underfliptown said:

Monsanto is fucking evil, reasons:

-Terminator gene
-Indian suicides
-Crop dusting inoculation of patented substrains
-General douchebaggery

---

The_Aviator said:

In B4 "it's a Monsanto conspiracy!"
http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/11/08/argumentum-ad-monsantium/

---

that is awesome.

JoieDeVivre said:

underfliptown said:

Monsanto is fucking evil, reasons:

-Terminator gene
-Indian suicides
-Crop dusting inoculation of patented substrains
-General douchebaggery

---

Yes, Monsanto is a horrible company, much like a Walmart of the agriculture industry. GMOs themselves are not. Being able to separate poor business practices and ethical violations from the science involved shows maturity and scientific literacy IMO.

---

sVs said:

Oh yeah, everyone's clearly less intelligent than you, yet you're up in arms over something you clearly can't understand.
Sounds pretty fucking reasonable.

---

underfliptown said:

Don't you think that more testing has to be done on GMO's though before we can know one way or the other. It still seems a little quick for my liking.

---

tymoteusz3 said:

Mykes logos said:

Well the citrus industry is forced to use pesticides these days. citrus canker and greening are huge problems, and according to my friends at the USDA here in SWFL, if we don't find a way to get rid of these pests (many of which originate in China and shit), the south FL citrus industry will basically collapse in 10 or 15 years.

---

This has nothing to do with GMOs.
Also... have you ever heard of the fallacy appeal from authority?

Quote:

By supporting Monsanto and their pesticides, our national food industry is getting dangerously close to relying on chemicals and GMOs.

---

Monsanto is NOT the only pesticide or herbicide company - there are many many more, and larger ones.

Quote:

Many GMOs, in plant varieties that is, aren't as healthy for you and because they require all kinds of pesticides, they aren't sustainable.

---

Really? All evidence points to the contrary.

---

Don't quote wikipedia, please. Even if it's correct... that's not acceptable.

And yes, there are many others. What about them? Did they just ride a bill through congress?



Not all evidence, especially in foreign countries. Show me yours and I'll show you mine.

underfliptown said:

Monsanto is fucking evil, reasons:

-Terminator gene
-Indian suicides
-Crop dusting inoculation of patented substrains
-General douchebaggery

---

yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

the crop dusting is fucked. Also how independent, small time farmers get their crops pollinated by Monsanto's and then get sued into bankruptcy... so messed up.

My uncle is a 6th generation farmer on 200ish acres in Ohio and he tells me all about how these companies and the government have forced them into being controlled externally... and how they can't resell/keep seeds anymore either.. they have to buy the new ones from the companies, like Monsanto...

The_Aviator said:

A lot of the genetic modifications change the expression of proteins in a way that decreases the amounts of pesticides required.

What do you want to know specifically? Most people seem to think that genetic modification is splicing random genes all willy-nilly. But in reality it is a highly controlled process of reverse transcription of specific genes that are of well-known functions and genetic interactions. Read about how five patients had their cancers cured (or at least extremely restricted) using new genetic modification practices:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/cancer-halted-in-five-patients-after-treatment-with-own-genetically-modified-cells-8544693.html

In B4 "it's a Monsanto conspiracy!"
http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/11/08/argumentum-ad-monsantium/

---

Thank you

Interesting.

JoieDeVivre said:

underfliptown said:

Don't you think that more testing has to be done on GMO's though before we can know one way or the other. It still seems a little quick for my liking.

---

I think each new GMO should be tested before it is implemented, and that's almost always how it works. People who are anti-GMOs would have you believe all GMOs are mad scientists randomly splicing genes without having any idea what will happen. In reality, the genetic code that we modify is intensely studied before, after and during the modification process. We have well informed hypotheses of what we expect to happen and we test that against what actually happens.

When you have an evil company like Monsanto, sometimes you see a breakdown in this process or purposeful shutting down of undesirable results but that happens much less than anyone who is anti-GMO would like you to believe.

---

Very good point. I go to school with some environmentalist hippy kids, so I really understand what you mean.

DeadHearts said:

The problem is not simply with GMOs alone but the Corporations like Monsanto. How can you put a fucking patent on nature whether its modified by you or not? And being allowed to squash your
competition into the ground unjustly on top of it.

Nasty Nasty stuff when your gov endorses this shit.

---

Quote:

tymoteusz3 said:

Mykes logos said:

Well the citrus industry is forced to use pesticides these days. citrus canker and greening are huge problems, and according to my friends at the USDA here in SWFL, if we don't find a way to get rid of these pests (many of which originate in China and shit), the south FL citrus industry will basically collapse in 10 or 15 years.

---

This has nothing to do with GMOs.
Also... have you ever heard of the fallacy appeal from authority?

Quote:

By supporting Monsanto and their pesticides, our national food industry is getting dangerously close to relying on chemicals and GMOs.

---

Monsanto is NOT the only pesticide or herbicide company - there are many many more, and larger ones.

Quote:

Many GMOs, in plant varieties that is, aren't as healthy for you and because they require all kinds of pesticides, they aren't sustainable.

---

Really? All evidence points to the contrary.

---

Don't quote wikipedia, please. Even if it's correct... that's not acceptable.

And yes, there are many others. What about them? Did they just ride a bill through congress?


Not all evidence, especially in foreign countries. Show me yours and I'll show you mine.

---

DeadHearts said:

The problem is not simply with GMOs alone but the Corporations like Monsanto. How can you put a fucking patent on nature whether its modified by you or not? And being allowed to squash your
competition into the ground unjustly on top of it.

Nasty Nasty stuff when your gov endorses this shit.

---

JoieDeVivre said:

I haven't seen you "back up" everything you have said, so trying to make everyone else in this thread do that is unreasonable. Wikipedia is a perfectly fine source, by the way, it's an aggregate of many other reliable sources and it makes sense to use Wikipedia when discussing with people who are not scientifically literate enough to understand and evaluate a scientific journal entry (many on the shroomery fit into this category).

You're the one who appears to be claiming that GMOs are inherently bad, which is an extraordinary claim considering that genetic modification is a natural process and that every single organism alive on earth has gone through extensive genetic modification.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

No one here is claiming all GMOs are inherently good. They can be good or bad, and scientific testing is what should determined that. Right now we have a bunch of hippies assuming that GMOs must be bad because they're "not natural" when the biggest irony here is that genetic modification is a process that is ESSENTIAL to all life as we know it. We got the idea for genetic modification through studying nature and the mechanisms by which nature can genetically modify itself. Yes, GMOs can be used bad just like anything else including money, power, and guns. What our goal should be is not getting rid of the tools that allow bad things to happen because the same tools can be used for great things, instead we should be making sure that people who will use these tools for their own harmful interests aren't able to do so.

---

That's a very good point (wikipedia). I'm too used to not being allowed to even talk about wikipedia in school

I didn't mean to sound like and support that "all GMOs are bad and we're all gonna die if monsanto does all this etc etc"

I just disagree with their bad parts and devastating potentials, and like you said, we need to make sure they do this wisely and safely and not just for profit (like everything else turns into)

And we can modify food without the complex science.

New Zealand's pipfruit industry is an excellent example of this, although it is much easier when you don't have the pests and diseases that the rest of the world has

and im multitasking and really shouldn't be on the shroomery lol... I would post some articles and scientific peer reviewed .pdfs but I really need to get off of here.

I have an appt at 8 for my narcolepsy and need to hit the post office before they close right now lol. also have to hit the supermarket for some mothers day cards and shit

call me out on leaving but I seriously gotta run lol!

cheers

Fatherroot said:

There's advantages and disadvantages I guess. But a label should be absolutely required.

---

JoieDeVivre said:

underfliptown said:

Don't you think that more testing has to be done on GMO's though before we can know one way or the other. It still seems a little quick for my liking.

---

I think each new GMO should be tested before it is implemented, and that's almost always how it works. People who are anti-GMOs would have you believe all GMOs are mad scientists randomly splicing genes without having any idea what will happen. In reality, the genetic code that we modify is intensely studied before, after and during the modification process. We have well informed hypotheses of what we expect to happen and we test that against what actually happens.

When you have an evil company like Monsanto, sometimes you see a breakdown in this process or purposeful shutting down of undesirable results but that happens much less than anyone who is anti-GMO would like you to believe.

---

underfliptown said:

My main point is that a lot of the damage that is possible from GMO's may not show up for several decades. Just like aspratame and other tricky substances.

---

tymoteusz3 said:

underfliptown said:

My main point is that a lot of the damage that is possible from GMO's may not show up for several decades. Just like aspratame and other tricky substances.

---

There is nothing wrong with aspartame. Every single myth people have made about it have been debunked. Simply looking at the pharmacology of aspartame and how it breaks down shows this. Substances aren't magic.

GMOs have been out for a while, and besides which, it isn't doing anything new or out of the ordinary - it's simply speeding up the exact same process which takes place in nature.

---

Senor_Doobie said:

In the meantime, here's today's free lesson.  Calling the kind of genetic modifications that accompany millions of years of evolution to those that occur over several years in a for-profit laboratory is so mind-bogglingly ignorant it is almost beyond words.

---