Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    11:59 AM

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:27,014
Points:1,372,150
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
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2014 11:41:10 PM

Horsefeathers would be another GM product from the labs at Monsanto.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2014 11:29:32 PM

Horsefeathers Tim!
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2014 4:35:09 PM


GMO crops were created to further the use of chemicals.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2014 4:31:50 PM

So you are saying that biologcally active chemicals that were designed to kill certain things might cause trouble. This is somehow supposed to be news??????

We also know without a shadow of a doubt that some to many inorganic compounds can cause similar problems.

But it relates to GMO technology how again?????

Are these chemicals - both organic and inorganic used in the production of other crops or things? Are they also used in the production of GMO crops? If the answer is yes to bot then the problem is not GM technology if you ask me.

Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:23,468
Points:2,101,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2014 3:08:29 PM



GMO Free USA

BREAKING: New study links pesticide exposure during pregnancy to autism. A study of 970 children found that children of mothers exposed to organophosphates were 60 percent more likely to have an ASD than children of non-exposed mothers, the authors report in Environmental Health Perspectives. Autism risk was also increased with exposure to so-called pyrethroid insecticides, as was the risk for developmental delay. Carbamate pesticides were linked to developmental delay but not ASDs. For some pesticides, exposure seemed to be most important just before conception and in the third trimester, but for others it didn’t seem to matter when during pregnancy women were exposed. Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, Director of the Children's Environmental Health Center at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York speculated that the pesticides probably drifted from crops through the air, and that’s how pregnant women were exposed. The new study did not measure airborne pesticide levels, however.

While glyphosate was not included in the scope of this study, it should be noted that in pure chemical terms glyphosate is an organophosphate in that it contains carbon and phosphorous. This leads us to ask... what would the study have found if they had included glyphosate in the scope?

READ: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/23/us-pesticides-pregnancy-autism-idUSKBN0EY1BF20140623

READ THE STUDY: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1307044/

List of pesticides examined here: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/advpub/2014/6/ehp.1307044.s001.pdf

#pesticide #autism #organophosphate #GMO #glyphosate #Roundup #organic #GMOFreeCanada #GMOFreeUSA — with Alerta Cali and Victor Vargas.
Like

Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 10:04:25 PM

Marty that is the same EPA who is tasked with determining the safety of pesticides. I don't have to like all that they do but they are the designated body in the US to make the determination of relative safety and safe dosage/exposure levels.

Just because one part of the organization does one job does not force me to agree with all the organization does.

Oh by the way - dont SMH too much - I heard tell some folks dont have it screwed on quite tight enough. Be careful....


[Edited by: flyboyUT at 6/14/2014 10:07:52 PM EST]
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 7:24:00 PM

That's the same EPA you hate when they publish findings with which you disagree. SMH
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 6:43:35 PM

Try this on for size Marty ----
.
.
.
>>>. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to glufosinate ammonium residues<<<

Doesnt seem to be a major concern there Marty.
.
.
.
.

Welcome to the discussion there tropicalmn. We have s few folks here who seem to be frightened of gm and yet don't seem to be able to show any rational basis for he fear that is supported by any data except data produced by folks who have an economic or other involvement in banning
GM tech and any thing remotely connected with newer farm technology of any kind.

Maybe you can provide them with some reasons to stop being afraid of food.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 6:16:24 PM

Hence the availability of "Roundup Ready Corn" which is tolerant of Roundup, and "Liberty Link Corn" which is resistant to glufosinate.
Profile Pic
tropicalmn
Veteran Author Minnesota

Posts:269
Points:250,880
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 4:40:15 PM

“Growing GM is a package deal, all or nothing. They control the seed and the chemicals needed. the whole purpose of GM was to be able to boost chemical usage.”

Ridiculous inane nonsense.

The entire reason behind the BT corn borer & corn root worm GM traits is not to need to use any insecticide for those pests. In Conventional grown Non GMO corn to kill those same two pests you would need to spray a non selective insecticide possible multiple times that would potentially kill non target beneficial insects also. Golden Rice with added vitamin A or Papayas what additional chemicals?
If a Ag producer chooses to buy & grow a variety of seed with a genetically enhanced trait developed by Monsanto you pay a tech fee per bag of seed & sign a grower agreement or some will refer to as a license that the primary purpose is that you agree not to save or sell seed produced. There is nothing what so ever requiring you to use Monsanto chemicals. The patent on glyphosate the active ingredient in name brand Roundup herbicide expired in 2000.

“I might add that last year in spite of the fact the crops drowned early from heavy rains the spraying continued until fall. When asked why they were spraying a dead field the crop duster said the contract had to be fulfilled.”
Fallow weed control. The so called “dead field “LOL had weeds growing on them right? One weed can produce up to 100,000 seeds.

Examples of how difficult it is to explain rapidly changing 21st century agriculture that has grown extremely complex to someone who has no present day involvement. More often than not while trying to keep it simple it still gets misconstrued into some ridiculous nonsense.


[Edited by: tropicalmn at 6/14/2014 4:40:54 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 4:30:09 PM

Sure there is money to be made in making and selling chemicals - of all kinds.

If there was not sufficient money to be made to insure a profit the stockholders and investors would tell the company to stop selling something at a loss. This is supposed to be something new or surprising? The people who make tractors and plows and harvesters and barn stanchions and knitting needles also expect to make a profit. So your point is what again????

As far as the coke and eggshell - are you saying that coke should not sell coke or the egg folks should use some GM techniques to produce eggs that are impervious to being soaked in an acid solution for a year????

In other words your two post have what to do again about the subject of the topic?????
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:23,468
Points:2,101,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 2:24:30 PM



Talking about chemicals and their reaction to things....
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:23,468
Points:2,101,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 2:23:00 PM



Well there is money in making chemicals isn't there, or are you that blind to that fact also flyboy?!
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2014 11:54:30 AM

"the whole purpose of GM was to be able to boost chemical usage. "Suuuuuuuure it is Tim.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 9:39:20 PM

"So what your saying is that the claimed contamination was done at the behest of your government?"

Didn't say that at all.

You still don't get it. Growing GM is a package deal, all or nothing. They control the seed and the chemicals needed. the whole purpose of GM was to be able to boost chemical usage.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 9:00:36 PM

So what your saying is that the claimed contamination was done at the behest of your government? Sounds like you have other problems up there my friend - GM food aint one of them. GM is just a technology to change seed. It has nothing to do with people doing wrong things in terms of use of pesticides. If you really do have people spraying unneeded chemicals on flodded fields you have other major problems.

The topic is and has been that GM food is not inherently hazardous to eat any more than any other food is.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 8:43:40 PM

All I'm saying is this is remote farm and boreal forest mixed area. The latest well shut downs have been in a 10x10 section or 100 sq mile area which until about 5 yrs ago was mainly free range cattle pasture or buckwheat. A govt program paid the farmers to break the pastures and mulch the bush for cash and the land was leased to the canola growers contracted to you know who. The money paid was more than they could make on their own and no more headaches along with jobs working for the canola producers seeding and combining. There is no industry in the area other than the farms. Pristine upper lakes but contaminated streams and ground water now after over 100 yrs of pure drinkable ground water. You tell me why they said chemical contamination and nothing more.

I might add that last year in spite of the fact the crops drowned early from heavy rains the spraying continued until fall. When asked why they were spraying a dead field the crop duster said the contract had to be fulfilled. Win win for M.

[Edited by: timothyu at 6/13/2014 8:47:12 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 7:25:15 PM

OK Tim - I will try to give you a straight answer.

First of all what chemicals specifically are we talking about?

Second just how widespread of a problem are we talking about here - could the problem come from a few farms or chemical spills or what.

What has changed that might explain this aberration?

Why is it confined to just one small area?

Even if they changed from say hay farming to Canola oil faring why is GM to blame for that? Are you saying that the producers of GM seed forced the farmers to change crops and then forced them to use too much of some different kind of pesticide? Is it possible that the farmers chose to change crops adn again chose to use too much or inappropriately used farm chemicals. If it was the farmers choice why are you saying its a fault of GM technology and the use of GM in foods?

Before we can have a real discussion on things in this instance there needs to be a lot more information.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 6:41:26 PM


OK, based on your expertise, what other causes of chemical ground water contamination are there in an isolated farm area.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 6:10:14 PM

So I'm supposed to take it on hearsay evidence from someone who has previously shown an irrational fear of GM technology.

Tim give me a break will you - You are attempting to make what is probably a much more complicated problem with many reasons and topics into a screed against GM technology - Then you say take it on faith? Give me a break!!!!!
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 5:59:54 PM


The herbicides in the area used in the past half century obviously were not of sufficient strength or amount to facilitate the condemnation of private wells. Now either their is a hidden agenda behind them doing so now or the heavier usage of chemicals in recent years since the area contracted to GM canola has caused this localized movement to shut down private water supplies. How much of your local goings on make it to the news or internet? Must be hard up for excitement.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,000
Points:3,313,120
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 5:34:22 PM

Topic: Are GMO foods safe?

--I'm not aware of any that have been proven unsafe at this time..
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 5:32:55 PM

I suppose the problem could be from all the old hockey pucks tossed out over the years too.

You keep saying there is a problem but you have no news stories or anything on the internet that identifies the concern and the cause of it. Must not be a very large concern or its so localized its of no real importance.

But for sure you wish to blame it on GM food right? The fact that Herbicides (I'm assuming you thinking of herbicides) have never been used on anything but GM seed is fact up there right? The fact that they have never been used by homeowners or other industrial users up there too I guess.

You have made an accusation tim - back it up.

Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 5:11:22 PM


Why would there be links to what is happening here ,why the neighbouring farms are being told to fill in their wells?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 4:47:28 PM

By all means provide some good links to buttress your position.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 2:01:29 PM



Inspectors gave this as a reason, chemical contamination. Never was a problem before the lands here were contracted a few short years ago.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 1:40:22 PM

Oh really - and these supposed things are and have been only used for just GM Canola I suppose.

Your real sure about that now aren't you? By all means provide some good links to buttress your position.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 12:53:33 PM


"Oh Tim - the subject is GM food and not water management in central Canada. "

In case you purposely missed it the ground water has been contaminated with chemicals used for the GM canola.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 12:48:40 PM

Wowsers folks here it comes the next food fad.......
.
.
>>> California-based Desert Farms has launched what it calls the first commercially available line of camel milk products, including raw and pasteurized camel milks and a raw camel milk kefir (a fermented drink).

The company is touting the health benefits of camel milk, saying it provides “more absorbable calcium than available in other milks” and it “may enhance diabetic wound healing,” among other benefits. But it’s also saying camel milk is simply a milk for our times — “richer, more filling, more easily digested, and more satisfying than cow, goat or dairy milk.”

And the pitch is apparently working: The product line is already being featured in more than 40 Whole Foods stores throughout California and is starting to be distributed elsewhere. And that’s in spite of the fact it doesn’t come cheap — a pint of Desert Farms camel milk runs $18.

“It’s the closest milk to a human mother’s milk…People are willing to pay a premium,” says Walid Abdul-Wahab, the entrepreneur behind Desert Farms.<<<

Yep now someone is going to trot out all kinds of 'studies' how it will save the life of everyone......

But if they feed the Camels GM produced feed will they then have baaaaaaaad milk....
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 12:36:43 PM

Marty what you still don't accept - in the forest types I worked in I was the expert. That specific knowledge does bleed over to a certain extent into other areas of land management and the tools used to manage it.

One of the things I learned is to look at so called studies and evaluate them to a certain extent. The so called studies that show that GM food is harmful are not what is commonly accepted as valid research but you are entitled to your opinion I guess.

Oh Tim - the subject is GM food and not water management in central Canada.
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 12:17:14 PM


How do ecosystems experts right the damage done to ground water by man? Ignore the cause and penalize the user? Force people to pay for that which they once got for free? Those are not experts but lackeys of forced consumerism and protectors of those who plunder.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 11:54:32 AM

Treat those with differing opinions respectfully and you won't have to endure the embarassment of being called out on it, mister self-proclaimed ecosystems expert.



[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 6/13/2014 11:57:19 AM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 10:07:05 AM

Well Marty I'm glad your happy in what you do. For what its worth I have some advice for you ---- stick to what you say you know....
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 9:27:19 AM

For all your expert knowledge of managing ecosystems, it's a shame you never learned the important part the creatures you so cavalierly dismiss play. Not all knowledge is gained through experience, a point your previous post makes painfully obvious.




"Did you ever manage them to actually produce the products real people need Marty - like wood and water and recreation and clean air and wildlife of all kinds to look at and maybe eat. How about it Marty?"

I do far better than that. I produce students who are superior to what they were prior to my tutelage; who can think, and read, and do math, and write cohesively, and who thank me later for doing it. I make a difference.




Profile Pic
Caragogo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:3,318
Points:993,565
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 7:04:35 AM

GM has labeled plain ole Cherrio's non-GMO. All the other are modified.
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:23,468
Points:2,101,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 1:52:27 AM



We need more of this spread around!
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 11:37:27 PM


Well... they condemned more wells in the area today. Ground water contamination from chemicals. This is Mons*nto canola country.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 11:33:59 PM

"There are no implications to printing the label, except perhaps that folks might decide not to buy Frankenfoods labeled as such." If you honestly believe that you are living in a dream world. Marty my comments concerning resource management are as follows - "But where were you when these ecosystems were burning up and peoples livelihoods and dwellings were being destroyed - were you out on the firelines?

Were you ever trying to figure out the best methods to manage those same ecosystems - not from a textbook Marty but actually out on the ground doing the job. Did you ever manage them to actually produce the products real people need Marty - like wood and water and recreation and clean air and wildlife of all kinds to look at and maybe eat. How about it Marty?"

Yes without being involved you really don't know much about what it takes Marty. But the bulk of my comment concerned actually managing those ecosystems Marty - you know developing the prescriptions for management and quantifying the outputs and timelines and then actually doing it - you know implementing the plans on the ground and seeing the results.

I make comments about how I feel the school systems should be operated Marty and I have taught a couple of days. That gives me an idea of what I might like but in no way do I feel I am an expert on education. Yet you feel your some kind of expert on land management??? Or at least you think you have enough knowledge and experience to tell me I don't know how to do it in the areas I specialized in. That is pretty arrogant there Marty.

And as far as the military - yes Marty, if you haven't served you DON'T know much at all about it!
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 8:53:16 PM

"Marty - I said my comments were snide"

Okay. If you say you're snide, then you're snide.




"But there really has been no valid proof yet that the gGM food is harmful to our populace."

We have already discussed the reasons for the dearth of independent research.




"Sensational cries of the world is coming to an end will not do it Marty."

Nobody is claiming that.




"For some reason you don't want to look at just what the implications of that dab might be and you don't wish to even try to understand how our food industry works today."

Are you as much an expert on how the food industry works as you are on natural ecosystems? There are no implications to printing the label, except perhaps that folks might decide not to buy Frankenfoods labeled as such.




"In fact all the reputable studies to date have shown the opposite."

There are no reputable independent studies. We have already shown why they don't exist.




"Then you have to say I don't care about things as a last zinger"

I said you seem to have little regard for the natural ecosystems you claim such expertise with.




"But where were you when these ecosystems were burning up and peoples livelihoods and dwellings were being destroyed - were you out on the firelines?"

Will you next tell us about your military service? Will you tell us how those who weren't on the firelines just can't understand, and neither can they contribute anything to the discussion? Not having been on the firelines doesn't preclude me from having an informed opinion any more than not having been an educator precludes you from having opinions about education. Neither does it preclude me from wanting to be a good steward of the world God has entrusted to us.

Please, get yourself a real hobby and do stop wasting people's time.







[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 6/12/2014 8:57:17 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 8:20:11 PM

Marty - I said my comments were snide. I feel I have reason to be snide regarding things said to me in this topic. Sorry if you don't share my views.

My feeling is she was and still is attempting to do to me what you accuse me of doing to her. But at least I didnt go to other peoples WBs and lie about her like she did about me.

Now the topic - well the topic I started was to decry the use of shoddy research and flat our sensationalism to try to cause the food industry more work. When and if it can be shown via valid research that GM food is hazardous to our health then I will be a proponent of taking measures to reduce the potential harm. But there really has been no valid proof yet that the gGM food is harmful to our populace.

Sensational cries of the world is coming to an end will not do it Marty. Neither will people saying its just a dab of ink on a label so therefore what is the problem. For some reason you don't want to look at just what the implications of that dab might be and you don't wish to even try to understand how our food industry works today.

Then we come to this gem of friendliness - "Perhaps it's time to put your vast knowledge of natural ecosystems to good use by acknowledging that substantial evidence exists for suspecting GMO foods to be hazardous. For someone who claims to have knowledge of ecosystems you seem to have precious little regard for them."

Marty the knowledge of natural ecosystems that I do have leads me to use extreme doubt concerning the so called evidence that GM food may be harmful... In fact all the reputable studies to date have shown the opposite.

Then you have to say I don't care about things as a last zinger - Thanks Marty - I love you too.

But where were you when these ecosystems were burning up and peoples livelihoods and dwellings were being destroyed - were you out on the firelines?

Were you ever trying to figure out the best methods to manage those same ecosystems - not from a textbook Marty but actually out on the ground doing the job. Did you ever manage them to actually produce the products real people need Marty - like wood and water and recreation and clean air and wildlife of all kinds to look at and maybe eat. How about it Marty?




Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 7:38:01 PM

Whether you are or are not in favor of using road salt is irrelevant. I didn't say you were snide, I said your comments to sis were diminutive. You did not bring up "bugs and stuff" but you did start the topic rolling and sis' comments are within its scope.

Perhaps it's time to put your vast knowledge of natural ecosystems to good use by acknowledging that substantial evidence exists for suspecting GMO foods to be hazardous. For someone who claims to have knowledge of ecosystems you seem to have precious little regard for them.



[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 6/12/2014 7:40:12 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 7:28:56 PM

Marty for your knowledge I never was in favor of using chemicals to melt ice and snow. Even when I lived in Minnesota. Not only does the practice harm the environment it caused a lot of damage to infrastructure and vehicles. For sure it tore up my 57 Chev.

Now if you say I should not be so snide - I am returning what I have been given. I am not the one that brought up the bugs and stuff.

But before you accuse me of not knowing natural ecosystems too much please remember what I did for a job.

Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 7:19:54 PM

I don't appreciate the diminutive attitude you have for sis' concerns over damage to the butterfly population. Butterflies play an important role in nature, of which you are clearly ignorant. Additionally, the problems GM foods cause is not limited to butterflies but rather spread their tentacles to include creatures higher on the food chain.

Nobody in this conversation has demanded we stop using GM technology (as though anyone could demand such a thing). Labeling techno-"foods" would allow consumers to make more informed choices about the things they ingest. Making light over someone else's valid concerns does nothing to bolster your credibility in this or any topic. You're arguing simply for the sake of arguing. You really must get a decent hobby.

Road salt does indeed cause damage to the ecosystem, which is why many communities (and states) are opting for greener, less damaging road treatment methods.




[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 6/12/2014 7:22:44 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 7:06:36 PM

Marty since one poster made such a huge hoopla about butterflies early in this topic it is relevant --- even if you dont like it.

This poster was all wound up that gm technology was responsible for a reduction of certain weeds that resulted in problems for some butterflies. Based on that thinkd this person was demanding that we stop using GM technology.

Well now they are finding out that road salt is also causing some butterfly concerns.... Will the "proflutterbys" demand that states stop using road salt or any other chemical that might cause concerns. Will they also demand that the states stop mowing roadside weeds for the same reasons?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 6:24:22 PM

Bringing up road salt is irrelevant in a discussion about GMO foods. Still, you should be made aware that a great many communities no longer use salt to treat roads, so your post is irrelevant on more than one level.



Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2014 9:52:03 AM

Some time back someone here got all upset over butterflies and GM food - just found this - more for them to worry about than GM tech it seems. NOw lets see if they want to ban cars or ban keeping the roads safer for people. or what.. This might be fun-----..
Profile Pic
timothyu
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:17,354
Points:207,925
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2014 8:07:19 PM



Because the lives of people are irrelevant compared to the system that lives are wasted on protecting. That thinking existed long before Monsanto. Just another self justifying ideal of mankind. Protect those who would be king.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,115
Points:312,530
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2014 6:23:20 PM

Why does Monsanto need a protection act, and why is it okay for the government to protect Monsanto and not okay for the government to protect consumers from its Frankenfoods?



[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 6/11/2014 6:23:33 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,014
Points:1,372,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2014 5:53:46 PM

And that wonderful message is sent to you by the folks who thought the same as those who sent you the message that 9 out of 10 doctors preferred Camels.

They are trying to sell you their silly supplements for criminy sake!!!!!!!

Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:23,468
Points:2,101,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2014 2:41:22 PM



America's Silent Parasite: 300 Million People In Danger

IT’S ALL BECAUSE OF
ONE BIG GOVERNMENT
SCREW UP

In March 2013, the president signed The Monsanto Protection Act into law which gives companies that deal with genetically engineered food, IMMUNITY to federal courts.

The bill states that even if future research shows that genetically modified food or seeds cause significant health problems, the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales.

Gets interesting at 11:30

Post a reply Back to Topics