|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Le_Canard]
#21923760 - 07/10/15 09:23 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So, lc, you are against labeling too? Keep the public in the dark to prop up monsatan's profits?
Regardless of how people believe gmo's are perfectly safe, no one has advanced a rational argument against labeling or preventing labeling.
Pris, why am I not surprised at your response? Many people get sick if they eat aspartame, I am one of them. Many people have a bad reaction to msg, it even has a name, Chinese restaurant syndrome.
Crank up your sneer, here is more evidence to ignore
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0149-5#page-1
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923788 - 07/10/15 09:34 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: So, lc, you are against labeling too? Keep the public in the dark to prop up monsatan's profits?
in the dark about what?
Quote:
Regardless of how people believe gmo's are perfectly safe, no one has advanced a rational argument against labeling or preventing labeling.
non-gmo products are already labeled, right?
Quote:
Pris, why am I not surprised at your response? Many people get sick if they eat aspartame, I am one of them. Many people have a bad reaction to msg, it even has a name, Chinese restaurant syndrome.
ok, so dont eat aspartame or MSG http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001126.htm
Quote:
food additive called monosodium glutamate (MSG) is often blamed for Chinese restaurant syndrome, but scientific evidence has not proven MSG to be the cause of the symptoms
Quote:
Crank up your sneer, here is more evidence to ignore
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0149-5#page-1
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity
really? seralini again and on a pay to publish site no less... seralini is an activist being funded to find at what ever means some link even when one isnt there. saralini is a shill of ever there was one... maybe you forgot the dozens of links I provided last time to show you he's a fraud
http://www.science20.com/genetic_literacy_project/the_industry_funding_behind_antigmo_activist_gilleseric_seralini-156197
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923815 - 07/10/15 09:44 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
In a surprise move, pris sneered at all the evidence. Here is something by a doctor to sneer at. Is he a quack too like everyone who disagrees with you?
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/20000619/does-chinese-food-give-you-headache Many people, however, pay more than just the restaurant check for their MSG-enhanced gastronomic pleasure. For some, the price includes a headache and numbness in the back of the neck, which can radiate down the arms and back. Other people report symptoms of mild to severe headaches, tightness in the chest, pressure around the cheeks or jaw, mild mood changes, weakness, tingling, burning sensations, heart palpitations, or vivid and bizarre dreams. A few people report asthma-like symptoms after consuming even small amounts of the food additive
Here is some more info on toxicity of aspartame.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/29349-symptoms-aspartame-poisoning/
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923838 - 07/10/15 09:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said:
The best immediate reason to put the labels on the food is to address public concern. Public concern doesn't have to be based on evidence in any reasonable way.
We have a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, though. We can't infringe that right just to serve "public concern". If we could, unpopular speech could be banned simply because the public doesn't like it.
Tamper-proofing is completely different because there is no constitutional right to choose how one's product is bottled.
I agree that that these kinds of subjects need to be handled carefully, and with due consideration for people's freedoms and safeties (dictionary act definition of people). The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product. Granted, there's not a lot of strong evidence to suggest that that's causing any danger, but it's certainly not helping anybody but the corporations who are making the sales. From a non-profiteering standpoint, what's the real danger that these labels cause?
I understand the laws mandating most of what's on the current labels were based on pre-exisiting medical evidence that the information could prevent harm, but stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
PS Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge. It's hurting your credibility.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21923855 - 07/10/15 09:59 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product.
It forces speech. That's a serious infringement on the right of free speech.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923859 - 07/10/15 10:01 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said: In a surprise move, pris sneered at all the evidence. Here is something by a doctor to sneer at. Is he a quack too like everyone who disagrees with you?
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/20000619/does-chinese-food-give-you-headache Many people, however, pay more than just the restaurant check for their MSG-enhanced gastronomic pleasure.
MSG is used in far more than chinese food, it's used to retain color and flavor in a large variety of foods and as a meat tenderizer but for some crazy reason it only happens when some people eat chinese food... you like spaghetti? maybe a little parmasian cheese on it... how about doritos or pringles, maybe campbells soup, KFC or Chick Fil A, ranch dressing... yeah, fuckloads of foods with MSG and this only happens with chinese foods... makes me suspicious, just like all those hipsters with their gluten allergies sucking down beers and other gluten containing foods unaware that they're supposed to get sick so they dont have a reaction at all
Quote:
Here is some more info on toxicity of aspartame.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/29349-symptoms-aspartame-poisoning/
maybe you should go with actual scientific studies, not retard blogs
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21923894 - 07/10/15 10:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I avoid processed food as much as possible. Eat all of it you like, put some extra roundup on everything if you like. The govt says its safe.
mgw >stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
Well said
>Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge.
The left patented it, I give credit where it came from. Not saying pris is liberal overall, just his use of the sneer tactic rather than facts.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923901 - 07/10/15 10:14 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Mr.GuessWork said: The tricky part here is that necessitating the label doesn't really stop anybody from doing anything except hiding the source material of a widely distributed product.
It forces speech. That's a serious infringement on the right of free speech.
I entirely agree that it's a restriction on the right. I was just pointing out that forcing speech in this particular case doesn't seem to do much, if any, harm. I'm open to arguments on that front though.
The reasoning behind requiring labeling is more like the reasoning behind the freedom of information act. It's put in place to increase public awareness so we can better recognize problems when they occur. I'm not sure what the legal arguments behind the freedom of information act were, and I'll bet they had some evidence of wrong doing in them that could have been prevented by the act, but I think it's a decent analogy even though it's a bit weak.
Edited by Mr.GuessWork (07/10/15 10:16 AM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21923913 - 07/10/15 10:18 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Forcing people to reveal their breast/penis size on a public database doesn't do much, if any, harm either.
The right is a right for a reason, and we have clear guidelines for when we can and can't infringe on the right. If we make exceptions to those guidelines to quell public concern, it won't be long before the exceptions swallow the rule.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923919 - 07/10/15 10:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
>Quit calling pris's sneer liberal, stonehenge.
The left patented it, I give credit where it came from. Not saying pris is liberal overall, just his use of the sneer tactic rather than facts.
you do realize it's the lefty douchebag hippies that push for the GMO labeling dont you, groups such as green peace. you cite the dangers from sites such as mercola, some detox blog and studies by people like seralini who it's been shown is paid off by the big organic lobbyists and has been discredited completely by his peers
and it would be a smear tactic if the crap you post were in fact true
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign
Quote:
mgw >stonehenge's point stands too. What about the specific ingredients list? Those things a legally required to be listed on the label and many of them are completely harmless. There's more than constitutional law at play here, and part of that is about addressing public concern. That's one of the functions of law and government, and it's important.
"contains spices and natural flavors"
horse shit is a natural flavor, I'm sure we'd find that on the ingredients list of a garden burger
|
Asante
Mage


Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 86,796
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21923921 - 07/10/15 10:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Stonehenge said:
The old liberal sneer again.
I'm pretty sure its lesbian aloofness
-------------------- Omnicyclion.org higher knowledge starts here
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21923932 - 07/10/15 10:25 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Forcing people to reveal their breast/penis size on a public database doesn't do much, if any, harm either.
The right is a right for a reason, and we have clear guidelines for when we can and can't infringe on the right. If we make exceptions to those guidelines to quell public concern, it won't be long before the exceptions swallow the rule.
The difference is that people's penises and breasts aren't being eaten by a large portion of the population and there's no public concern about that stuff, and there's also very little that could possibly be gained from such a database. We already do make exceptions to guidelines to quell public concerns (again, look at the freedom of information act as an example). We just do it carefully (I assume), and that helps to stop the exception from becoming the rule. You can't just dismiss every concern because it might start a slippery slope. That sets a bad precedent for other bad precedents.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,509
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Mr.GuessWork]
#21924251 - 07/10/15 12:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The freedom of information act is about disclosure of publically owned information, dude. Completely different situation.
You're talking about forcing private citizens to reveal the genetic makeup of their products just because people are curious. It serves zero utilitarian purpose to do so since these products are safe.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924286 - 07/10/15 12:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>since these products are safe.
Not proven, or you might understand better if I say fact not in evidence.
Selling products on the market place is not a right, its a privilege and the public has a right to know what they are getting.
You made sense for one day but now are back to your usual drivel.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21924300 - 07/10/15 12:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Here ya go pris, another study to sneer at. Were the doctors all quacks? Is the website untrustworthy according to you? I know you can't deal with facts so it will be something like that.
HTTP://WWW.TRUEACTIVIST.COM/END-OF-ASPARTAME-STUDY-LINKS-DIET-SODA-TO-MAJOR-PROBLEMS/
It’s nothing new to report that aspartame is an artificial sweetener everyone should aim to avoid. In the past, it has been proven to contribute to a list of ailments, including Diabetes, neurological concerns, weight gain, brain fog, and more.
But in a study (published in 2014) which took place over 10 years and involved 60,000 women, it was determined that women who drink two or more diet drinks a day have much higher cardiovascular disease rates and are more likely to die from the disease.
In the largest study of its kind, The University of Iowa concluded the following:
[C]ompared to women who never or only rarely consume diet drinks, those who consume two or more a day are 30 percent more likely to have a cardiovascular event [heart attack or stroke] and 50 percent more likely to die from related disease.
This is one of the largest studies on this topic, and our findings are consistent with some previous data, especially those linking diet drinks to the metabolic syndrome, says Dr. Ankur Vyas the lead investigator of the study.
The association persisted even after researchers adjusted the data to account for demographic characteristics and other cardiovascular risk factors, including body mass index, smoking, hormone therapy use, physical activity, energy intake, salt intake, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, and sugar-sweetened beverage intake.
On average, women who consumed two or more diet drinks a day were younger, more likely to be smokers, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes, high blood pressure, and higher body mass index.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Enlil]
#21924314 - 07/10/15 12:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: The freedom of information act is about disclosure of publically owned information, dude. Completely different situation.
You're talking about forcing private citizens to reveal the genetic makeup of their products just because people are curious. It serves zero utilitarian purpose to do so since these products are safe.
The free disclosure of public information is what makes it public information in a practical sense. legal Gobbledygook won't change that. Effectively, that law turned certain restricted information into public information. This argument about labels is not a cut and dry legal argument with clear classifications. It's a power struggle between opposing interests, and it requires a cost benefit analysis that's fair to both parties.
It's not clear that labels would serve zero utilitarian purposes. People should have a right to make informed choices. I don't see a need for any extra buyer-beware shit with our already fucked up food industry. Generally, most information is useful to somebody, and consumers seem to have some use in mind for this information, otherwise they wouldn't want the labels. It's not clear that the labels would provide any public benefit or what those benefits might be, but calling them useless is premature. Maybe people are unconvinced by the limited amount of research that has been done over the past few decades, and they want to be able to reliably make informed choices about what they're eating. The corporations who produce these foods get special privileges so they can more effectively deliver services (ideally), so why should they be free from special demands?
|
Hippocampus



Registered: 04/01/15
Posts: 753
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Stonehenge]
#21924318 - 07/10/15 12:45 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said: Most Physicians don't even have training about vitamins. 
Physicians are trained about vitamins starting in undergraduate with basic chemistry knowledge. They then use that knowledge to learn biochem in 1st year med school. During which they learn about exactly what each vitamin does in the body on a molecular level. Then they learn about various pathology that is caused from different vitamin deficiencies and their respective treatments. Then they practice in the clinical setting actually seeing patients that have these various vitamin issues. After about 6 months of clerkships where they might see vitamin related cases they choose a residency which may or may not have anything to do with vitamins ever again. GP or IM will treat lots of vitamin things. Surgical specialties not so much.
But if you mean that doctors aren't trained in bullshit unproven vitamin fads, or that they don't work in research on the cutting edge of vitamin related clinical study, then yes, that's true.
|
badchad
Mad Scientist

Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,372
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: Hippocampus]
#21924373 - 07/10/15 01:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
And what about pesticides? Labeling pesticide use is likely to be FAR more important, no? This is why our food regulations are based on the end product, and rightfully so.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center


Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924380 - 07/10/15 01:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
>GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
Nonsense, how about "gmo inside"
>GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
If it is gmo, label it as such.
>To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
Why? A reputable manufacturer will know where his ingredients come from. Those selling the ingredients will have to label them too.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Mr.GuessWork
Stranger

Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 4,563
|
Re: 68% of doctors thing GMO's should be labeled [Re: badchad]
#21924425 - 07/10/15 01:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said: GMO labeling is likely to be expensive, and there is no consensus on how to do it.
GMO corn makes up 88% of all US corn and over 90% of all soybeans. How would this be labeled, are you suggesting ANY food item with any amount of corn or soybean be labeled "GMO"?
To clear themselves of GMO labeling, it would be expensive for a manufacturer to track EVERY single food ingredient in the process.
And what about pesticides? Labeling pesticide use is likely to be FAR more important, no? This is why our food regulations are based on the end product, and rightfully so.
Granted the whole discussion about how to do it is a clusterfuck, but the costs of keeping track of labels should be easy to manage since they have to keep track of a bunch of similar stuff. They're supposed to do a lot of monitoring on the products they use anyway, and you'd better believe they have to know where all their ingredients came from. That's how they can track infected food back to it's source when there's an outbreak.
If you look at a food label, it lists ingredients. The food labels say what was put into the food, and what the food's nutritional values are. The label is not entirely focused on end product. All you'd have to do for the GMO stuff is put a little GMO symbol by stuff that was produced with the help of millions of dollar genetic engineering, and when Corps buy that stuff it would come with the label already on it. All they would have to do is pass that information on in the label, which could be done very cheaply.
The thing about costs is a scapegoat argument to distract people from the real reasons that corporations don't want the labels in place. Basically labeling allows products that are more expensive to produce to have a competitive edge against GMOs.
|
|