Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

GMOs: what's your stance?

profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
If your against them, give me a legitimate reason.
Jan 27 2014 12:40AM
107 61
profile picture
SamtheEagle
Posts: 1658 - Karma: 713
gmo
n. 1. genetically modified orgasm. 2. to have a fake orgasm.
"I just found out my girlfriend has been GMOing on me."

"Jenna Jameson is the queen of GMOing."


Not a fan. I prefer the real thing
Jan 27 2014 12:41AM
6 0
profile picture
shr@gler
Posts: 1233 - Karma: 912
Against.
They are unnecessary. The only motivation behind them is purely for profit!
You can generate greater yields and higher quality produce in different manners, ie polycropping or permaculture.
We need to grow more at home and sop relying so heavily on factory farms for our food needs!
GMO's are fucking with he natural ecosystem and giving power to scumbags like monsanto.
They are too willing to experiment for profit without knowledge of the consequences. They pretend it is for good of humanity, when all they give a fuck about is their investors and bottom line.
That's my view anyway. Would love to be proved wrong.
Jan 27 2014 12:48AM
12 8
profile picture
.Duncan.
Posts: 1375 - Karma: 459
You're against innovation in a capitalist economy, seems legit.
Jan 27 2014 12:57AM
5 6
profile picture
shr@gler
Posts: 1233 - Karma: 912
You don't need to innovate food! you can make new recipes if you like!
You can make money with genetically modifying food. Wtf are you even saying!
Jan 27 2014 1:03AM
4 6
profile picture
chicken
Posts: 6843 - Karma: 2,123
gmo's can help save the world. Fuck the hippies and their bullshit organic movement. We just need to modify food for the right reasons.
Jan 27 2014 1:05AM
12 4
profile picture
.Duncan.
Posts: 1375 - Karma: 459
What are you fucking saying, as population grows it makes complete sense that we need to innovate and find ways to produce more food at lower prices. I would prefer to spend less on food and such through GMO's so that I have more to spend on other things like skiing.
Jan 27 2014 1:08AM
1 2
profile picture
GEORGEzimmerman
Posts: 1473 - Karma: 440
hemp will save the world
Jan 27 2014 1:11AM
3 0
profile picture
JeremyClarkson
Posts: 1599 - Karma: 1,934
Ever since the introduction of GMO products to the american consumer, Food allergy rates have doubled from 7 to 14 percent.
Jan 27 2014 1:17AM
5 6
profile picture
chicken
Posts: 6843 - Karma: 2,123
hemp products are a lot better than alternatives like cotton, synthetics and especially wool. Also its a good replacement for tobacco which is less in demand now.

I think hemp is pretty radical.

Jan 27 2014 1:22AM
4 0
profile picture
GEORGEzimmerman
Posts: 1473 - Karma: 440
and can grow in nearly half the time as cotton and leave nitrogen in the soil as to maintain the health of the soil. unlike cotton which ravages the land its grown in. and can produce our next energy source so we can stop DPing the earth for her cum(oil).
Jan 27 2014 1:27AM
3 0
profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
dude this, ever heard of golden rice?
Jan 27 2014 1:28AM
4 2
profile picture
GEORGEzimmerman
Posts: 1473 - Karma: 440
a brand new fan i see? and a fello montanan?
Jan 27 2014 1:30AM
0 3
profile picture
Phil-X-
Posts: 7205 - Karma: 14,399
As someone who actually studying in this field at the top university for it, I can promise you that you could not be more wrong.


Considering the following-

the current demand for food

the current level of agricultural production

the current percentage of agricultural production that is GM

the efficiency of gm vs non-gm crops

the exponential increase in demand for food


You could not possibly feed the world given that data. Please don't spew bullshit about stuff you know nothing about
Jan 27 2014 1:34AM
4 4
profile picture
GEORGEzimmerman
Posts: 1473 - Karma: 440
maybe its time some of us starved off though. earth cannot support the amount of people on it, so why try and support all of em? we need another plague if you ask me, maybe gmo's will bring that plague=)
Jan 27 2014 1:36AM
1 3
profile picture
Phil-X-
Posts: 7205 - Karma: 14,399
Click for larger image


ha
Jan 27 2014 1:40AM
3 2
profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
I'm actually living in colorado at the moment, but i am a huge fan of brand new. Golden rice is a strain of GMO rice that is being distributed to the 3rd world because it contains essential vitamins and minerals not found in normal rice. THe strain has been developed for over 10 years and is completely safe. yet,l people are against it. why? is watching people starve chill?
Jan 27 2014 1:40AM
0 0
profile picture
JeremyClarkson
Posts: 1599 - Karma: 1,934
werd dewd ur sew smart lol ya. mad chyll man haha.
Jan 27 2014 1:42AM
0 2
profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/10/14/2000-reasons-why-gmos-are-safe-to-eat-and-environmentally-sustainable/



whatever risk is in your head
Jan 27 2014 1:43AM
1 1
profile picture
Casey
Posts: 7847 - Karma: 24,309
I think the problem isn't so much in the modified food itself, but the industry behind it and what it represents. I mean, our means of getting food is pretty fucked up no matter how you look at it. I think that's why people are especially sensitive about this stuff.
Jan 27 2014 1:45AM
0 0
profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
hit the nail on the head, people should be concerned with the food industry, but not GMOs. The hormones and wierd shit we feed animals for instance, much bigger deal.
Jan 27 2014 1:48AM
0 0
profile picture
cheaaaaaa
Posts: 830 - Karma: 630
when you have the time, this is an awesome video

SOMEONE PLEASE EMBED

http://vimeo.com/56745320
Jan 27 2014 1:54AM
1 0
profile picture
miroz
Posts: 10333 - Karma: 3,945
Agreed. GMOs are an incredible and necessary innovation, but I don't necessarily trust the people at the helm of the movement. Corporations like Monsanto and Dow may 'live within the laws' set by the US gov't, but no one fully understands the effects of GMOs on people. We're seeing all this fucked up shit b/c these corporations aren't (and cannot) go through due process to fully research the effects of these products.

Humans and all other animals have eaten the same shit for thousands of years. Any changes to that diet are generally slow and take generations. Granted, we've changed it rather drastically with the introduction of industrialized agriculture and fast food, but this is really changing the root of the food chain.

GMOs will eventually save the world. They might fuck with some people first, though.
Jan 27 2014 2:02AM
2 1
profile picture
cheaaaaaa
Posts: 830 - Karma: 630
theres far more humane means of curbing the world population than via favoring non-gmo's for their (in some cases) relative lack in efficiency.

Secondly, other than concepts of (poorly used) GMS contributing to a lack of genetic diversity/stability within a given crop, theres not much grounds for fear of a plague affecting production in the big picture.

Maybe I'm being mean because I have a degree in the sciences... but i really hope your joking with the shit you said, its dumb
Jan 27 2014 2:04AM
0 0
profile picture
fghtoffyrdmns
Posts: 2998 - Karma: 6,867
can you provide actual evidence that they are fucking with people? i spent l2 hours tonight trying to find legitimate evidence, and all I got was a bunch of bullshit.
Jan 27 2014 2:05AM
0 0
profile picture
miroz
Posts: 10333 - Karma: 3,945
It's late and I don't really feel like it.

However, I never said that it was fucking with people. I said it might. Given the vast variety of human diet and the short amount of time, trends might not be identified for a while. Who knows?

Anyways, we are seeing some weird shit though: for instance, bees that take the pollen from GMO plants seem to exhibit digestive shutdown and die. That's not normal. Does it indicate anything about the fruits produced by the plants and their effects on those who eat them? I don't know. But I'll eat it on principle #science.
Jan 27 2014 2:11AM
1 2
profile picture
cheaaaaaa
Posts: 830 - Karma: 630
stats and science class numero uno home splice "correlation does not imply causation".

Maybe Im wrong, but I have yet to read a paper from a legitimate journal that backs such a correlation.

Plus, even if the occurrence of food allergies is constant, and I'm not saying they are, if the threshold for the detection of particular allergies decreases (which it has over the years with better technology), then the rates of allergies will inherently increase as a result. couple that with the fact that the rate of gluten intolerance has been drastically on the rise over that same span of time, then it is not too hard to account for a good deal of flux in numbers. (try and hold back from saying GMOs contribute to gluten intolerance unless you can back it up by some peer reviewed data)
Jan 27 2014 2:15AM
0 0
profile picture
nutz.
Posts: 3150 - Karma: 6,712
I like being able to buy an apple for like fifty cents as opposed to a dollar and a half because its organic and grown on a farm where they tell the apples bedtime stories and water them with only blessed water
Jan 27 2014 2:23AM
1 0
profile picture
chicken
Posts: 6843 - Karma: 2,123
Also smoking rates have decreased, and the internet became popular. Go GMO's
Jan 27 2014 11:17AM
1 0
profile picture
.MASSHOLE.
Posts: 7481 - Karma: 11,487
The increase of allergies is not from GMOs. Do a little research and you will come across the hygiene hypothesis which attributes the increase of allergies from a lack of exposure to basic pathogens at a young age and a suppression of our immune systems natural growth.

GMOs are necessary in this day and age. I cant understand the hypocrisy of people saying that every person should have access to food and water, yet are against foods produced that provide the nutrients needed to survive. If you want people to survive, you need a way to produce the amount of food with nutrients that allow for survival. The natural earth cannot provide enough anymore.

The anti-GMO hype is all speculation with very little scientific evidence behind it. If this was a potential life saving cancer or HIV drug, I doubt we would see the same uproar.
Jan 27 2014 12:24PM
1 0
profile picture
SamtheEagle
Posts: 1658 - Karma: 713
Personally I think GMO's are fine but its the regulation and use of them which is terrible. They are not inherently bad but what is bad about them is what Monsanto does with them. The fact that if a single seed gets onto a neighboring farm through natural processes (birds eating and shitting the seeds out or wind moving them) and then Monsanto can sue for not paying for that patented product and esentially steal a small family farm that refuses to grow GMO's. The other problem is the reliance on other products to make GMO's grow. It is often necessary to grow monsanto corn using monsanto fertilizer and monsanto pesticides. Everything has to be purchased from monsanto or it won't grow correctyl. Finally the problem is those two points combined. Internationally, most foods are now all mixed together so there are GMO and non GMO seeds together. Lets say we send those seeds to Peru. Now suddenly the peruvian farmers need to purchase monsanto fertilizer and pesticides to make sure their crops grow properly when they didn't even want GMO's. I do not think they are bad though. They potentially could solve world hunger by growing more on smaller plots of land in worse conditions to make more nutritious food (sometimes) but the legal system that directly benefits big business and harms farmers and endangers our food supply needs to change.
Jan 27 2014 12:27PM
2 0
profile picture
SamtheEagle
Posts: 1658 - Karma: 713
the problem is there are unforseen consequences. Also the destabalization of food stocks because GMO's often can't be grown without other products made by the same company (which farmers in developing nations can not afford)
Jan 27 2014 12:31PM
0 0
profile picture
cheaaaaaa
Posts: 830 - Karma: 630
Agreed, research is so expensive that capitalism/ current regulatory constructs massively favor the big guys. Its a really hard market (and this goes for most research) to regulate such that intellectual property can be shared profitably without stepping on anybody's toes, namely the consumers (farmers) and the smaller research companies with less capital to throw around in lawsuits and FDA trials. theres not an easy answer... and the whole monsanto thing has gotten more and more fucky, however I really don't think it should scare anyone away from GMOs.

Also, most of these GMO products are available at subsidized rates for third world counties. Your right tho, that if we can't make the advances in GMOs available to those most in need, whats the point.
Jan 27 2014 12:47PM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Dickless
Posts: 2620 - Karma: 1,392
fuck it, lets just get it over with and start eating Soylent Green

its delicious AND nutritious
Jan 27 2014 1:25PM
0 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,628
Could not give one shit right now. In ten/twenty years, yes.

As has been said many times in this thread, so many of the worlds problems could be solved by GMOs. However, almost all the research is funded by large corporations, and while I'm never a fan of shouting conspiracy, they do not have the worlds best interests at heart. With all the bullshit about GMOs it could potentially be a major vote loser if governments were to fund the research, which leads to a very good reason why scientific research funding should not be decided by governments, but that's a different discussion.

Jan 27 2014 1:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Benson.
Posts: 2739 - Karma: 3,787
Who's to say it won't kill you, Mr. High and Mighty?
Jan 27 2014 2:23PM
0 0
profile picture
-benedetto
Posts: 5238 - Karma: 1,359
Click for larger image

Shitty foods coincidently are made of gmo's. "Natural" ingredients don't necessarily mean healthy.
Jan 27 2014 3:11PM
4 1
profile picture
Tinga
Posts: 11349 - Karma: 2,333
can we just say fuck monsanto?
Jan 27 2014 3:11PM
9 1
profile picture
SkierPT
Posts: 2177 - Karma: 4,720
I'm all for them. Not enough research has been done proving they affect humans negatively. I've researched this stuff a lot and it comes down to this....starving people would rather eat food created via GMO technology than having no food at all
Jan 27 2014 3:58PM
0 0
profile picture
DasGoatenshafter
Posts: 580 - Karma: 307
How many people on this site believe in evolution?

Most if I recall. GMO is accelerated evolution. I don't have an issue with modified genes, but the ethics of ownership and patents does concern me.

Counter question: Is it right for a company to own a genome - to own life?
Jan 27 2014 4:29PM
1 1
profile picture
corona
Posts: 12795 - Karma: 32,749
It really isn't accelerated evolution. Pretty much every agricultural advancement humans have done is counter intuitive to evolution. Reason why? Resources. Almost every crop, GMO or not, has been selected for increased productivity. This means increased resource needs. For almost every crop this increased resource need makes the crops totally unsustainable in a natural environment and would die off very quickly. This is completely against evolution which will push a plant or animal to best succeed given the least amount of nutrients and to make them more competitive for nutrients.
Jan 27 2014 4:41PM
0 0
profile picture
corona
Posts: 12795 - Karma: 32,749
in today's world GMOs are pretty much a necessity though and will continue to solve many nutrient issues world wide (like golden rice).

The companies are the evil. There needs to be better regulation. And government research needs to be more involved for the people, rather than for companies. Then you get results like Canola.
Jan 27 2014 4:45PM
0 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,352
without gmos it would be impossible to feed the vast amounts of people in the world.
Jan 27 2014 4:45PM
0 0
profile picture
90053
Posts: 2565 - Karma: 3,728
i think they are a pretty short term solution to our problems, we need to concentrate on curbing exponential population growth, reducing food wastage and provide more land by reversing desertification
Jan 27 2014 4:47PM
0 0
profile picture
cheaaaaaa
Posts: 830 - Karma: 630
Cant they be doing it for both $$ and the good. Like thats how free market works, and its simply not sustainable to give away all your best ideas after you spend 100s of millions developing them. but yeah, theres plant of changes to be made
Jan 27 2014 4:53PM
0 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,352
yeah the real problem is that there are too many people, there needs to be a limit on how many kids you can have.
Jan 27 2014 5:10PM
1 1
profile picture
fortyvalve
Posts: 1442 - Karma: 1,573
GMO's in theory would be a great idea if we could make them completely beneficial towards health and if it weren't a company like Monsanto being the forerunners of the trade. Why would they lobby so hard to prevent labeling of GMO's on products? If it is completely safe for consumption then they really should have had no problem with the labels. As someone who has suffered from acid reflux and Crohn's, a year ago I decided to experiment and completely cut out GMO's from my diet which i guarantee barely anyone in this thread has tried at all. Within that year my acid reflux has disappeared and my stomach problems are at a significantly reduced amount. All i'm saying is you can't trust the GMO industry yet with a company like Monsanto as the face of it.
Jan 27 2014 5:55PM
1 0
profile picture
Halo1junkie
Posts: 202 - Karma: 435
They help people in alot of poor countries keep from starving. People against them are simply retarded. "Oh no, theres no seeds in this orange, its probly gonna give me the cancer". Haha
Jan 27 2014 5:56PM
0 0
profile picture
TNORTS
Posts: 2076 - Karma: 2,754
We need more extensive testing as to the long term health effects of gmos.
GMO's should be labeled simply because people should be informed as to what they are eating.
If we find that GMO's are fine for long term health and can produce them in a somewhat sustainable manner, then GMO's definitely seem like a viable method of increasing yields of mass produced foods. For now I'm undecided though.
Jan 27 2014 6:29PM
0 0
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9215 - Karma: 5,398
cause hipsters and uneducated moms all over the place will read about how scary things are in readers digest and no sales will be made.
Jan 27 2014 7:44PM
1 0
profile picture
louie.mirags
Posts: 6015 - Karma: 5,029
powerful indeed
Jan 27 2014 7:48PM
1 0
All times are Eastern (-5)