This conversation is closed.

GMOs... yes or no? (Genetically modified food)

Just trying to see how people feel about Genetically Modifed organisms/food
I would like to see more strong Yes/No ... I feel like a lot of people are on the fense (grey area where some GMO are okay, some are not) but I would REALLY like to see some strong opinions on this topic

  • Aug 4 2013: (my very same comment earlier today was mysteriously deleted, so now I have to post again.)

    No to GMO.

    1. Most of the GMO now in the market are to be planted together with a powerful herbicide like "roundup" etc., that kills all the weeds but leave the GMO intact. But over time, weeds grow resistant to the herbicides and become "superweeds" and thereby require more spraying of the herbicide and leads to intense poisoning of the soil. The same goes for the pest-reisistant GMOs, which lead to "superpests". In this way GMOs can potentially cause serious environmental damage which may not be reversed in short time.

    2. Also for the above reason, the claimed high yield of GMOs is only short term. GMO may tackle some problems and out-grow in short term but there is no evidence for their long term robustness as compared to our traditional crops that have stood the test of history.

    3. GMOs are patented. GMO farmers no-longer can save seeds but they are required to buy seeds from the company every year. If a non-GMO farmer's field gets contaminated with GMO pollen via wind (happens very easily), they can potentially face lawsuit by the companies and go bankrupt. This can lead to social injustice.

    4. Micro RNA of the GMO food can survive the digestive process and go into the blood stream. They can also potentially alter the genetics of the our gut microorganism. How they influence our own genetics and biology is not clear.

    For more information, the following documentaries are good to watch (available on the internet):

    "The world according to Monstanto" by Marie-Monique Robin
    "Seeds of Death" by Gary Null, Richard Polonetsky

    More info is available online if one is willing to search.

    Luckily, many states in the US now require the labeling of GMO, thanks to the "Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act".

    Now for something positive, smart farming design like permaculture is sustainable and has great potential to feed the world with good food! Just search!
  • thumb
    Aug 5 2013: Nothing we eat today is anything like it was when mankind first found it was edible.... Mankind has spent the last 12000 years improving food crops, the first 11900 by cross breeding until we got a better product and lately by tweaking a few DNA markers. Now the claims made about growing tails and turning cross-eyed may someday happen, but I don't think so....
  • Jul 11 2013: Genetically modified foods are thoroughly tested before ever hitting the market, just like any other food product. In fact, they're scrutinized closer to medicinal standards than regular food ever is. There is no real danger.

    They do however, allow more efficient use of land, provide a higher quality product, and reduce the chance of crops failing and causing rising food prices at best and famines at worst.

    I really don't see the problem.
    If we'd have organically grown everything we've eaten without use of things like pesticides and artificial fertilizer, the earth wouldn't have been able to support the 7 billion people it does.
    Genetically modified foods ought to be able to raise that cap higher. That's a good thing, because if we ever hit the cap, we'd be faced with famines, and wars caused by competition over dwindling resources (which would both ironically go a great deal towards solving the over population problem; that's mother nature for you, she's not here to protect your better interest).
  • thumb

    W. Ying

    • +1
    Jul 8 2013: .
    Human requires "ultra-high accuracy" for things (including foods) to survive.
    (Such as: to recognize a person from 7 billion people,
    to select the right foods from countless species of plants,
    etc.)
    This "ultra-high accuracy" comes from bio-evolution through many, many generations.

    The safety of GMO foods has to be verified by the same way.

    Wrong?
  • Jul 5 2013: I wonder why there is a discussion about GMF? Each one of us is modifying the air through his personal lifestyle in some kind, but when some company or scientist wants to modify a plant everybody screams...

    The old fashioned way of agriculture is nothing else than modifying, but without any control about the result. The past was not better, at no time...
    • Jul 5 2013: The food itself - good (i think.) but higher in sugar and calories.
      The farming methods - okay, and efficient
      the control over family farmers it gives GMO seed companies - DANGER DANGER DANGER
  • Aug 5 2013: I do not know if GMOs are necessary. I do know, however, that the issues against them are more propaganda than anything else. I agree that maybe some kinds of engineered ecosystems might be the right answer. however, GMOs should be produced, studied, investigated, because should engineered ecosystems fail, or should they need a push, the push might come in the form of a few intelligently designed GMOs.

    There's also the thing that GMOs are not just for food, but also for producing vaccines, or pharmaceuticals, which makes them valuable in fields besides food.

    I know you wanted strong opinions, but reason should trump over polarization and propaganda. Otherwise humanity has little if any future.
  • Jul 8 2013: NO - is that clear enough Lisa :)

    My reasoning is simple, it'll take a long time before we know the effects of consumption, and I dont want, either wittingly or unwittingly to be a Guinea pig, and it surely feels that's what's happening - just so some can make a dollar.

    I use as justification - Aspartame. After reading the below, it might make you realize that $ always come first.

    The legal "dealings" that got it approved. (January 1981 - in particular inserted below)
    http://rense.com/general33/legal.htm

    January 1981-- Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of Searle, states in a sales meeting that he is going to make a big push to get aspartame approved within the year. Rumsfeld says he will use his political pull in Washington, rather than scientific means, to make sure it gets approved.


    American cancer society.
    http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/aspartame

    Mercola
    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/11/06/aspartame-most-dangerous-substance-added-to-food.aspx
  • thumb
    Jul 8 2013: GMO's need more testing before wide spread use, in fact I think GMO's are a great client for private space missions. I am an Orchardist and I have seen to much about the invassive nature of GMO's in other crops.
  • Jul 8 2013: GMO's exist, people are STILL starving. that argument is invalid. Why ruin mother nature? GMO's are making our people crave foods they don't need. It's all part of the system. GMO's even cause horrible diseases. There are facts out there been proven that they harm us. GMO foods and Fluoride are used for manipulation. RBST treated milk has puss and other nasty steroid ingredients. no bueno. Rise Earth.
  • Jul 5 2013: when we didn't have enough food everyone complained because there families were starving. there is so much talk about what food is best and what methods of farming are most profitable i feel like we forget what food really is, fuel. Without its vital nutrients we would all die. That said, i don't think there is anything that wrong with the genetically modified food itself. Its fuel. Its what gives me energy to run 3 miles every morning. The slightly larger sweeter orange (better tasting and higher in fuel.) is not the problem. Its the politics associated with it. By creating superior foods genetically and selling them to farmers seed companies gain unnecessary control over the food industry. Why is this a problem? Becuase they are not looking out for the farmers who supply the oranges we enjoy-just there pockets:( this sucks.

    The food itself - good (i think.) but higher in sugar and calories.
    The farming methods - okay, and efficient
    the control over family farmers it gives GMO seed companies - DANGER DANGER DANGER
    • Jul 5 2013: Times change, also farmers will disappear in the long run, as GMF is just a necessary step towards fully "artificial foods". I have not seen a farmer workin all day for free, but I have seen farmers who threw away foods because people did not pay the prices they fantasised. So in my eyes the farmer is not less "evil" than anybody else who is working for profit.

      They should simply forbid that you can hold a patent on life forms of whatever kind, what would include plants as they are living.
  • Jul 5 2013: Farmers, historically, have attempted to genetically modify their crops in a relatively simple way - motivated primarily by the very real needs - of survival.
    Today's GM foods, despite extensive propaganda to the contrary, are manufactured solely for profit, by large companies that are able to manipulate governments and influence policy to their own advantage.
    People need to be able to trust those who control our food production. Unfortunately both the historical, and current actions of these companies do not engender such trust.