnology services company dedicated to accelerating the clinical trial process for biotechnology firms.” (6)

AGRA Watch is a Seattle-based group that, according to their website:

[is] challenging the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s questionable agricultural programs in Africa, including its Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). The Gates Foundation and AGRA claim to be “pro-poor” and “pro-environment,” but their approach is closely aligned with transnational corporations, such as Monsanto, and foreign policy actors like USAID. They take advantage of food and global climate crises to promote high-tech, market-based, industrial agriculture and generate profits for corporations even while degrading the environment and dis-empowering farmers. Their programs are a form of philanthrocapitalism based on biopiracy.

AGRA Watch goes on to explain, “The [Gates] Foundation promotes industrial farming, inappropriate technologies, and pro-corporate policies that will make things worse for the hungry, for small farmers, consumer health, and the environment in Africa.”

Sylvia Burwell also has strong ties to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin. (7)

--------------------------

But flyboy, you go ahead and call us "paranoid" and "liberal luddites" and say we "are all alike." You can stay in that fantasy world of yours and keep that big head buried in the sand just as long as you want.

SMH
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:11:54 PM

More information that the ideology of the GM is scary folks is out to lunch.
.
.
>>>The claim that genetically engineered crops are ‘understudied’—the meme represented in the quotes highlighted above—has become a staple of opponents of crop biotechnology, especially activist journalists. Anti-GMO campaigners, including many organic supporters, assert time and again that genetically modified crops have not been safety tested or that the research done to date on the health or environmental impact of GMOs has “all” been done by the companies that produce the seeds. Therefore, they claim, consumers are taking a ‘leap of faith’ in concluding that they face no harm from consuming foods made with genetically modified ingredients.

That is false.
.
.
.
and the conclusions is
.
.
.
In short, genetically modified foods are among the most extensively studied scientific subjects in history. This year celebrates the 30th anniversary of GM technology, and the paper’s conclusion is unequivocal: there is no credible evidence that GMOs pose any unique threat to the environment or the public’s health. The reason for the public’s distrust of GMOs lies in psychology, politics and false debates.<<<

All the chicken little prognostications of the same folks who have freaked out over the idea that the earth is gonna die in a hot water bath or something are migrating to the "hate GM food" branch of sillyness. The earth is not going to die in a heat wave caused by man nor is it going to die from eating GM food.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:11:41 PM

-

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 7:16:54 PM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 7:01:30 PM

Par for the course:

ABBOTT PARK, Ill., Oct. 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Abbott Laboratories today announced that William M. Daley, chairman of the Midwest for JPMorgan Chase & Co., was named to the Abbott Board of Directors, effective immediately.

"We welcome Mr. Daley to the Abbott Board," said Miles D. White, chairman and chief executive officer, Abbott Laboratories. "He is a respected businessman and public servant and brings a wealth of global business experience and perspective to the board."

Daley is the senior executive of the Midwest region across businesses and serves on the JPMorgan Chase & Co. Executive Committee and on its International Council. Daley joined JPMorgan Chase & Co. earlier this year after serving as president of SBC Communications for three years. In 2000, he coordinated the effort for permanent Normal Trade Relations with China and chaired Vice President Al Gore's U.S. presidential campaign. Daley served as U.S. Secretary of Commerce under President Bill Clinton from 1997 to 2000. As Special Counsel to President Clinton in 1993, Daley coordinated the successful campaign to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Daley serves on the boards of directors of Boston Properties, Inc., The Art Institute of Chicago and Loyola University. He also sits on the Council on Foreign Relations....

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 7:03:16 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:54:22 PM


Agreed.. two sides .. same coin.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:50:15 PM

"Once again the blind lead the blind playing their right/left games blissfully unaware there is a new government over all governments. How many here are even aware of how the North American Union operates here over three countries and our governments."

I've spoken of it many times throughout the years. Nary got a response.

"It's a new world out there but the rabble is too busy squabbling amongst themselves to even care."

It's exactly what those in charge want - ignorant rabble that are unaware, bickering about left/right issues. At the Council on Foreign Relations meetings, 'Billary', Cheney and the Bushes are best buddies. They know who is really running things. The first 30 seconds - Hillary Clinton at the CFR.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 6:50:54 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:38:18 PM


Exactly. Once again the blind lead the blind playing their right/left games blissfully unaware there is a new government over all governments. How many here are even aware of how the North American Union operates here over three countries and our governments. It's a new world out there but the rabble is too busy squabbling amongst themselves to even care.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:37:52 PM

If the choice is between Jab and Billary I will hold my nose and vote for Jeb. But I do wish they would run someone else.

His stance on illegal immigration doesnt fit well with my ideas.

Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:33:47 PM

It's best to name what it for what it is. It is a very real system of global fascism run by elites that began over a century ago. The largest biotechs and pharmaceuticals are part and parcel in the system, and it doesn't matter what party is in office - the system is set up and it goes forward.

If my cooperative of independent farmers were to bring a new genetically-modified seed to the USDA - with our own tests and reports that say it was safe - the USDA would *not* accept it. That's the same with small pharmaceutical companies that must wait years for approval from the FDA. But large pharmaceutical companies are given passes - just like the large biotechs - their products are fast-tracked through the regulatory approval process.

Our political system is a shell game; our elected representatives are face-pawns. The real work goes on behind closed doors with unelected appointees heading the most powerful agencies in the Executive Branch (which includes the regulatory agencies) of our government. The media are owned and controlled by the same system. If you don't play by the rules and watch your p's and q's, you are drummed-out.

Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us. Ron Paul warned us. From bottom to top, a geopolitical and international corporatist system runs things; it is a symbiosis that has gotten into and corrupted governments throughout the world. It's not just the Obama admin. This administration has merely helped to bring the problems closer to the surface. Both Bushes and Clintons are and were a part of it. As long as we keep blaming the other party, and ignore those really ruling things, we lose. Cheryl Atkisson, Dr. Paul, etc., etc., - anyone in a position to talk about the truth, gets marginalized.

It's a form of soft fascism known as corporatism. It is real. It isn't what the founding fathers had in mind. It isn't socialism. It isn't communism. It isn't about small government or a democratic republic. It isn't about free-market capitalism either. It is fascism.

When Jeb is elected President in 2016, he will be part of the very system. Nothing will change. Campaign promises will continue to be spoken and broken. And more liberties will be taken. Believe it.

As I75 said, it's time for the Pitchfork Party.



[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 6:38:34 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:20:37 PM


"No thanks I choose not to accept your ideology. "

Yet you have the nerve to go into the Christian forum based on that ideology and spouting false allegiance?
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:18:59 PM


"Yep you liberal luddites are all alike arent you."

Sorry. Those separation games are restricted to your world.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:16:33 PM

"You must listen to us for we know what is best for you. We will protect you and serve you. Believe this so that we may continue to reign over you and profit at your expense. Do not rebel against our self imposed authority or we will destroy you in an way available to us."

Yep you liberal luddites are all alike arent you. No thanks I choose not to accept your ideology.

Go along now and play.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 6:06:50 PM


Agreed. It is already above it and serves no nation.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:54:34 PM

Tim, conservatives are afraid to broach this topic for fear of looking anti-free-market or anti-capitalist. Those who understand what's going on, realize that this kind of corporatism has nothing at all to do with free-market capitalism.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 5:56:17 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:51:58 PM


"On GMOs, you don't have a skeptical bone in your bod. "

I understand much of your society is driven by political separation. Perhaps it is just fear of biting the hand that controls it.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:49:11 PM

flyboyUT: "You keep saying I'm not skeptical - that isnt true."

Fly, I know you *want* to believe you are skeptical. But in this case you are NOT. Fly, You're NOT skeptical! You have taken their word, lock, stock and barrel. Further, you have claimed that all data that dissents with what the Monsanto/ConAgra/DOW studies came up with, are invalid! Fly, your skepticism - on this topic - is so far down in the basement it is non-existent.

flyboy, you have done just what the USDA has done. You have done just what the EPA has done. You have accepted the studies of those who benefit. On GMOs, you don't have a skeptical bone in your bod.

Thank you for bringing up AGW. It roasts your own argument.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 5:52:35 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:43:52 PM


You must listen to us for we know what is best for you. We will protect you and serve you. Believe this so that we may continue to reign over you and profit at your expense. Do not rebel against our self imposed authority or we will destroy you in an way available to us.
Such has been the ways of mankind since the beginning. Only the names have been changed.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:43:27 PM

You keep saying I'm not skeptical - that isnt true Mini. I jut have not seen any good reason to condemn GM food. If and when it does prove that GM food is harmful then and only then should we get up in arms.

At present the only data we really have is a bunch of folks who are emotionally involved saying we all gonna die. Sorry that isnt good enough!

Just as its not good enough if a bunch of emotionally involved people say we all gonna die from AGW.

Its not settled science - ever!

But demanding that food producers make separate labels depending on what state they sell their food in and keep track of each ingredient supplier and where they source every ingredient is just not a wise thing to do in my opinion.

Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 5:32:37 PM

flyboy: "Jim Hanson, Al Gore and that hockey stick guy might argue with you Mini. After all Obama says its settled science doesnt he?" (flyboy is talking about man-made global warming here - AGW)

EXACTLY flyboy! They are telling us the science is settled on AGW, although there's dissenting data that says that the science is *not* settled! They tell us the dissenting studies are invalid. Don't they? That's no different than you, the USDA Monsanto and the biotech machine trying to convince others that all the dissenting studies and anecdotal data that are critical to GMOs are invalid.

flyboy: "The IPCC has tons of their studies that say we all gonna die from AGW dont they." (Again, flyboy is discussing global warming.)

Exactly. The EPA believes those tons of global warming studies...as if they are gospel! Right? Well, the USDA believes the tons of studies on GMOs, paid for by the biotechs, also. In *both* cases, they have same thing in common - the people who benefit from the studies are the ones writing/overseeing the reports. You cannot get around that ugly fact, flyboy - in both instances, the fox is in ruling the hen house.

That you can accept that the science is settled on GMOs - and that there is a "consensus" - that they don't need independent, NON-DOW CHEM/NON-Monsanto/NON-USDA studies - is a total non sequitur (we KNOW we CANNOT trust the EPA on AGW, and we cannot trust the USDA on GMOs, because they accept the chemical companies's reports, without question).

flyboy, on this topic, I'm afraid your gullibility quotient is off the charts. I'm intelligent enough to realize that there's enough dissenting data that says the science is not settled on this issue, and that further study is necessary (and was necessary a long time ago).

So fly, you may continue to believe whatever you want. But the science is clearly not settled. I'm proud of my skepticism. (And again - just because you choose to call tons of dissenting evidence invalid, doesn't make it so.)

To good health, bon appétit and all that rot.

;-P

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/12/2014 5:41:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 3:27:50 PM

Jim Hanson, Al Gore and that hockey stick guy might argue with you Mini. After all Obama says its settled science doesnt he? The IPCC has tons of their studies that say we all gonna die from AGW dont they.

The science of AGW is settled just like the Science is settled that says GM is BAAAAAAAAD for you.Tim if that process is viable it might be a boon to all of us. We could reduce the use of farming techniques that are not that good and reduce the amount of land farmed - put more back in fallow/wildlife habitat/watershed protection etc. Sounds like it might be a win win situation for all of us. If it works. If it can be done and produce fuel at a reasonable cost in terms of money and environmental effects. Heck we might even be able to stop drilling for oil and stuff - sounds like a dream come true - is it the perpetual motion machine ????????
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2014 3:01:57 PM


"Now for some more fun - since GM is so bad does that mean we cant use it to make fuel either?"

No need soon.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 9:51:48 PM

There's a Grand Canyon of difference. AGW has Mama Gaia invalidating it. There are zero studies - none at all - that show AGW is real. OTOH there are tons of evidence of actual, real health problems with GMOs.

Just because you choose to label tons of evidence invalid, doesn't make the evidence invalid.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/11/2014 9:58:13 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 8:23:19 PM

fear of GM technology with no valid proof is just like fear of AGW again with no valid proof.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 4:15:46 PM

"Be careful what you wish for. A larger, more powerful government would only serve to strengthen that which you already abhor. "

Thanks for the summary, mini.

But since I do not seek a larger, more powerful government, per se, I won't have to be concerned.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 1:57:01 PM

It's like when myalgic encephalomyalitus, a polio like disease, was costing disability insurers too much long term money, it was taken off the list of official diseases two decades ago. The disease still exists but not officially or legally and now goes medically unrecognized in the US.



[Edited by: timothyu at 4/11/2014 2:00:02 PM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 1:51:34 PM

In the U.S., instead of safety testing GM seeds, the USDA accepts biotech company-paid tests, and simply deregulates them. It's a special deal the USDA has arranged with the biotech industry.

The next one to be deregulated is a 2,4-D-resistant genetically modified strain of corn for DOW Chemical Company

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/11/2014 2:00:19 PM EST]
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 1:30:44 PM


Borrowed from another forum but applicable

"Men desire authority for its own sake that they may bear a rule, command and control other men, and live uncommanded and uncontrolled themselves" (St. Thomas More, A Dialogue of Comfort).
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,032
Points:3,207,985
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 1:26:05 PM

Nobody has ever said that consuming pesticides is a "good" thing. That is a different issue completely from the safety or non-safety of GMO foods or crops.

Speaking of which, many GMO crops are not used as foodstuffs. Some are used to make chemical intermediates for other syntheses or for pharma use.

Now, should we test GMO foods, sure. Why not? Should we ban everything, pending the outcome of the testing? Not if it's already been proved safe and non-toxic for a number of years, which most of these have been.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 1:19:43 PM

Davewalk: "It turns out that this so-called "study" has never been published at all in the four years since this article was written. I wonder why?"

The link also said, "Scientists who discover adverse findings from GMOs are regularly attacked, ridiculed, denied funding, and even fired. When Ermakova reported the high infant mortality among GM soy fed offspring, for example, she appealed to the scientific community to repeat and verify her preliminary results. She also sought additional funds to analyze preserved organs. Instead, she was attacked and vilified. Samples were stolen from her lab, papers were burnt on her desk, and she said that her boss, under pressure from his boss, told her to stop doing any more GMO research. No one has yet repeated Ermakova's simple, inexpensive studies."

Did you wonder about that also?

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/11/2014 1:20:45 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Davewalk
All-Star Author Los Angeles

Posts:908
Points:2,226,985
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 12:20:11 PM

From mini's link:

<<The study, jointly conducted by Surov's Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the National Association for Gene Security, is expected to be published in three months (July 2010)--so the technical details will have to wait.>>

It turns out that this so-called "study" has never been published at all in the four years since this article was written. I wonder why?
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:16,735
Points:200,305
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 11, 2014 11:20:22 AM


Biotec stocks fell dramatically yesterday as Monsanto shares dumped.

However...
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 10, 2014 11:45:33 PM

Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility, Infant Mortality in Hamsters

"Russian National Academy of Sciences, reported that more than half the babies from mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks. This was also five times higher than the 10% death rate of the non-GMO soy group."

(Yeah, I know flyboy - not 'reputable' proof. What kills rats won't harm humans. That's why we use rats for safety studies, right? Because there's no correlation! Besides, U.S. government-paid shill scientists are so much more reliable. Just ask AGW scientists. Right?)

"Snicker smile chuckle"

------------
"Central Iowa Farmer Jerry Rosman also had trouble with pigs and cows becoming sterile. Some of his pigs even had false pregnancies or gave birth to bags of water. After months of investigations and testing, he finally traced the problem to GM corn feed. Every time a newspaper, magazine, or TV show reported Jerry's problems, he would receive calls from more farmers complaining of livestock sterility on their farm, linked to GM corn."
-------------

(Yeah, I know flyboy. Again, not 'reputable' proof. We should wholesale dismiss Rosman and claim his and other farmers' anecdotal problems are irrelevant "not reputable proof."

Besides, we ALL know that what causes sterility in pigs and cows, couldn't possibly effect humans. Right?)

"Snicker smile chuckle"

-------------
"Scientists who discover adverse findings from GMOs are regularly attacked, ridiculed, denied funding, and even fired. When Ermakova reported the high infant mortality among GM soy fed offspring, for example, she appealed to the scientific community to repeat and verify her preliminary results. She also sought additional funds to analyze preserved organs. Instead, she was attacked and vilified. Samples were stolen from her lab, papers were burnt on her desk, and she said that her boss, under pressure from his boss, told her to stop doing any more GMO research. No one has yet repeated Ermakova's simple, inexpensive studies."
--------------

(Wow, she was treated like scientists skeptical of AGW! Why would that be? But, I know flyboy - that's not 'reputable' proof there that there's anything to be concerned about.)

"Snicker smile chuckle"

--------------
"In an attempt to offer her sympathy, one of her colleagues suggested that maybe the GM soy will solve the over population problem!"
--------------

(Isn't that nice? Maybe SemiSteve will change his mind about GMOs.)

"Snicker smile chuckle"

Besides, the thousands of Monsanto-paid studies - even in Italy - are all telling us the truth. That's why the USDA deregulates them rather than rule on their safety. "Snicker smile chuckle"

Bon Appétit!

"Snicker smile chuckle"

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/10/2014 11:54:25 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,878
Points:1,263,250
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 10, 2014 10:58:36 PM

Strange and here I thought the claims that GM was so bad sounded just exactly like those who squeal that AGW is gonna kill us all.

Same reasoning it seems. Same dependence on shaky so called scientists. Same lack of the predictions of catastrophe being realized as time goes by......

Keep smiling Mini....
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:10,809
Points:948,365
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Apr 10, 2014 10:39:24 PM

flyboy, your cavalier attitude toward it all, and your denial of anything disquieting about this entire mess, is duly noted. You remind me of government-study believers on AGW, and their 100% consensus claims -- although independent scientists and physicists all over the world won't touch it with a 1,000 foot pole.

It is truly amazing to me how people can rationalize anything. Anything at all.

[Edited by: ministorage at 4/10/2014 10:44:23 PM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics